EPT/in
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXIII
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
/in | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
If the mafia member chosen to kill on a particular night is roleblocked, no kill will occur. A mafia member may use his ability and kill in the same night. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
Policy on LAL is fine with me. Lying can only hurt town and I see no situations how this could be beneficial. Regarding lurkers, I think that it shouldn't be set in stone. From my point of view as a newbie, lurking isn't a quality of either mafia or town. It is equally as likely that a mafia/sk will actively post, lead discussions, blend in with town as it is that a townie will, and the same goes for lurkers. Ultimately its a judgement call based on quality of posts, and hopefully the majority will make the right call in that situation. Cakepie, I really liked your post regarding not being afraid to make mistakes as a townie. In this game of newbies, we will learn while asking questions and participating in discussion. I will be fearless. That being said I think at this point in the game, there is very little information available, but I see value in scoping out a possible lynch on the first day. I think we should be looking for players who promote environments where Mafia thrive. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
On December 19 2012 16:05 Spaghetticus wrote: While I'm a bit of a fence sitter in regard to lurkers, your assertion that mafia are equally likely to lurk as town causes me concern. Mafia, particularly new mafia, derive benefit from lurking if nobody picks them up on it. Town, new or otherwise, damage their chances of success if they do not contribute. While arguments can be made about the certainty of judgement, this game is not about certainties, and unless you can think of a good reason for a town to lurk that statistically counteracts the motivated tendency of a scum player, it is best to strongly pressure lurkers into action with your vote. I see your point regarding the reason for lurking. Upon reflection, I agree that lurking should be discouraged and if apparent, you will be questioned and proded. I think its very simple, as Mocsta said: lurking is not a free pas to fly under the radar. I also agree with Kickstart regarding lynching scum leads of randomly lynching lurkers. This, I feel, is obvious. As far as I understand an environment where mafia thrive is that of uncertainty, confusion. An environment which contains people who have split views, people that are not confident in their stance and can be swayed by logic, reason, should the situation call for it. Threesr did a good job of contradicting views regarding lurking, diverting town chat paths, and the town seems to be talking a little bit but we are dancing around constructive discussion (not to mention the fact that Threesr has been quite inactive recently). Perhaps this is scum behaviour. I understand policies on LAL and lurking needs to be discussed, and most of the tough thinking will come when it`s time to vote by ultimately making a read. This makes it really important to present strong arguments when it comes to FoS because others will base their arguments upon the information you present. I think we should be asking ourselves a few questions (whether to find scum or to eliminate uselss town), who is contributing constructively to discussion and who is simply causing the town to get hung up on lesser-than-top-priority thoughts and ideas. Top priorities, to me, are: establishing a wagon using a strong argument, reading into feedback and responses after suspicion has been vocalized, and developing an opinion (certainties are non-existen in this game, right?). The town atmosphere seems to be good so far and this is good for finding scum: perhaps we should start prodding the lurkers and advocates of lurking. I say this because inactivity seems to be common, and as we have all agreed, uncontributing town is useless and detrimental to town goals, whether they are mafia or town. My read is currently for Threesr, but am open to discussion. Would liek to hear more from him regarding lurking and why HE thinks it can be benificial for town to allow. ##Vote: theesr | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
In a game where opinion and discussion are encouraged, you seem to be quite reluctant to contribute. Your respones to questions are often dodged or ill-presented out of laziness, and I think this is not acceptable. You have to be able to develop your reasoning, and the type of posts you create paint a picture of someone trying to get the attention off himself. My attempt to be consistent is important because as town we need to structurally build arguments and if those compounding arguments contradict one another, we cannot make a logical FoS or lynch. Without consistency, why did we discuss policy on LAL and lurking? My opinion on corazon is the following: he's relatively new to the game and any form of aggression toward him will be met with a stiff upper lip. I know this because I am new to the game too. Thus my read on him is questionable at best. My read for threesr stands as per my previous posts and is only amlipified by his recent comments. Mocsta's decision to confirm threesr as scum was a little bit hasty and agressive in my eyes, yet also I don't think that mafia would come out so early as to present a confirmed scum. Thus I lean against the vote for Mocsta, and toward lurkers (Sylencia, aquanim, OrangeRemi?) and threesr as a possible lynch. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
