Newbie Mini Mafia XLIX
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
| ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
| ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
We've spent a lot of time discussing what amounts to a backup plan. The whole "vote inactive vs vote RNG" debate only matters in the odd and unlikely case that we don't have any likely suspects by the end of the day. A quarter of our time is gone, spent discussing something that likely won't be important when we only have a quarter of our time left. We can reopen that debate later when it matters, for now we should be finding scum. To that end, I'd like istandwithmitt to join the discussion. He's posted only once, saying: On October 14 2013 14:38 istandwithmitt wrote: ##vote: SagaZ Lynching lurkers gives us no information for future days & keeps scum from having to lay down a real vote. The way he's trying to guide the town is really scummy too & makes him look town without contributing anything. Well, see ya His points are fairly sound. Lynching lurkers doesn't accomplish much, and the suggestion to rally around me is an easy one to make (and not without its issues). However, those points are buried in a confrontational, finger-pointing post that also implies istandwithmitt won't be participating much ("Well, see ya"). This currently makes istandwithmitt a prime suspect, as there's little more unhelpful than a single, disruptive post. If he's a townie he's either already lost interest in the game or is more of a liability than an asset. If he's a mafia then he's an obvious target and we should pick the low-hanging fruit. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 01:46 OdinOfPergo wrote: Vonthin -- SCUM + Show Spoiler + Setting up an RNG to lynch someone is really stupid, especially with those odds plus it also takes away the fun/skill of the game. Also seems silly to be talking about an afk lynch when the game literally just started, would rather vote for someone suspicious looking like SagaZ who was so quick to start talking about lynching people minutes after the game started. How is July's thought a bad idea, it is unsafe, while you have a 40% chance to land a scum you have a 60% chance to blame an innocent townie like myself. Police detectives just don't take a group of people then choose one of them at random and arrest them. Don't even understand how you think he is throwing off the town when you are a danger wanting to pick random people to lynch, that is what seems scummy to me. I have a obvious goal in mind. Everyone should be able to see it by now. I've explained my reasoning behind this point already. If you didn't read it, It doesn't help your position to point attention to it. Anybody that graduated grade school can do the simple math. That will tell them a almost 40% chance is better than a blind shot in the dark. Which was like a 20 something iirc. From what I've seen to this point, you are just trying to side-track me. Also Vonthin, How does that work into what I said at all? July didn't even post a counter argument. He just disagreed with what I suggested. He was just saying he disagreed with your methods, he didn't say anywhere(unless I missed something which i don't think i did) that we waste our votes lynching inactive members which you said he did in one of your earlier posts. Both lynching RNG/getting the inactive person is both sorta stupid Ok, so he tried to derail my train of thought without trying to giving me a new one? Sounds like your trying to stall for something. Again. On October 14 2013 16:20 OdinOfPergo wrote: Yes. The difference between his and my idea, Is mainly, I have a strong chance to land scum. He has a penny in a hay bail. More over, my idea leaves me the entire rest of D1 to ALTER my vote. While he is claiming, regardless of what happens in the next FORTY hours, that we should waste our votes on "in-active" members that may or may not be mod-killed and replaced anyway. Also Vonthin, please note; I have not even cast a vote yet. You should really contribute to these arguments at this point. Because from I can tell you are just side-tracking them without an alternative. Player Boi -- Leaning towards town + Show Spoiler + That is a ballsy move, what makes you think it's a good idea to go ballsdeep on him because of his ONE post? I enjoy the fact that at least you question things. You are contradicting yourself. First you say you don't want to waste your vote on someone who doesn't post and then you proceed to push for a RANDOM lynch. My responce. Well, that was sort of my point. We can force early conversation with a RNG. Best case scenario; We rid ourselves of a scum role. Worst case scenario; We have to change our votes because a townie defends himself. This is the entire reason I found the previous post twards this questionable. Player did not understand my previous post. I explained it out again through pages 8&9 (Too lazy to copy this since people do NO FORMATTING PLS. USE YOUR SPACE/ENTER KEY PLS.) But anyway, the result came to this: Alright, allow me to clarify in lamest terms for you. If town lynches a lurker/afk that has not posted at the end of day one. Odds are, is that SAME person will proceed to afk and NOT VOTE (Which is