Nomination Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
slOosh
3291 Posts
| ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
I found phagga's entry into the game pretty weak (of all the things to talk about he picked out something pretty minor) and his "coaching" of Mocsta very unnatural. What are your thoughts on him? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
If you think he is scum, then lay it out clearly and precisely why. Don't needle him. Don't call him names. If you think he is calling you names a la scum, incorporate that into your case. Because not only does your interaction make the thread harder to read, it allows scum to lurk. Yes - that's right. Lurking is pretty easy when townies are ripping at each other's throats (Right now I read you both on the town side) and like prplhz said, you need to step back and refocus, because the method you are taking isn't the most helpful. So I instead choose to focus on someone like phagga, on whom no one has commented on. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 07 2013 01:41 phagga wrote: Regarding Palmar, I dont like how he throws a vote without explanation and then in his next post he implies: "Guys, I got this really good plan for tomorrow so don't lynch me today even though I might be lurking, mkay?" Sloosh, do you mean me talking about lurkers or about Mocsta/Oats? I'm going to wait on what prplhz thinks before clarifying it to the subject we are talking about. What do you think about Djodref? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 07 2013 01:59 yamato77 wrote: I see what Sloosh is saying about Phagga, and I agree on some level that his entrance to the thread has been weak, and relatively quiet so far. There are some things that make me doubt his scumminess, however, so what I need from him is some more meaningful contribution on things that aren't setup. That also goes for VE, who was here early spouting setup info, and then dropped off. My strongest mafia read is Mocsta. This game has begun exactly the same way as NMM XXXV where Oats was town and Mocsta the mafia. I think getting a lynch rolling on him is an excellent idea. Any doubters need to go read the game I mentioned and see the similarities, and then read his LIX filter to see the difference between this game and his more amicable town game. Palmar needs to not lynch prplhz. I sense the troll with Palmar on this one, so hopefully he doesn't act the same way he did in LVIII and derail day 1. Prplhz is looking decently townie, I will not jump on lynching him any time soon. The onus is on you to show that he is mafia, not on us to show that he is town. If it is as clear as you indicate, I'm sure it won't be hard to make a case compare and contrasting his play this game to the ones that you cite. Additionally, please expound on the things that make you doubt his scumminess. I've already asked him for a specific contribution, so as we wait you can tell me what sticks out. It helps us get a clearer read on him, but also helps me get a clearer read on you (thinking process etc.) | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
What's most concerning for me, is that for you, Phagga should be just as guilty of these tells: Focus on lurkers: On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: He calls out "lurkers" to appear to contribute and care about the town atmosphere, something I readily see as a common trait in his mafia game and this one. On February 06 2013 17:05 phagga wrote: Short on time. I agree with the lurker lynching early as we cannot differentiate between lurkers and scum later on and we have no mechanic to clear lurkers / confirm them town. Will post more later. On February 06 2013 18:09 phagga wrote: I just want to add something shorty in terms of lynching lurkers: D1 lynches are often crapshots, Kitaman analysed in anohter thread that town would be better off RNG the D1 lynch generally than trying to analyse and find scum. Combine this with the beformentioned fact that we have mechanics to differentiate lukers from scum or get rid of them, I therefore embrace a lynch on a lurker on who we cannot get an alignement read, should one be available. And calling out bad play rather than scum play: On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: He's making the same sort of argument about Oats this game that he did about Sn0 in the other game, that their play isn't "optimal" and they are "helping mafia". It's a fabricated read, in my eyes, and a fabricated contribution to say such things. It doesn't matter how a player is playing versus how you think the ideal town player SHOULD play, it matters if that player is playing in a way you know mafia would play. On February 06 2013 18:09 phagga wrote: Regarding you, Mocsta, I don't agree with VE that you tried to establish a good town atmosphere. You are writing calm, but some things you posted like are not helping creating a good town atmosphere. Did you really think Oats would say "oh well, I guess he's right, can I get a replacement GMarshal?" This subtle stabs have a tendency to poison town atmoshpere much more than the shouting of Oats did, and I did not like this at all. Considering that everything else you posted is barely alignement indicative, I'll be interested to see more from you. So it is a huge deal that you, have some things that make you doubt his scumminess when you are oh so certain that Mocsta is mafia. I think you are lying and I want you to put your money where your mouth is. What about Phagga makes you doubt his scumminess? | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Also if you could start consolidating your posts that would be great - a huge advantage in this setup is that scum have one less avenue to bury good posts / posts on the right track (by NK the dude). Take away spamming and they have even less to work with, and are forced to confront tough issues / take stances etc. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
