|
On December 04 2011 15:59 Velinath wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 15:56 xsksc wrote:On December 04 2011 15:52 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:48 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:25 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:22 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:11 jaybrundage wrote:On December 04 2011 15:01 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 14:42 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 14:20 Blazinghand wrote:I want to hear what you have to say. Don't flop around like you did in your first post. Be a man. Do the right thing. On December 04 2011 14:36 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Hey Blazinghand sorry if I came around to be a little shady.
I was just trying to feed into the conversation, about the voting. How do we want to plan the lynching with the time zone difference? I feel like this will be a major roadblock as it will be 12 AM for our friends in the UK.
As for my earlier comment I just wanted to say hi. Did not mean to get off on the wrong foot Hi, this also feels noncontributive. I feel like what Blazinghand was looking for was more of an opinion on one of the matters we've been discussing in the thread. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to hear what you have to say about the Lynch All Lurkers policy discussed a couple of pages back. Adding questions but no answers isn't really posting content, at least not in my eyes. I'd just like to point out that Blazinghand is calling out people for giving their opinions. I guess if it's not groundbreaking then it's fluff. While I agree with you that just posting a question isn't enough, giving an opinion that agrees with others shouldn't be considered not participating. If we're going to win, the town needs to work together and discouraging newer townies to post by slapping them around when they do is probably not the right answer. Well you could say blazinghand is coming off aggressive. However honestly i think its just scum hunting. You should be aggressive and state your opinion if you think someone is scum. And remember just because someones new doesn't mean there town. You could be new and still draw mafia. I honestly am not sure how to read BKEXE hes obviously new. But is he a newbie townie or a newbie mafia. On December 04 2011 13:11 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Hey guys!
Great to be joining. I think that when we vote we should make sure people did not mispeak.
I think that we all need to figure out what we want to do as a group.
What do you think? This was his first post and while there was alot of discussion going on in the thread he just posts this. Not even commentating on what was going on in the thread. Then talking about what we need to do as a group. When we already were talking about policy lynches. I would not straight out call him scum at this point. I just dont see him as being pro-town I didn't think Blazing was trying to do anything but scum hunt. However, I don't fully agree with his methods. Creating a contentious atmosphere in a game full of newbies who are likely intimidated is probably not the best way to get the town working together. Did it get me to post more, sure. Will it everyone else? I'm not totally convinced. I'm also not sure browbeating everyone into posting is going to help us figure out the scum lurkers over the town lurkers. I don't think that asking people to post is too much to ask. I see voting them (given the more than 40 hours till deadline) as an easy way to prod them into saying something. It's not as if the vote can't be removed once they post. I just think it's dangerous and is how bandwagons get started, of course at some point someone is going to have to start voting on someone I just don't want another new player coming in and seeing ##votewhoever a couple of times while trying to catch up and think that obviously that must be the person to vote for. As long as the rest of us are careful to not let the bandwagon get going, then I'm fine with whatever. It is just really easy to let one person make the decisions through sure force of personality or constantly posting ( I would think in a newbie game especially) by getting a ball rolling. As long as we're vigilant and step i and say, "Hold the fuck on that doesn't make sense" then I'm fine with whoever doing whatever they think will help the town win. Just like I think I've been doing the last few posts with Blaze. I completely agree here. We have voices of moderation in this town, obviously - I don't think it'll be easy to get incorrect bandwagons started given that we have some very vocal posters that are not necessarily willing to lynch on a whim (you being one of them). While one person can make decisions through personality (Palmar in 46 springs to mind), I feel like we've got a pretty vocal group that is able to balance each other out leading the town right now. If someone new steps in and votes blindly, I don't think it's out of line to ask them to justify their vote - the grou pthat we have right now will probably do a good job of discouraging sheeping, from what I've seen so far. Agreed on the above. However I want you guys to be very careful not to be too trusting. Do not assume the mafia will just be the lurkers posting 1 liners. It wouldn't suprise me if we have a scum member in this "voices of moderation" group, as you call it. All I'm saying is don't trust anyone, and use your heads. Oh, absolutely. While I think that anyone who is willing to stick their neck out and be vocal about a given player is less likely to be mafia (as mafia has no interest in contributing to constructive discussion), I definitely agree that leading the town down an incorrect path is certainly a viable strategy and one that the mafia may be employing here. That said, there's nothing in the posts from any of our active posters so far that screams "scum" to me - and so far our policy decisions are furthering a town agenda, IMO.