Okay here we go. OrgangeRemi has posted very little in this game so far, so it is difficult for me to answer your first question with him as an example. Corazon is different from O.R. because he actually posted something in a defensive manner and I am explaining what my read is on this, as per your request. Regarding theesr I have expressed my opinion on him. He is different from corazon because his motives, if he were mafia, can more easily be predicted because of the nature of his posting and his quantity of posts as well. He may share similar qualities as Corazon, but he has quite simply posted more than Corazon and supported his arguments. I simply await more posts from corazon to make a more accurate read. Is this sufficient for you? I am sooo sorry that I didnt put corazon in that list - I either omitted him because I presented my thought on him already, or maybe just to bring light to the fact that we need to discuss other lurkers AS WELL AS Corazon. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
On December 20 2012 05:45 threesr wrote: So to go into more detail the reason why I voted for BigChunk, I think his reasoning for voting me is pretty weak. He goes on and on about this mafia environment. What exactly did I do to promote this so called environment? I just answered questions I was asked. I think his mafia environment speech is just filler, but is actually meaningless. Of all the people who have voted so far his vote seems to be the least reasonable. Even if he says it was to start conversation, it seems odd to me that I was randomly voted for by this person. You think my reasoning is weak? Let me fix this. Your answer to the question, "why should lurkers be allowed?" was: I like lurking because a lot of the time its hard to know what to say. Obviously it doesn't benefit the town but I don't think it hurts the town that much also. It benefits the scum because it makes it easier for them to blend in but good players should still be able to find the mafia even with lurkers. That doesn't seem to be a strong argument, yet you constantly refer to yourself as having answered all questions directed towards you. You agree that lurking obviously hurts the town, then you GUESS that it MAY help the town. In my opinion, it's not worth the risk, especially in a game of noobs where posting mafia will make mistakes. When you decide on lurking policy, you do it to pull lurking townies out of the shadows so they can contribute in any way they can, and mafia so they can make mistakes. Then you proceed to FoS Mocsta because he's trying to be "moderator" (your logic is that if town talks too much, they're mafia, and if lurkers lurk, they MAY be town?), Vote Mocsta, unvote mocsta, vote me, unvote me, vote corazon, unvote corazon, vote me, etc. What does this accomplish apart from chaos, confusion? And how can you educatedly possibly change your vote 3 times within... 2 hours (I may be exaggerating)? If theesr isnt mafia, then at least hes not helpful as a townie. These are a couple of reasons for my vote. I would be happy to reconsider if you give explanations to divert my suspicion. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
@Chromatically You asked for a read on corazone, again. All I will say is that I think that the original suspicion behind corazone was never really fully justified. It is easy to pin two people together when their opinions happen to align, and thus you have created this me/corazone case. I'm not going to address everything in your post because I consider alot of your suspicions to be based on the fact that I know what I'm doing (lol, which I dont. it is either my ignorance or lack of experience in making reads and accusations as well as inability to present them accurately). When I was perceived as helping corazone, I simply meant to present an opinion, spark further discussion, and make a final decision on whether or not to lynch corazone tongiht. I will be careful when voicing who I agree with from now on. Also I am confused: scum hunting and expressing opinion is good for town, and when I try and provide the ONLY opinion I have at the time (threesr) I get labelled as not supporting evidence and trying to lynch anyone without reasoning. Chromatically suggests that I will vote anybody off (even though a vote is a tool to apply pressure), yet I am sticking to a read that is not the majority read at the moment. Town reads: Mocsta - clear concise posting , good leadership, asks the right questions to promote discussion. I agree with his read of threesr. His argument against spag needs work but I think his head is in the right place. Spag - I felt I should elaborate on this one since he's getting lynched tonight. While I agree that he has not shared a lot of his own analysis, neither have a lot of people. Also, he mentions that his analysis is in the background and will present findings as they arise. If he is not lying, this could be very useful to town. He has at least been active in trying to promote discussion, and defending people under pressure comes as a sideaffect of good judgement and rational thinking, something I respect. While I don't clear him completely of being mafia, I think it is more than likely he is town and we gain nothing from voting out Spag. Possible scum: threesr - derailing town thinking, being useless. I stand by previous comments. chromatically - I have noticed that he pressures too hard to the point of almost lying and skewing my words and overanalyzing small reactions in order to further his agenda. Faint vibe that I think should be looked into. Also, he seems like an experienced player which is scary if hes mafia. Aquanim - I believe aquanim, the driver behind lynching both spag and corazone, could be mafia trying to control town direction or at least direct discussion away from his mafia mates. sorry if my posts arent as professional as you guys'. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
Everyone keeps mentioning that spag is appearing useful while not contributing. Spag has argued that he has been lighting fires under lurkers to gain information. Is this not considered scumhunting, whether direct or indirect? He seems to be contributing in ways that are very obviously pro-town. I do not really see conclusive evidence. But who knows, maybe thats what town's supposed to do on day1. Anyway, we would have stood much more benefit and less to lose by lynching theesr - we would have confirmed theesr as town/scum and in turn shed some light on spag's innocence. Now hes gone. I will do my best D2 to be more useful, as it seems nobody values my posts. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
@Mocsta: Scum read is an opinion on someone and a scum tell is a specific incident that occurs which hints at scum behaviour. With regards to your post on Aqua being town, I think I might agree. I may have misinterpreted a possible scum read based on overly aggressive and incomplete arguments, and pushing a town lynch. I did not know the information about him being an aggressive townie in the past, and if this is truly his style, then it seems like he is being consistent. Will leave it at that for now. Mocsta: Why do you find it important to discuss what a scum read and a scum tell is? Why do you value this information? I'm very busy and am trying to get a couple posts in per day. Will try to be more active as I will be on holidays as of tomorrow. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
On December 22 2012 09:08 cakepie wrote: I was roleblocked. With Mocsta's flip I feel that it is thus more likely that this comes from Robert Bellarmine (scum RB) than Martin Luther (town RB). I'm just curious, why would you assume it's scum RB? Mocsta has some great points, I find it very hard to provide new insight when cases are well-fabricated and I agree with them. While I do not think the evidence is inconclusive against Chromatically (while I always shared a suspicion of him) Omni is a real issue. My stance on OmniEulogy: -I find it very hard to believe that he claimed VT as proper strategy. -His 100% scum read on corazone is very interesting, as he is very easy to sway off that vote when pressure on corazone is removed. This smells of scum trying to mis-lynch, and he is appearing to be useful by presenting his case against corazone. Before I vote OE I will provide more explanation for my vote. Here's what I think happened: Scum omni knows spag will turn town, and pre-claims VT innocent in an attempt to avoid defending against spag's challenges. Otherwise, town omni would genuinely expect spag to turn scum, and then would have no reason to claim VT. This is because scum spag's scum read on omni would be discarded immediately upon spag turning red. @Omni Your reason for claiming VT is that you knew they would question you if spag turns town. Are you claiming that your scum read on spag was insufficient to base your vote on, realized that you sheeped the vote, and began to prepare for spag to turn town? This is the only explanation IMO that can come from a townie. This being said, I would like to hear from sHz and Sylencia, two players who have been posting infrequently and pretty much agreeeing or disagreeing with others without providing reasons. I honestly don't know why these players have been given a free pass, with nobody prodding them during their time afk. sHz: -Basically he's a lurking sheep. Agreees with any arguments that multiple people have approved. He switches his vote from corazon to spag juts because spag defended him. -He does not provide any new information when he posts, and does not participate in very much scum-hunting. -A list of people he has been suspicious at one point or another: Mocsta, Corazone, Spagetticus, me, threesr. His arguments for suspicion