In fact, I never said that I think Phagga is mafia. So that's strike two. The topic is "why is yamato calling Mocsta scum and isn't calling Phagga scum when they share the same tells?" On February 07 2013 03:35 slOosh wrote: What's most concerning for me, is that for you, Phagga should be just as guilty of these tells: It doesn't matter how valid the tells are. Even the most stubborn and illogical of townies adhere strictly to their way of thinking. You are displaying a contradiction and the backlash / defensive attacks don't look too good. What about Phagga did you find that made you doubt your scumminess? Until you can adequately answer this, I'm devoting myself for your lynch today. ##Vote: yamato77 | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 07 2013 03:53 VisceraEyes wrote: Lemme go take a look at phagga. I noticed that he was your top read only a few posts ago, now he's "to a lesser degree". Should I assume you're disliking yamato more now? Let's be clear with our language. I never called Phagga scum. Just because I'm interested in a person doesn't mean I think they are scum. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 07 2013 04:10 yamato77 wrote: So, I'm mafia because I won't tell you why I think phagga might be town? Lol. Okay. Sure. Waste today thinking that. Lol dodge more. You are mafia because I called you out on a bs read and you can't back it up. Only scum make b.s. reads because their knowledge precedes that of town and they jump the gun as in your case. If everyone would note yamato's dismissive and condescending attitude in his approach to this topic, that would be great. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Thank you yamato. The clear progression of your thinking process indicates to me that this is indeed a misunderstanding (based on how you treat town / mafia tells). At the time of my post I chose to talk about phagga to: - Get a better read of phagga - Get a read on prplhz - Do something more productive than focus on the messy Mocsta - Oats feud You could say I wanted to pressure him, for I found some blips on the radar. They weren't that big, but they were what I had at the time. If it helps you understand my thinking process, yamato & phagga scum => yamato soft defends ally phagga yamato scum phagga town => yamato is not taking hard stances As you can see in these two scenarios, your alignment isn't wholly dependent on phagga's. I needed to know your "town" tells, because mafia can dish out shallow reads and there's no way to know what they mean unless you call them out on it and make them provide the reasoning behind it. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Oats, I've played more games but I never counted. I started with Newbie Mini III which gives you somewhat of an idea of when I started playing. If you are looking for meta, go for my older games because I've rolled scum / 3rd party for ... 3~5 games now? Additionally, be clear with your language. I don't mind you saying "I want to see more", but don't say "start contributing" as if I haven't done anything. Cause that's total b.s. Reading up on the newer posts concerning Djodref. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Jay, who I'd like to talk to is prplhz, as his opportunity to comment on phagga was lost / buried / whatever. Mocsta: Honestly speaking I think I need to sleep on it before having another crack at it. Which is what I'll be doing since I've procrastinated far too much work and need to get it done. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
That said I was able to do a clean read with the JX flip in mind and I've gotten some pretty strong reads both town and scum from it. I have almost no doubt I'll be up for nomination tomorrow so I'm going to sit on my reads until dawn. Because I'm definite that scum will always put 3 townies up - they won't bother risking putting one of their own into the group unless it is certain that someone else will get lynched. And right now, it doesn't look like that's gonna happen. That said, we don't want to focus the discussion primarily on the candidates tomorrow. Because if three townies go up (probably the case), it is to scum's advantage to focus discussion on them. 1) Because it means attention drawn away from their selves. 2) Gives them ammunition to work off for future lynches. In any case the discussion should also be driven and moderated and lead by the candidates. You know it's gonna be at least 2 townies, so by following their lead we will have good (town motivated) direction. mmm .... for clarity's sake: I am sitting on my reads because I also have the unique advantage of a clean slate. If I give out a wrong town read, they can put one of themselves up and "gang up" on the 3rd townie. Thus with the flip I'd look bad and they can always draw attention away from themselves by pushing it onto me. If you are concerned by my absence, just let me take front and center tomorrow, so that I can have a great showing and (re)convince you otherwise. I think we had a great D1, and I highly encourage everyone to reread it. heh ... sounded like I was running for mayor or something :p | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 08 2013 20:34 Mocsta wrote: Sl0sh pls spell it out for me. Why are u certain u will be up for the lynch? I thought that comment was odd. I'll address this and also the idea of 3 townie nominations, because they are the same issue. In this setup, there are two things that scum want gone. 1) Strong town players (i.e. they are good at catching scum) 2) (Relatively) "Confirmed" town players (i.e. people who are hard to mislynch) The first is obvious, the second is because if they have less people to target, then the only people left to target are