You are the number one poster quantitywise in this thread, you are also one of those who have voted early. You are also perhaps the one I consider to be most likely (as of now) to get a bandwagon started on someone (either as number one voter or two). Based on that, my question is: Are you trying to give yourself an alibi with the statement above?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 04 2011 21:58 BByte wrote:\ Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 20:38 ElectricBlack wrote:On December 04 2011 12:26 xsksc wrote:
Well, with something like a counter-claim, we have to decide who's telling the truth and who's not, breadcrumbs are useful for this later in the game. Breadcrumbs aren't useful. Nothing about breadcrumbs confirms the person performing them. There is nothing that stops the mafia from having an elaborately thought out claim they've breadcrumbed since day one. Do not attempt to use breadcrumbs to confirm anything. Breadcrumbs alone can't confirm a claim, but they can still be useful in analyzing which claimant is the real one. Depending on who the claimants checked, whether any of those checks flipped is still valid information to use.
Breadcrumbs should not be used to confirm a claim. A mafia dude can plant crumbs, then choose to use them or not. Here's what breadcrumbs are for:
Situation: Player Alpha is a Detective. He finds out Players Bravo and Charlie are innocent and Player Delta is a mafia member. Each day, he indicates the results of his detective work in his posts, hidden in a way that you wouldn't know to look for them unless you knew he was the detective. He is killed by the mafia during the night, and everyone sees that he was the detective. Players go through his filter and find out his investigative results by following the trail of breadcrumbs.
This is the primary use of breadcrumbs. Used this way, it lets our DT and/or Watcher to convey the results of their investigations from beyond the grave. DT and/or Watcher in this game should begin leaving breadcrumbs after they have investigative results, so that when they die we know what they knew.
Use breadcrumbs to pass along knowledge in case you die, not to support roleclaims.
|
On December 04 2011 23:21 xtfftc wrote:
Tunkeg, I approve of the way you're pressuring but would you mind answering the questions you've been so happy to ask the others? Not just a summary of the thread activity but how this makes people more or less likely to be mafia. Who do you trust and who would you lynch?
Of course.
Some of the answers I have asked I have summarized in my opening post. But I will be more spesific about my thoughts on players alignment and who I at this moment would lynch if I had:
Alignment
For a starter I don't think the scum players have been all that active yet.
Adam4167 Neutral. Got to little info on him, only 2 posts. Abit scummy that he makes the first post after the game starts, and then do nothing (almost) when the discussions get going.
Grackorini Neutral. Not a whole lot of posts here either. Mainly policy posts, but I agree on his point of view here. And I am leaning town here.
Velinath Neutral. Leaning town. Alot of posts, some of them I see as pro town, but also alot of fillers whic I see as pro scum.
xtfftc Neutral. Abit to many policy posts for my liking. The other posts are ok/good. Especially this last post where you called me out I see as very pro-town (Unless you are scum and think my ramblings are bad for town  )
xsksc Scum. If I had to pick three scums right now xsksc would be my third pick, I'd say more based on a hunch and not so much reasoning. It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities.
jaybrundage Scum. "Veteran", posts to little and with to little content, should know that thats anti-town.
ey215 Town. Even though coming of as very defensive, his posts so far says town to me. He is balancing out Blazinghand.
Blazinghand Town. Aggreessive play, scumhunting. May be spreading his votes around to much, but for now I see him as the most towniest.