mandatory I might add.) Resulting in a mod-kill. This outcome leads to the ENTIRE TOWN wasting their votes on a lynch that meant LITERALLY NOTHING Why take these odds when you have much better odds with a rng? We can alter rng votes according to what players argue. We can apply pressure to try to flesh of scum on day 1 with these votes. We can move the town in the right direction with these votes. Now please answer me; What the heck do you find scummy about my suggestion? TO which PB answered quickly; ( I GOT FREAKING LAZY. I WILL CONTINUE IF PEOPLE ARE TO LAZY TO GO READ TWO PAGES. Actually screw this. I've been trying to peice this post together for almost and hour and a half now. I just got off work and it's still not done. Our conclusion comes out to: PB calls me out to explain my claims- I explain them- PB explains his point of view. I explain mine. We tend to agree after a while on most subjects. EVERYTHING to do with this takes place on pages 8-10 Go read up on it. I'm tired. Also, you guys, for the most part, don't format shit. It's hard to type things out on notepad (Haha, It denies me [for the most part] the ability to format anything.) Ok, well at least you have come to a point on this. There is literally no point in lynching someone who's afk. Our current big lurkers, SagaZ and istandwithmitt, Haven't given us much to bais on. I'm more agains't Istand because it seems he's trying to bandwagon an early vote. While that's not suprising in these games, He doesn't follow up with anything (Be it because SagaZ didn't post anything after or not.) At this point I'll agree with you in saying this action is slightly disturbing. You can pressure vote on SagaZ though Istand. I will not vote for you yet because of this. If SagaZ comes back into this discussing I might even apluad you for it (Thought, it's been several hours, I have my doubts this will happen gracefully.) LATER ON I'm against lynching afkers. Lurkers are kind of a different story though, we have to force those to post. Honestly your suggesting isn't lynching someone randomly, it's lynching whoever is the scummiest (something I agree with). Lynching afkers should never happen in my opinion as it's more likely to set us back then anything else. I HATE E00e!!!! SERIOUSLY WHAT ARE YOU THINKING? July -- Questionable/SCUM + Show Spoiler + On October 14 2013 15:29 July617 wrote: You're going to randomly tag someone who could be potential town and marking them as scum? Doesn't sound like a safe way to play to me . My responce. I don't agree with this at all. How exactly is lynching a afk/lurker at this point better than taking stronger odds chance of a RNG I posted earlier better? I just don't get it. his "responce"? I mean this seriously isn't even coherent. How am I suppose to answer this per my previous question? At least you realize how bad that sort of thinking is , I don't feel comfortable lynching anyone just yet . I never said we lynch anyone . let's just let people talk for a bit. We ARE talking. Why are you saying that this discussion is bad? I dont think anyone is sidetracked, I just think we need to talk more so we can get idea's of the active players and a direction in which to go towards . Preferably a sane one. I don't understand how you expect us to move foward. You are obviously agains't my idea. You are "undecided" (I lack a solid statement) saying that you are for/agains't a policy "afk/lurker" vote. If I missed something here, point it out. Because alls I can gather from your current filter is that you obviously have no set objective. That makes me think you're scum GGTemplar -- Have to wait. NULL + Show Spoiler + I think between SagaZ and istandwithmitt, at most one of them is mafia. SagaZ's first post is somewhat suspicious but istandwithmitt instantly going so hard on him is just as suspicious because it seems like such an easy target at that point. There's no way they're both mafia together. It's possible both are town, but if we gain information that one of them is mafia, it would clear the other as town I'd say. He did at least "sort of" defend his post. I don't think if istandwithmitt was mafia, he would throw his buddy so hard under the bus that hard and that quickly. E00e -- NULL (RESEARCH PREV.) At the end of the road here, I've come into a few conclusions. Which is good. It was the whole reason I posted the RNG in the first place. I would have used it if nothing else came up. Lucky for me, there is plenty of things that have drawn my attention since this topic started. @Suess -- I don't intend to follow through with a RNG now. I have reads/tells that I have posted above that resulted from this days current discussions. I will adjust my views depending on what happens after this. Do you have an opinion on istandwithmitt? | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