themselves. The optimal scum play is to therefore make nominations in a way that can eliminate from this pool of people. For instance, say there were three more JX esque players - townies with much suspicion on them. Scum would be shooting themselves in the foot by putting these three up for nomination because even though it results in a mislynch, it aids town because it means someone who is 1) or 2) didn't get mislynched, which causes headaches for them late game. I assume I'll get put up because I tend to get shot N1 and I guess it's just ingrained into me that scum want me gone soon and fast. If they don't nominate me, that means they have to deal with me for at least 2 more cycles. Especially because they don't know how much on the right track I am, I don't think they'll risk pushing me off (egotistical? maybe. But my track record shows lots of N1 deaths.) That said, if they choose to do so, then that's cool too. I'm comfortable enough with my town play to know I'll do more than enough D2 to erase the suspicion of me not getting nominated. As for the 3 townies idea: I understand the concern that people might treat the two not lynched candidates as "confirmed", but there's two things here. 1) If a scum is put up they are put under incredible pressure and attention, which isn't worth the "town" cred might want to get with it. 2) Even with 1 scum in the pool, there are 3 that aren't. We can hunt those no problem, especially if we follow my plan I outlined before, which puts even more pressure on the scum in the nomination. On February 08 2013 15:19 slOosh wrote: That said, we don't want to focus the discussion primarily on the candidates tomorrow. Because if three townies go up (probably the case), it is to scum's advantage to focus discussion on them. 1) Because it means attention drawn away from their selves. 2) Gives them ammunition to work off for future lynches. In any case the discussion should also be driven and moderated and lead by the candidates. You know it's gonna be at least 2 townies, so by following their lead we will have good (town motivated) direction. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
It's both: "reasons why scum probably won't put one of their own in", and "if they do it's not as big a problem as you think it is". For the second part, refer to the "Survival v. Pushing Your Agenda" in the scum section of Incognito's guide: | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
That said, tomorrow should be a day of scumhunting based primarily on D1 information, not D2 nomination candidacies. By forcing discussion to be centered on the former, we prevent scum from skating by with the latter. Only scum don't have meaningful reads by now. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 08 2013 15:19 slOosh wrote: That said, we don't want to focus the discussion primarily on the candidates tomorrow. Because if three townies go up (probably the case), it is to scum's advantage to focus discussion on them. 1) Because it means attention drawn away from their selves. 2) Gives them ammunition to work off for future lynches. In any case the discussion should also be driven and moderated and lead by the candidates. You know it's gonna be at least 2 townies, so by following their lead we will have good (town motivated) direction. It's like you guys don't even read. The worst outcome of today is time wasted by focusing on the nomination candidates. Let me and Palmar take front wheel and scumhunt into the non-nomination pool, of which we would all agree are at least 3 scum. If we are both town, then our interaction should produce a strong scum lynch list. If one of us isn't, then our interaction should reveal whom to lynch today. Again: D1 information is critical. We can't let scum skate by today pretending to scumhunt by choosing the least towniest of three people, because it is oh so easy for scum to fabricate town reads (no cognitive dissonance and awkwardness of interacting with a teammate naturally). If I sound like I'm repeating myself, it's because some players aren't getting it, and it's letting scum hide. The low hanging fruit in this game is phagga. If you familiarize yourself with his meta (nicely displayed in his profile and devoid of any scum games), it becomes clearer that he is new scum whose play pales to his town play. I've pointed out in my earliest post what I found about phagga to be interesting. On February 07 2013 01:21 slOosh wrote: I found phagga's entry into the game pretty weak (of all the things to talk about he picked out something pretty minor) and his "coaching" of Mocsta very unnatural. What are your thoughts on him? I pointed it out when I distracted myself by latching onto the yamato thing here, but the tells are pretty valid. He has a focus on lurkers, "contributing" statistics and reasoning. His "coaching" is very awkward, as seen: On February 06 2013 18:09 phagga wrote: Regarding you, Mocsta, I don't agree with VE that you tried to establish a good town atmosphere. You are writing calm, but some things you posted like are not helping creating a good town atmosphere. Did you really think Oats would say "oh well, I guess he's right, can I get a replacement GMarshal?" This subtle stabs have a tendency to poison town atmoshpere much more than the shouting of Oats did, and I did not like this at all. Considering that everything else you posted is barely alignement indicative, I'll be interested to see more from you. Awkward checklist: - Talking to Mocsta rather than VE concerning Mocsta's play, over something he disagrees with VE about. - Stating that Mocsta is writing calmly, but then dismissing everything else by saying it is alignment null, i.e. devoid of content - Pointing out to the subject himself the problems with his play rather than convincing / discussing with other people. Compare this to a D1 post (about three