against these players are not very well presented, and are based on things like "the case against X is convincing to me". Votes based on desire to lynch anyone. -He appears to be useful when not actually being useful. I would like to hear what he has to say about Mocsta's case, he has been active for too long. I would like to see him actually scumhunt, ask questions that reveal important information. Sylencia: -Lurks, comes out with opinions out of the blue that, quite frankly, nobody takes seriously. -One page filter can serve one purpose: provide as little information as possible so that nobody can make a read. This definitely brings the advantage to the scum since they currently don't feel pressure in needing to talk, so if they don't talk, they don't reveal anything to us. ---Ironic.Unless I see increase in useful posting from him he goes up in my scum suspicion. -away excuse gives him free ride for 1-2 days? -Has less attention put on him for these reasons -Votes corazone D1 because he's the easy target (has the most votes) and tries to appear like he is emotionally torn apart by making this choice. Attempt for sympathy can only be scummy to me. Does anyone agree with any of these points? What are your opinions of shz and sylencia? Aqua, I thought there was a relationship between theesr and spag, as spag was advocating theesr as town. If we lynched threesr and he turned town, you can probably expect spag to be town too. However if we lynched spag, and he turned town, we would be stuck with the non-useful townie. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
I apologize, i meant to say i don't think the evidence is conclusive against chrom, but Mocsta brought up some good points regarding Chromatically's agression and alignment to Omni to give me a mild scum read. I am suspicious of Omni, and it would be foolish to ignore the post Mocsta made regarding his and Chrom's alignment. I suggest we pursue Omni, while keep an eye on sHz. A mafia turn on Omni would cause an increase in suspicion in Chrom, and a town turn on Omni would eliminate interplay between the two. | ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
| ||
|
FatChunk
Canada93 Posts
I also did not like his defense of his scum slip. Cakepie in his case post on Omni identified that As has already been pointed out, this VT claim is utterly ridiculous, and is atrocious ahead of N1 as it helps scum focus their PK onto blue roles. It is premature, since there is hardly a threat of him being lynched. He has tried to explain it as "pre-emptive" to protect himself -- but at what cost in terms of risk to our blues? This is a selfish play without any motive to help the town. I strongly agree with this, as I have presented in earlier posts. Regarding his FoS on me: All I ever said was that I had a suspicion of chrom, something that needed to be examined after a lynch of omni, who is the most suspicious right now in my eyes. I also simply mentioned that Mocsta's case should be considered as we move forward. + Show Spoiler + you are misunderstanding pretty badly. Or intentionally trying to twist what I am saying. I did not say that I claimed to give more information. I said that it makes sense to claim VT even if I thought he was scum because if he isn't I would be put into this position one way or the other. You argued how I'd know he is town, I replied by saying I didn't, I was pretty confident AND when he flipped scum the information we would gain would be far greater than scum learning my role. I'm not changing any story I'm just giving you more information behind my thought process because you've asked the same question in different ways about 3 times. I have to go into more detail. Nowhere in there do I say I claim to give town information. ##FoS: Chromatically This is twice you've tried to either twist my words or intentionally misunderstand to try and get your own agenda out. In the first sentence again no less. followed by: I believe I should also add @Shz I still have a town read on Chroma. My FoS was defensive and meant as a way for him to stop misunderstanding my posts and read them again. I think this could have been handled better. He places FoS too hastily on someone he has a town read on. I dont think his justification for FoS is valid. He is quite defensive as a general posting theme. All this seems to give me a scum vibe. My stance on threesr is: vote him out on a day that we have weak scumreads, or have a vigilante take him out. Orangeremi: -Claims he has suspicions but no scum reads, is reluctant to accuse anyone. When he does vote, he votes to bandwagon and gives no justification for his choice other than that person X presented the case before me. Sounds like he's trying to free-ride. -"take this with a grain of salt", "I'm not convinced of anyone being scum D1", "although I agree they [OR's arguments] are brief and weak" - quotes like these (not exact) make him appear to contribute without doing so. He is playing VERY safe and gives alot of uncertain reads, or reads that require more information before they can be justified. -IMO: lazy bad town, or bad scum. ##Vote:OmniEulogy | ||
| ||