Try writing as if you're writing a letter, rather than as if you're having a conversation. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 02:06 OdinOfPergo wrote: This being his only post I am somewhat torn about it. I understand that trying to pressure vote is a way to get people to talk. But I don't really think this is a "pressure vote" There is no pressure here. It's a scape goat "Oh look, I posted this day" Now I will proceed to lurk and not follow up any argument or pressure on this "pressure vote". This particular post is scummy. But as it is his only post, I'm not really enticed into chasing for this lynch yet. Perhaps I will revert to it if my other scum reads post valid counter-arguments. I'm fine with chasing other potential scum for now. I'm curious as to why you're leaning town on playerboy345. Do you not find the way he and July617 randomly jumped on E00e suspicious? | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 02:54 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I'd like to think this is a pro-town post because I agree with your point about the afk-lynch discussion when we've still got like 36 hours left to decide. I don't know what to make of you siding with istandwithmitt against SagaZ yet as it could mean a lot of different things based on what assumptions I go with. For example: -If SagaZ is mafia and istandwithmitt is town, you could be bussing your mafia under the table OR you could just be getting a good mafia read like another townie. -If SagaZ is town and istandwithmitt is mafia, you could be working with your mafia to go for a relatively easy and suspicious first lynch OR you could just be drawing an incorrect mafia read as a well-meaning townie. And I'm not sure what to make of your last paragraph regarding the cop. According to you, it's too early to discuss lynching afks because we have a lot of time left on Day 1 (which I agree with), but youre willing to go even further and discuss on what circumstances in future days the cop should come out? I'd say it's too early to discuss that as well here, or possibly not even relevant as maybe it's something you should ask your coach. Actually E00e is siding with SagaZ against istandwithmitt. Read the following sentence carefully: I dont think it is reasonable to immediately vote for SagaZ (who suggested afk lynch first) like istandwithmitt did. He's saying what istandwithmitt did was not reasonable. I think it's fair to assume E00e simply didn't know discussing the cop wasn't useful. When he got pounced on for his poor suggestion no one explained why it was bad. In fact, it wasn't until a few posts ago that the explanation actually came out (i.e. the cop should only announce themselves if they're going to get lynched). Despite the vitriol thrown at him, E00e was polite and tried to kill the flaming. At the moment suspecting him of anything beyond being a newbie is a waste of time. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 03:00 OdinOfPergo wrote: @GGTemp - If E00e defense of SagaZ is wrong, was mine wrong too? Please explain. SagaZ has made 1 post. It doesn't seem like it's complete trash but he hasn't posted anything else yet. I have to wait to see if this changes. Like my first couple post were about this. One of them specifically mentioned I was not on board with lynching SagaZ at the moment. It's kind of the reason I lean towards Istand lynch of SagaZ. Either way, at this point, either of them could probably post a compelling statement to sway my reads on them with solid reasoning. The whole reason I don't have a real read on either of them is entirely a lack of content. Actually it looks like GGTeMpLaR just misunderstood E00e, and thought he was defending istandwithmitt. SagaZ has actually posted twice. You apparently missed this one: On October 14 2013 20:11 SagaZ wrote: Of course I meant lurker lynch, afkers will get modkilled after all. If one guy is not saying anything in the thread or very little, but still turn out to vote for people without giving reasoning... that would be very scum telling to me. I guess it is fairly obvious to everyone, but pointing it out will make them talk whether they want it or not, and that gives information. I took the opportunity of the first post to basically say "game started, don't hide behind your inexperience and post". For town to win we need 2 thing: - Get everyone active - Organize around our confirmed towny Seuss @nyxnyxnyx: Care to explain why you trust Odin? Him being so hyper posty makes me nervous but he actually present points for us to discuss on, which creates discussion and is therefore good for town. It is weird to me at least that you come in, decide to side with odin even thought we have a confirmed townie. Like E00e he seems reasonable, though that mess about "I'm sorry I'm new" was pretty weird. I'm not particularly keen on his "organize around Seuss" idea because there's a high probability I'll be dead tomorrow, crippling the organization, but at the moment I think he means well. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