quarters into cycle) from Wheel of Fortune Mafia: On April 23 2012 16:22 phagga wrote: Mr. Zentor: I don't like how his "really long post" was actually not long at all, but only full of quotes. If we ignore the quotes, the post was quite short. So why announce it as long? His case on prplhz was weak, and when asked a second time why he thought that prplhz was still scummy, he never answered. His style is unnecessarily aggresive. VisceraEyes: His Filter shows 5 ingame posts, which is more than I have, but unlike me he is notorious for being very active borderline on spamming, trying to direct people and generally being helpful to town. He is completely lacking these features this game. His townread post is suspicious, I can't remember him making townlists like this in the last games? His behaviour currently reminds of the Bastard game we just were in, where he was SK. Ace: I don't like how he has basically been talking about game mechanics and shown no interest in hunting scum. However, I've read some games where he was in (last was space station) and I think this is part of his D1 play? Not entirely sure. Radfield: He would not have shown up in this list was it not for sbrubbles points. I think they are very legit, and I look forward to Radfields reaction. Very straightforward, gives clear thoughts and explanations, talks to town in general rather than the subjects. Another contrast is his fear of taking a hard stance, a common tell among newer scum players. Notice how many scum tells phagga is able to point out, and compare that with his final conclusion: On February 07 2013 06:26 phagga wrote: I was rereading your dialogue with Sloosh, and the other post was already big enough. 1: I don't like how you accused him of making an association case (which he was clearly not), and 2: how you tried to dodge his questions. you not wanting to give town reads is not really alignment indicative. 3: You're case on Mocsta is rather weak, the tone of his posts vs Oats is completely different than what you posted from his scum game. 4: Your reaction to sloosh's questions feel over the top. You seem to bark at him for no good reason instead of just trying to answer his questions. It feels partially like someone who just got caught in the act and tries to hide it. Specially the following two posts stick out: and 5: Afterwards everything else is just you attacking him until prplhz points out to you that it might be beneficial for you to actually answer slooshs question. The way you explained why you thought I was town actually showed that you have reasons to believe so, and it's not because you'd actually know my alignment, which seems townish. Still, due to your reaction I slightly lean scum on you. Regarding Sloosh: Nothing I have read so far indicates that he would be scum. The counterbalance to five points is yamato's town read explanation "which seems townish". There's a clear disconnect here people. phagga's newb scum play is showing: he is afraid of committing to a stance despite being able to list much evidence. And there are the empty promises he often makes, because he can't make actual reads: On February 07 2013 18:55 phagga wrote: Doesn't do so.I will read up on Djo and Snarfs at the next possibility and comment on them. On February 08 2013 02:51 phagga wrote: Doesn't comment on the case at all, and his "grilling of VE" concludes somehow, with this:Snarf I feel unsure about, have to read up fully on his case on VE. I currently think he might be right about VE, so I do not want to lynch him On February 08 2013 09:52 phagga wrote: - VE is not a good lynch today, i do not agree with prplhz there. On February 09 2013 16:21 phagga wrote: I have a small post put together with thoughts/questions on some other players before yesterday but did not post it because I did not want to influence nominations. I will not post it right now, as D2 is fresh and the current vote discussion is more important, but I will put it up later (latest beginning of D3). More excuses not to post reads, because he doesn't have any. For someone who "took my advice" on rereading the thread (seriously why credit me with that), he clearly didn't read anything else I had to say since he is doing the exact opposite. So, yea that's that. We can start there. Palmar I want you to comment your thoughts on VE. Also, a fleshed out read on one of Cheesecake, snarfs or prplhz. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
On February 09 2013 17:15 Mocsta wrote: As an aside: My main problem with sl0osh and what I need him to re-address is "Why did he think he would be up for nomination" I think it is arguable, sl0osh missing 3/4 of Day 1 does cast suspicion on him. This is followed up by "dangling a carrot" of 'clean slate reads'. Something I was not a fan. (We all have reads, why say this?) Using his logic of optimal scum play = 3 townies; it does not make sense for him to be included. I don't understand why me being included contradicts with my idea of 3 townies. The pool of people I referred to were good town players and "town" town players. I consider myself (and Palmar) the former, Mocsta the latter. I don't understand the danging of a carrot - I wasn't acting in a way to get myself nominated. The clean slate comment was an explanation of why I wasn't giving updated reads after a prolonged absence. | ||
slOosh
3291 Posts
Just note that he didn't bother bring up most of those things during the actual day, and his final conclusion is "there is probably 1 scum in this group of three". Lots of questions but no real conclusions. Going to sleep because it's 2:38am and I have to be up at 8am and seriously why am I doing this to myself .... Next post will be around ... 1 or 2pm since that is when I'm free. If you have questions for me, consolidate them in a nice post so I can address each one clearly when I get back. | ||
| ||