BroodKingEXE Neutral, leaning scum. He is posting far to little, but I think it is because he is new. Hopefully if more people challange him with direct questions it will be easier to get a read on him. He is the fourth scummiest though.
ElectricBlack Neutral. One post, hard to say anything. Needs to post more or be considered a lurker.
Hassybaby Scum. Another veteran, and this one have not posted yet.
[b]Bbyte[b] Neutral, leaning town. Not many posts yet. But seems open and are answering questions given to him.
Trust and lynch
At this point I trust no one, I know to little yet.
For lynch I would go for either jaybrundage or Hassybaby at this point. They need to step up their game or GTFO.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
So, a lot of players have come by and posted while I was gone! We're running out of time- The day ends in 34 hours as of this posting.
Urgent Lurkers:
Hassybaby
You literally haven't posted since signing up.
Moderately Urgent Lurkers:
Adam4167
Still hasn't posted since I've voted for him. I suspect he was asleep or otherwise away from his computer. I still want you to respond to my post, by the way.
BroodKingEXE
A lot of low or no-content posts. Came out of his shell a bit when the pressure was on, but otherwise no contributions.
ElectricBlack
One post since I prodded him, and that's it. Big post though and offered a little bit of content, but mostly just head-nodding.
Grackaroni
Despite the unbelievably awesome name, offered only some initial commentary on liar and lurker lynching. Answered some rules questions. Not sticking his neck out.
To Hassybaby and all the other lurkers: I want you to post and answer the following questions: Who so far has the scummiest play? Who should we lynch today? Who do you trust the most, and gives you "town" reads? Who are you unsure on?
I was worried about Adam, but honestly, Hassybaby is a much bigger problem. He literally hasn't posted. At all.
##Unvote Adam4167
##Vote Hassybaby
If Hassybaby isn't going to contribute, he doesn't belong in this game. If he's been afk or just hasn't gotten to a computer yet, that's fine-- but I'm not gonna unvote him unless he posts.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
[06:58] == Hassybaby [~Hassybaby@host-92-21-9-84.as13285.net] has joined #TLMafia
[06:59] <Hassybaby> i hate traffic...
[06:59] <Hassybaby> hey very1
Hassybaby, either you have an impersonator on the #TLMafia IRC or you're no longer afk. I'd like to see a response from you.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
You're gonna have to let me read through all the pages since it started dude, or I won't be able to give a proper response.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Yay~ okay, can't wait to hear from you. Something for all townies to keep in mind:
On December 04 2011 23:11 Radfield wrote:
Hyshes, the gist is that it is far easier to scumhunt if you can first establish your innocence.
1. If you do not establish your innocence, and have to spend your time defending yourself, you have much less time actively searching for scum. In addition, it can be difficult to scum-hunt when everyone is debating your alignment. You become biased.
2. It is far easier to build a case and gain support for your cause if you have already established an air of innocence. Why would I listen to someone I think is probably scum?
3. Getting lynched Day 1 is generally the worst failure of a town-aligned player. All townies should seek to eliminate their name from the short-list of lynches.