I'm not going to argue with you. Either you shape up and post in a style that doesn't invite us to get into long, time-consuming, and pointless arguments, or we're lynching you on principle. On October 15 2013 04:33 onlywonderboy wrote: It's not that safe of a bet. He could just as easily be a scum who started being active early to avoid suspicion. I'm not claiming Odin is scum, but your logic is far from infallible. I'd rather rally around the guy making the most sense, not the guy making some sense first. Im most interested in Susses' reads since we know he's not scum. You guys know for a fact that I'm not scum, but I'd like to remind you that I'm the only person in the game with zero people I can 100% trust. The fact that you know I'm genuine helps, but it doesn't make my reads correct. That said, here's how I see things right now. Completely Worthless, Lynch Plz: istandwithmitt Probable Townie: E00e, nyxnyxnyx, OdinOfPergo, GGTeMpLaR Uncertain: Bereft, onlywonderboy, SagaZ, Vonthin Probable Mafia: July617, playerboy345 AFK: Balla24 These are just my initial impressions. I'm uncertain about a few people because we really haven't seen enough of them to truly judge. In any case, these are not conclusions but working hypotheses. I'll change them at the drop of a hat if I find reasons to change my opinion. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 05:01 OdinOfPergo wrote: Istand, even to this point, if anyone goes through your filter, you haven't posted anything useful to support yourself. @Suess, I'm curious on why you think Nyx is town though. His 5? post consist of nothing but pretty much the same statement. I'm less than sold on the idea. At the time nyxnyxnyx wanted to blindly follow you the discussion that was going on was chaotic, without purpose, and generally a mass of confusion and bad assumptions on all sides. Killing the conversation so that we could move on to actually hunting scum needed to happen. It is slightly suspect. It's possible both you and he are actually mafia, and he's just chiming in to increase confidence in your authenticity. However, so long as I think you're a townie and contributing positively to the game, nyxnyxnyx is also likely a townie because as a mafia he wouldn't gain anything by killing a disruptive conversation or following the lead of a proactive townie. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 11:29 Bereft wrote: also lawl, adding July to that list, just read his post above. July, please give us some reads within the next 12 hours -- that should be enough time for you to "safely and calmly" get your reads together. We don't actually need every last poster giving a full list of reads. In fact, it's a fairly decent way for mafia members to look productive without actually contributing anything useful. The thread is also drawing very quiet, which is good news for the mafia, so I'm going to incite some discussion. At this point I believe istandwithmitt is just an absolutely terrible player/communicator. He's confrontational, dogmatic, egotistical, and generally a pain in the butt, but he's drawn way, way more negative attention to himself than makes sense for mafia. Bereft is right that we should be focusing on finding other targets right now. To that end, I believe the two most likely mafia players are SagaZ and July617. I'll present each case in turn. + Show Spoiler [SagaZ] + While he was the first player to post following the start of the game, he's been a sparse participant since. His first post immediately drew suspicion for a number of reasons. 1. Despite its word count it's actually very light on content. 2. The actual suggestions contained within are highly questionable. Observe: On October 14 2013 11:26 SagaZ wrote: As a disclaimer early, I think we should all agree on something. We are all newbies here, so if you fuck up or say something dumb, don't play the "oh sorry, I am new I didn't know". [/color] [color=green]Seuss is our confirmed town, we should try to organize around him. For a day 1 lynch, I think lynching some1 innactive is the best way to go.[/color] Having innactive players around just give mafia the opportunity to sit back and do nothing while town runs around screaming at each other. So give information about yourself if you can, so that others will be able to read you easy. My stance this early is easy: I will vote for people that post nothing worthy or nothing at all, unless some1 slips. I am also more likely to vote for people that say suspicious stuff and then say "sorry I didn't know I am new" SagaZ spends both the first and last paragraphs primarily rambling about how people shouldn't play the newbie card. If all he really wanted to do was encourage newbies to post, as he later claimed, he could easily have done so with a far more positive tone. He doesn't sound like he's encouraging newbies as much as discouraging them. While he does make two seemingly reasonable suggestions, they are obvious and ultimately counter-productive. As the sole confirmed townie in the game, my lifespan is likely to be short. Rallying around me exclusively would simply set the town up for trouble upon my inevitable death. Similarly, lynching players who'll simply be modkilled does nothing for the town either. So SagaZ' first post discouraged activity and made no useful suggestions. That's enough to arouse suspicion, but not to conclude he is mafia. That brings us to his second post: On October 14 2013 20:11 SagaZ wrote: Of course I meant lurker lynch, afkers will get modkilled after all. If one guy is not saying anything in the thread or very little, but still turn out to vote for people without giving reasoning... that would be very scum telling to me. I guess it is fairly obvious to everyone, but pointing it out will make them talk whether they want it or not, and that gives information. I took the opportunity