|
On December 05 2011 00:02 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 23:21 xtfftc wrote:
Tunkeg, I approve of the way you're pressuring but would you mind answering the questions you've been so happy to ask the others? Not just a summary of the thread activity but how this makes people more or less likely to be mafia. Who do you trust and who would you lynch? Of course. Some of the answers I have asked I have summarized in my opening post. But I will be more spesific about my thoughts on players alignment and who I at this moment would lynch if I had: + Show Spoiler +AlignmentFor a starter I don't think the scum players have been all that active yet. Adam4167 Neutral. Got to little info on him, only 2 posts. Abit scummy that he makes the first post after the game starts, and then do nothing (almost) when the discussions get going. Grackorini Neutral. Not a whole lot of posts here either. Mainly policy posts, but I agree on his point of view here. And I am leaning town here. Velinath Neutral. Leaning town. Alot of posts, some of them I see as pro town, but also alot of fillers whic I see as pro scum. xtfftc Neutral. Abit to many policy posts for my liking. The other posts are ok/good. Especially this last post where you called me out I see as very pro-town (Unless you are scum and think my ramblings are bad for town ) xsksc Scum. If I had to pick three scums right now xsksc would be my third pick, I'd say more based on a hunch and not so much reasoning. It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities. jaybrundage Scum. "Veteran", posts to little and with to little content, should know that thats anti-town. ey215 Town. Even though coming of as very defensive, his posts so far says town to me. He is balancing out Blazinghand. Blazinghand Town. Aggreessive play, scumhunting. May be spreading his votes around to much, but for now I see him as the most towniest. BroodKingEXE Neutral, leaning scum. He is posting far to little, but I think it is because he is new. Hopefully if more people challange him with direct questions it will be easier to get a read on him. He is the fourth scummiest though. ElectricBlack Neutral. One post, hard to say anything. Needs to post more or be considered a lurker. Hassybaby Scum. Another veteran, and this one have not posted yet. [b]Bbyte Neutral, leaning town. Not many posts yet. But seems open and are answering questions given to him.
Trust and lynch
At this point I trust no one, I know to little yet.
For lynch I would go for either jaybrundage or Hassybaby at this point. They need to step up their game or GTFO.
Okay, I like you. I agree on Blazinghand (although some of his stuff is a bit meh), I have no read on Hassy (he hasn't posted yet...), and I didn't like jay's first post (it was a first post though).
I liked xsksc's straight to the point opening - no messing around being lazy or trying to blend in but directly kicking off a discussion. He hasn't done much since though. I didn't like how he jumped in defence of ey215 when what Blazing did was perfectly fine, and he sounds like he didn't want to understand my arguments about lal for some reason. I wouldn't call him mafia yet but he's on my FOS list.
ey215 is my strongest mafia read for now though... Having to call out someone on scummy behaviour [b]two times just a few hours into a mini game doesn't bode well for that person.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
Ok, firstly, I want to actually say why I haven't posted since the game started: in all honestly, I didn't even know we were starting tonight. So I basically was out all day, and I come back to see the game's begun and I'm already lurking. Now that i know that the game's started, I will be posting plenty more to share my views.
About Lynching all Liras/Lurkers:
On December 04 2011 13:06 Blazinghand wrote:
It's acceptable for not everyone to agree on "lynch all liars"-- as long as a fair majority of us do, Nobody will lie. But lying or not, I think the thing we should focus on here is lynching lurkers. I say this because we NEED to make it so mafia talks. Everyone has to contribute. The reason lurking is considered a "viable strategy" is because the less a mafia guy talks, the less mistakes he makes, and the less chances there are that he'll seriously blunder.
If there were no serious repercussions, a Mafia guy will barely talk at all. This game begins with assymetric information-- Mafia know who's town (but not blue), but each individual townie/blue doesn't know anything but his own alignment. In this case, it's absolutely vital we encourage mafia members to talk so we can flush them out. They won't slip up unless they have the opportunity to do so.
This is the prime reason why lynching lurkers is a good idea. If we all strongly believe in this policy, there will be no lurkers. All the townies will be contributing, and all the mafia members will be torn between contributing AND trying to be unhelpful. It puts a huge amount of pressure on the mafia members. The additional reason for lynching lurkers is that we need all of the help the townspeople can give. It's important also to provide a lively conversation for the Blues (we have 2) to take part in. We have a cop and/or a rolechecker and they can't adequately get their information into the conversation without there being a conversation to begin with.
If it turns out we have a lot of townie lurkers even implementing this policy, we're dead anyways. The idea that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because there might be a lot of townie lurkers is inherently flawed-- if there's 1 townie lurker, it's good to get rid of him anyways, and if there are a lot of townie lurkers we're basically boned.
So, we should Lynch All Lurkers. Anyone who disagrees with me better have a damn good reason why.
While I agree wit this idea in theory, you have to remember that this is a special case. For a start, the game is very newbie based, and despite the fact that you ant them to talk, people just don't feel like that they can contribute, even though just stating opinions is better than nothing. On top of this, the game has barely been 12 hours, and started quite suddenly. Going after lurkers this early is just not a good idea because odds are people don't even know the game's started.
Later on, I'm all for it. But not Day 1 imo, and especially not less than 24 hours since the start of the game.
Still reading!
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 05 2011 00:26 Hassybaby wrote:Ok, firstly, I want to actually say why I haven't posted since the game started: in all honestly, I didn't even know we were starting tonight. So I basically was out all day, and I come back to see the game's begun and I'm already lurking. Now that i know that the game's started, I will be posting plenty more to share my views. About Lynching all Liras/Lurkers: Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 13:06 Blazinghand wrote:
It's acceptable for not everyone to agree on "lynch all liars"-- as long as a fair majority of us do, Nobody will lie. But lying or not, I think the thing we should focus on here is lynching lurkers. I say this because we NEED to make it so mafia talks. Everyone has to contribute. The reason lurking is considered a "viable strategy" is because the less a mafia guy talks, the less mistakes he makes, and the less chances there are that he'll seriously blunder.
If there were no serious repercussions, a Mafia guy will barely talk at all. This game begins with assymetric information-- Mafia know who's town (but not blue), but each individual townie/blue doesn't know anything but his own alignment. In this case, it's absolutely vital we encourage mafia members to talk so we can flush them out. They won't slip up unless they have the opportunity to do so.
This is the prime reason why lynching lurkers is a good idea. If we all strongly believe in this policy, there will be no lurkers. All the townies will be contributing, and all the mafia members will be torn between contributing AND trying to be unhelpful. It puts a huge amount of pressure on the mafia members. The additional reason for lynching lurkers is that we need all of the help the townspeople can give. It's important also to provide a lively conversation for the Blues (we have 2) to take part in. We have a cop and/or a rolechecker and they can't adequately get their information into the conversation without there being a conversation to begin with.
If it turns out we have a lot of townie lurkers even implementing this policy, we're dead anyways. The idea that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because there might be a lot of townie lurkers is inherently flawed-- if there's 1 townie lurker, it's good to get rid of him anyways, and if there are a lot of townie lurkers we're basically boned.
So, we should Lynch All Lurkers. Anyone who disagrees with me better have a damn good reason why. While I agree wit this idea in theory, you have to remember that this is a special case. For a start, the game is very newbie based, and despite the fact that you ant them to talk, people just don't feel like that they can contribute, even though just stating opinions is better than nothing. On top of this, the game has barely been 12 hours, and started quite suddenly. Going after lurkers this early is just not a good idea because odds are people don't even know the game's started. Later on, I'm all for it. But not Day 1 imo, and especially not less than 24 hours since the start of the game. Still reading!
Ah, yeah, I didn't know the game at first either. That's a fair point, and I don't hold your previous inactivity against you.
However, I think it's exceptionally important to not lurk since this is a newbie game, and the town tends to lose in newbie games. Furthermore (and this is even more important), we have no info on the first day. We have to lynch, but our Detective and/or Watcher haven't had a chance to do any checks yet. At this moment in time, the Mafia hold all the cards and we have no info (yet).