of the first post to basically say "game started, don't hide behind your inexperience and post". For town to win we need 2 thing: - Get everyone active - Organize around our confirmed towny Seuss @nyxnyxnyx: Care to explain why you trust Odin? Him being so hyper posty makes me nervous but he actually present points for us to discuss on, which creates discussion and is therefore good for town. It is weird to me at least that you come in, decide to side with odin even thought we have a confirmed townie. In this post he claims he meant "lurker" when he said "inactive". However, in his first post he clearly stated that his potential vote targets included those who posted "nothing at all". SagaZ is backpedaling here, and making it seem reasonable by repeating the reasoning that undermined his previous position. He also very carefully drops his excuse for the weird newbie-discouraging rambling at the end of an unrelated paragraph, burying it. "Getting everyone active" is an important step for towns looking to win, but SagaZ doesn't actually have any suggestions on how to do that, and doesn't participate enough himself. He again says everyone should organize around me, also without suggesting how or acknowledging the obvious flaw in the strategy (e.g. I'm a dead man walking). Finally, he ends the post promoting discord. While nyxnyxnyx' decision to trust Odin could have used some additional vetting, at that point Odin was at the nexus of a fairly chaotic argument, and rallying behind his "let's randomly pick someone and put them in the hotseat to get information flowing" idea would have killed a lot of the useless chatter while promoting helpful discussion. Questioning nyxnyxnyx at this point only served to perpetuate the pointless debate, and promote distrust. SagaZ third post was entirely inconsequential, and above analysis. His fourth post at least pretended to have substance: On October 15 2013 05:02 SagaZ wrote: First impressions: going into this I was feeling most uncomfortable with nyxnyxnyx, blindly following some1 sounds like a pretty bad idea for a town, and especially stating it in the thread sounds more to me like he was trying to get onto OdinOfPergo's good side. And the I read istandwithmitt's post and I'm like wtf. He voted for me at the beginning and I thought it was alright, aggressive play-style pointing fingers early to get some heat and get the discussion going, but then instead of making use of it he just go silent. And now this switcharoo vote with no explanation and abrasive behavior? There are a lot of words in this post, but it essentially says nothing. The entire latter half is a rehash of what everyone else had already said about istandwithmitt. The former half mostly repeats his previous misgivings about nyxnyxnyx' decision, adding an extra touch of distrust of both nyx and Odin. No progress towards anything happens over the course of these paragraphs. Finally, there's SagaZ latest post: On October 15 2013 05:20 SagaZ wrote: I'd like to hear what playerboy345 has to say to Istandwithmitt's accusations; just complete the weird triangle between them 2 and E00e. At this point debating with istandwithmitt was utterly pointless, whoever was doing it. I had said as much earlier. Promoting a useless discussion is never helpful to the town. It is for these reasons that I believe SagaZ has a very high probability of being mafia, and is worthy of a lynching. + Show Spoiler [July617] + July has posted 6 times since the game began (I'm excluding his edit explanation and apology), and he's made a solid point once. Look for yourself: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=430766&user=July617 The only useful contribution he's made was his response to Odin's confusing RNG plan. At the time Odin's confusing manner of communicating made it seem like the plan was to randomly select someone, lynch them, and call it a day. That ultimately wasn't what Odin was aiming for, but at the time it seemed that way and if July hadn't responded as he did someone else would have. Which brings us to his other 5 posts. They all say essentially the same thing, "I don't want to lynch anyone yet, let's wait and talk more." If everyone was jumping to conclusions in the first four hours istandwithmitt style that might have been fine, but with practically half our time spent he's still waiting for a sign from God (or is it the Godfather?). The only player who has contributed less is Balla24, who hasn't posted at all. Keeping his head this low, and trying to keep people deferring the lynching decision as long as possible, makes it a high probability that July617 is mafia. Until such time as either or both of these individuals has a convincing defense established, it's my preference that we lynch one of them over istandwithmitt, much as it pains me. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 15 2013 23:08 playerboy345 wrote: Guys please post some stuff, ANYTHING. Sorry, US Timezones at work. I was up until 3:30 AM my time writing my post and just woke up. Also, I really highly doubt E00e was role claiming. If you check his post history he was asking about the cop before the game even started. There's a chance he's the cop, but he couldn't have known he was going to be the cop when he first asked questions about how the cop worked. On October 15 2013 20:45 Vonthin wrote: After catching up after I went to sleep/work I am casting my vote for istandwithmitt ##vote: istandwithmitt Agree with the other people who voted for him(Suess/Odin), posts are really negative and bring bad attention to him, he might just be a townie with poor communication skills but still has the highest chances for being a scum from what I've read On October 15 2013 23:20 Vonthin wrote: I did read your post and Suess' posts Here is reasons why I voted for him 1. He is super quick to jump the gun to lynch someone, votes after seeing SagaZ's very first post saying we should lynch inactive 2. His very next post he switches and votes for playerboy by saying he posts nothing worthwhile(he has some point here, a good portion of his posts don't say much besides i agree with x but a lot of those posts came after he voted against him) 3. Makes shit posts saying things like "Good poast" after someone votes against him, then just proceeds to argue poorly trying to justify his voting and being 2 confrontational plus no real analysis. He seems the scummiest to me, there are some people that seem scummy but nothing as glaring as him. I am still contemplating switching my vote to Nyx but want to see another post or two from him. Reasons for thinking he is scum so far: Hasn't said almost anything besides that he is gonna blindly follow Odin when he isn't a confirmed town and that odin has a plan because we don't have one the townies auto lose! Then he just posts once more saying he is voting for Mitt and nothing else I've given you a lot of slack previously because OdinOfPergo's RNG plan was, at first, completely incomprehensible. However, Bereft's arguments and your latest posts are changing my mind. The arguments I made against istandwithmitt were mostly an attempt to get him to play nice. As you caught up on the thread, you should have seen the arguments Bereft I made saying essentially, "istandwithmitt is most likely the worst townie you'll ever see". It's the simplest explanation for his behavior. Moreover, if we lynch istandwithmitt tonight we essentially lose any information our votes could give us. Like Bereft said it's really, really easy for the mafia to join the bandwagon. We're far better off lynching someone who we have a strong read on but isn't so "obvious". Like you. You're jumping on the istandwithmitt bandwagon after we've clearly stated we're moving on and hoping to find a better target. Or July617, who in responding to me still managed to say practically nothing. Speaking of whom: On October 15 2013 18:11 July617 wrote: @seuss I'll give you that , my past five posts over and over again have been the pretty much the same thing, only because I really don't have an idea of who I should focus my attention to. Yes istandwithmitt is an easy lynch because of how he's acting but I believe there are better lynches out there. As to who ? I'm not so sure, I wish i could say SagaZ but he could just be playing bad town . And Whether it is bad town play or he's secretly mafia, I can't lean to either side without an explanation from him . SagaZ has given his explanation. You need to have an opinion and now because you've managed to make another post that says absolutely nothing.
My preference at this point is for us to lynch July617 or Vonthin; they are both valid candidates. We definitely have strong enough reads to leave istandwithmitt alone for the day. ##unvote ##vote Vonthin | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 00:43 nyxnyxnyx wrote: Because Odin probably knows how to play this game better than I do and he's voting for him right now. Following Odin initially made sense, but continuing to follow him when he basically hasn't posted today and everything has changed fairly dramatically is literally an istandwithmitt level misplay. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 02:10 istandwithmitt wrote: I came to play but literally all anyone can say is that I'm trolling or worthless. I just want to get this over with at this point. Playing mafia is 90% communication. I'm not sure what you expected was going to happen when you made terse, confrontational posts your modus operandi. If you want to play, play. The only thing that's stopping you from communicating with us is you. If you'd just gone into detail about why you jumped on SagaZ so fast and why you swapped to playerboy345, rather than blithely posting "good poast" and "Yeah sorry for posting about who I think is scum." you wouldn't be the social pariah you are now. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 05:46 July617 wrote: U.S timezone's people, give me a break, this is day 1 here, day one and we've had four players being called for a lynch and a mighty big bandwagon going on with mitt nyx and vothin, with the exception of vothin right now, yes nyx and mitt do seem like viable choices, but are your reads really that sure that they're mafia? We could be lynching bad town and losing votes we may need later on down the road, I'd like to not have a reason to vote for mitt, but the way he's acting will only worsen with time. I'd like to believe that it will worsen with time but I really don't know, and I have to go with the fact's here and the fact's are that we need the town as strong and as trusted as can be if we're going to want to win, having bad and erratic play isn't helping us . That's my opinion on the matter. ##Vote istandwithmitt Nyx dont pressure vote, pressure voting is how mafia infiltrates peoples ranks, just explain yourself more, and be exact and absolute with your points. I'm pretty much sure you're mafia at this point. I'd be willing to bet my (virtual) life on it. As bad and erratic as mitt's play has been, he's honestly contributed more than you have, which is saying a lot. Even this post is filled with meaningless statements and contradictions. You cry bandwagon and then hop on one. You warn us against lynching bad town players and then call us to lynch one. At this point it's all or nothing. I'm willing to wager that Vonthin is mafia on the basis that I think you're mafia and have nothing to gain from saving Vonthin otherwise. If he flips mafia you're next on the chopping block. Of course if he flips town then I'm probably wrong and will be extremely apologetic provided I'm still alive. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 06:26 SagaZ wrote: I understand you don't like E00e mentioning cop, but why do you go so hard on it? Also you switched your vote to Vonthin from mitt. Do you believe mitt is not mafia? Or do you keep him in your mafia zone but want to get info from somewhere else today? Is it going to be the same day 2, what about the rest of the game? I very strongly believe mitt isn't mafia. I think he's just a really bad town player. There's no point in killing him because our worst case scenario is that he just keeps posting short one-liners than everyone can ignore. Best case he either starts actually playing or gets himself modkilled. I'd appreciate it if you'd swap your vote away from mitt for that reason. I'd prefer that we lynch July617, but at this point Vonthin is an amenable alternative. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 07:29 Bereft wrote: Seuss, if you can gather enough steam from town on this, fwiw I'd be willing to switch from Vonthin to July. however in the event that you can't convince anyone, Sagaz I'd recommend you switch your vote to Vonthin because otherwise you are 100% throwing away your vote. It's preferable at this point if we vote Vonthin. We can read a lot more into the positions of other people based on how he flips than we can if we suddenly turn around and lynch July. If Vonthin flips Mafia we can read a lot into people's votes. If he flips town we can be pretty certain July isn't mafia, which will cease the abusing relationship between his head and his desk I am at fault for. So I second your motion regarding SagaZ vote | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 07:53 Balla24 wrote: Why do you think july can't be mafia if vonthin is town again? They haven't done anything pair-worthy besides being in agreement. There isn't really any evidence to support the fact that they are against/together. There never is this early in the game. If July is mafia and Vonthin is not, it's to July's advantage to kill Vonthin over mitt. The town is already largely against mitt, so killing him doesn't really accomplish anything for the mafia if there's another good target. | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On October 16 2013 07:51 Balla24 wrote: I would really prefer voting someone else than Vonthin and July. I don't see them as mafia yet, and can't really understand why you guys think they are mafia so definitively. I would much rather vote nyx, as his reasonings for his plays aren't anywhere to be found. It's just random posting and blindly following other people. Then the reaction vote on Vonthin? How is that not super strange? Vonthin and July showed their opinion on the Odin gamestart talk, and immediately that puts them under suspicion? Why? It's not like their positions were super scum-like. Their contribution levels are similar to nyx's if not more. ##vote: nyxnyxnyx There are enough votes on nyx at the moment that we could possibly swap, given that at least I and SagaZ appear to be present and able to do so. I am not immovable and we do have a couple of hours. If SagaZ will be around I think you have an opportunity to make a case in defense of Vonthin and/or against nyxnyxnyx. Can you post in more detail? | ||
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
So July can stop smacking his head against his desk because Vonthin's town flip pretty much exonerates him. If he'd been mafia he'd have had every reason to vote for Vonthin over istandwithmitt. Vonthin's untimely demise was extremely unfortunate, but I think we can be fairly certain of July's innocence. Apologies for any damage done to your head or your desk. If nothing else yesterday serves as a warning. We really can't afford to waste time arguing about RNG and getting bogged down in one person's tomfoolery. If we'd had more time to discuss the Vonthin lynch I'm fairly certain we'd have backed off and found a different target. On that subject, we definitely need to discuss nyxnyxnyx. He needs to justify himself better and we need to consider him carefully as a potential lynching target. | ||
| ||