Because we're flying the most blind on the first day, it's on this day that it's most important to get the pot stirring, imo. My vote isn't on you because I want to lynch you-- my vote is on you because I don't want to lynch you. I want you to prove yourself, so my vote can move on to Adam where it belongs. Please help me.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
P.S.: It's no rush to read the thread. I'm gonna go grab some breakfast. Take your time and make your analysis accurate. The number one goal is that we prove as many townies as possible innocent today, and put as much pressure as possible on the mafia.
|
On December 05 2011 00:24 xtfftc wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 00:02 Tunkeg wrote:On December 04 2011 23:21 xtfftc wrote:
Tunkeg, I approve of the way you're pressuring but would you mind answering the questions you've been so happy to ask the others? Not just a summary of the thread activity but how this makes people more or less likely to be mafia. Who do you trust and who would you lynch? Of course. Some of the answers I have asked I have summarized in my opening post. But I will be more spesific about my thoughts on players alignment and who I at this moment would lynch if I had: + Show Spoiler +AlignmentFor a starter I don't think the scum players have been all that active yet. Adam4167 Neutral. Got to little info on him, only 2 posts. Abit scummy that he makes the first post after the game starts, and then do nothing (almost) when the discussions get going. Grackorini Neutral. Not a whole lot of posts here either. Mainly policy posts, but I agree on his point of view here. And I am leaning town here. Velinath Neutral. Leaning town. Alot of posts, some of them I see as pro town, but also alot of fillers whic I see as pro scum. xtfftc Neutral. Abit to many policy posts for my liking. The other posts are ok/good. Especially this last post where you called me out I see as very pro-town (Unless you are scum and think my ramblings are bad for town ) xsksc Scum. If I had to pick three scums right now xsksc would be my third pick, I'd say more based on a hunch and not so much reasoning. It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities. jaybrundage Scum. "Veteran", posts to little and with to little content, should know that thats anti-town. ey215 Town. Even though coming of as very defensive, his posts so far says town to me. He is balancing out Blazinghand. Blazinghand Town. Aggreessive play, scumhunting. May be spreading his votes around to much, but for now I see him as the most towniest. BroodKingEXE Neutral, leaning scum. He is posting far to little, but I think it is because he is new. Hopefully if more people challange him with direct questions it will be easier to get a read on him. He is the fourth scummiest though. ElectricBlack Neutral. One post, hard to say anything. Needs to post more or be considered a lurker. Hassybaby Scum. Another veteran, and this one have not posted yet. Bbyte Neutral, leaning town. Not many posts yet. But seems open and are answering questions given to him.
Trust and lynch
At this point I trust no one, I know to little yet.
For lynch I would go for either jaybrundage or Hassybaby at this point. They need to step up their game or GTFO. Okay, I like you. I agree on Blazinghand (although some of his stuff is a bit meh), I have no read on Hassy (he hasn't posted yet...), and I didn't like jay's first post (it was a first post though). I liked xsksc's straight to the point opening - no messing around being lazy or trying to blend in but directly kicking off a discussion. He hasn't done much since though. I didn't like how he jumped in defence of ey215 when what Blazing did was perfectly fine, and he sounds like he didn't want to understand my arguments about lal for some reason. I wouldn't call him mafia yet but he's on my FOS list. [b]ey215 is my strongest mafia read for now though... Having to call out someone on scummy behaviour [b]two times just a few hours into a mini game doesn't bode well for that person.
You do have a point there, but from my point of view I see it more as a hissyfit than a scumtell. That beeing said it is something to take into consideration as the game progresses.
|
On December 04 2011 21:39 Tunkeg wrote:
So are you trying to establish yourself as a boring townie by not posting anything or what?
Adam, a couple of questions for you:
What is your thoughts on Blazinghand's aggressiveness? How do you perceive him thus far? Is his play pro-town or anti-town?
Any thoughts on xsksc's play? Is he a key player in this game? If he is scum, what effect will that have on the game?
If my lack of posting thus far has crowned me as a boring townie, I guess it’s a mantle I’ll wear; I had a Sunday off and decided to go out drinking.
My thoughts on Blazinghands aggression so far is that I feel he is trying to generate discussion. However, I question whether he is trying too hard to establish himself as a townie by his badgering. This, coupled with his apparent buddy-buddy relationship with Velinath has me keeping a close eye on both of them as I find it strange that they are apparently “BFF’s” after only 12 hours of play. So to directly answer your question, Tunkeg, I find his behaviour suspicious and erring on the side of Anti-town. 5 separate votes in 12 hours is akin to spam and is just leading the town around in circles, rather than focusing on any one target.
Xsksc is someone I’m more familiar with after close examination of the Newbie Mini Mafia thread. So far he has begun discussion, scolded Blazinghands reckless aggression and defended himself well when called out. Is he a key player in the game? Not yet, but neither is anyone else. Is he pro-town? All signs are pointing towards yes. If he turns out to be mafia, id hope to think we can still catch him out and hang him even with his greater mafia experience over us.
On December 04 2011 16:03 Blazinghand wrote:
Adam has correctly noted that there are no no-lynches in his sole post. Helpful, but not enormously so. Also, he's certainly awake since he's Australian. I'm gonna slap my vote on him and wait for him to contribute some more. Maybe he's eating or out or something, but hopefully this will get more than 1 post
Adam, I'd like to see you contributing to the discussion more. I'm heading to bed relatively soon, but when I wake up I hope to see a new post from you.
##Vote Adam4167
I don't necessarily think you're scum or that other people should vote for you, but you've only made one post, and that's simply not good enough.
Hurry up.
As previously stated, I went out drinking. And after I finish this post, I'm going to need at least 6 hours to sleep it off.
I feel that by flinging your vote in every direction, you have cheapened the weight of your vote when you eventually do decide to settle on a target. I also feel the need to point out again that you have had 5 separate votes in 12 hours, which is almost half of the players participating.
You’ve caught my attention Blazinghand, don’t slip =).
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 05 2011 01:38 Adam4167 wrote:
As previously stated, I went out drinking. And after I finish this post, I'm going to need at least 6 hours to sleep it off.
I feel that by flinging your vote in every direction, you have cheapened the weight of your vote when you eventually do decide to settle on a target. I also feel the need to point out again that you have had 5 separate votes in 12 hours, which is almost half of the players participating.
You’ve caught my attention Blazinghand, don’t slip =).
Ah, no problem. Hope to see a good post from you in 6 hours. Sleep a little extra if you're sloshed, man, don't be hung over.
Also, you can say what you want about Velinath. He's just another poster to me, and I don't know whether or not he's town. I know he spends a lot of time echoing my statements, but that doesn't make him any more or less town-- agreeing or disagreeing with me doesn't affect my read of your town-ness on its own-- otherwise mafia would hide by agreeing with me.
It's also worth noting that simply posting a lot isn't pro-town-- it's just that a lack of posting is anti-town.
I find his behaviour suspicious and erring on the side of Anti-town. 5 separate votes in 12 hours is akin to spam and is just leading the town around in circles, rather than focusing on any one target.
You are entitled to your opinion. However, I will keep the pressure on and prevent lurkers from lurking, even if it affects your opinion of my play. Nobody gets a free pass from scrutiny.
The fact of the matter is, no matter where my vote goes, at the end of the day it's worth 1 vote, just like everyone else. Everyone I've voted for has come out and talked and caused me to change targets. Compare: amount of info we had before I started voting for people and amount of info we've received because people come out and defend themselves.
I focus on targets who literally haven't posted, and once they become active, I move on. Do you have a better suggestion? If you can think of a more pro-town way for me to act, go ahead... but if your position is "well, I think blazinghand is calling a lot of attention to himself and to quiet people, and making sure everyone gets scrutiny rather than just one person, therefore he is anti-town"....
Well, I don't know what to say to that.
Am I putting words in your mouth? yes, because you haven't done a great job of doing so.
|
United Kingdom10823 Posts
Ok, read through the thread now. A few things:
On December 05 2011 00:02 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 23:21 xtfftc wrote:
Tunkeg, I approve of the way you're pressuring but would you mind answering the questions you've been so happy to ask the others? Not just a summary of the thread activity but how this makes people more or less likely to be mafia. Who do you trust and who would you lynch? Of course. Some of the answers I have asked I have summarized in my opening post. But I will be more spesific about my thoughts on players alignment and who I at this moment would lynch if I had: + Show Spoiler +AlignmentFor a starter I don't think the scum players have been all that active yet. Adam4167 Neutral. Got to little info on him, only 2 posts. Abit scummy that he makes the first post after the game starts, and then do nothing (almost) when the discussions get going. Grackorini Neutral. Not a whole lot of posts here either. Mainly policy posts, but I agree on his point of view here. And I am leaning town here. Velinath Neutral. Leaning town. Alot of posts, some of them I see as pro town, but also alot of fillers whic I see as pro scum. xtfftc Neutral. Abit to many policy posts for my liking. The other posts are ok/good. Especially this last post where you called me out I see as very pro-town (Unless you are scum and think my ramblings are bad for town ) xsksc Scum. If I had to pick three scums right now xsksc would be my third pick, I'd say more based on a hunch and not so much reasoning. It is his way of gaining trust, while not really providing any pressure to anyone or other pro town activities. jaybrundage Scum. "Veteran", posts to little and with to little content, should know that thats anti-town. ey215 Town. Even though coming of as very defensive, his posts so far says town to me. He is balancing out Blazinghand. Blazinghand Town. Aggreessive play, scumhunting. May be spreading his votes around to much, but for now I see him as the most towniest. BroodKingEXE Neutral, leaning scum. He is posting far to little, but I think it is because he is new. Hopefully if more people challange him with direct questions it will be easier to get a read on him. He is the fourth scummiest though. ElectricBlack Neutral. One post, hard to say anything. Needs to post more or be considered a lurker. Hassybaby Scum. Another veteran, and this one have not posted yet. Bbyte Neutral, leaning town. Not many posts yet. But seems open and are answering questions given to him.
At this point I trust no one, I know to little yet.
For lynch I would go for either jaybrundage or Hassybaby at this point. They need to step up their game or GTFO.
Firstly, I'm honoured that you think I'm a veteran, but you're totally wrong. I'm not a veteran in any way shape or form. This is my second game, and my first game was XLVII, and we all know how that went
Secondly, while I've already addressed this point to Blazing, I want to emphasize this one a bit more, because I'm wondering about your methods considering the game situation.
It's been just over half a day in a game that suddenly started, and you already have a scumlist based on the fact that people haven't posted? Really? The day lasts 48 for a reason dude; time-zones exist, as does RL. I've already mentioned to Blazing that I have been out all day, and I didn't even know that the game had started until I came back home. I suspect that there are one or two others in the same boat. So actually wait for responses before instantly preparing the gallows.
While its awesome that you guys are getting the ball rolling, you have to remember that pushing easy targets this earlier is actually very anti-town. You're basing your actions on very limited information, if any, and you're also discouraging discussions, and instead forcing players to defend themselves as opposed to looking at evidence and discussing THAT with people. At no point is that a good idea. This goes especially to you Tunkeg, because right now it feels like you're playing the Serejai role from XLVII. Accusing everyone isn't going to help. In fact, it can easily get you ignored in the thread. Accusing people is fine, but do it within reason considering situations in the game.
[B]On December 05 2011 00:32 Blazinghand wrote: Show nested quote +[B]On December 05 2011 00:26 Hassybaby wrote: [spoiler]Ok, firstly, I want to actually say why I haven't posted since the game started: in all honestly, I didn't even know we were starting tonight. So I basically was out all day, and I come back to see the game's begun and I'm already lurking. Now that i know that the game's started, I will be posting plenty more to share my views. About Lynching all Liras/Lurkers: On December 04 2011 13:06 Blazinghand wrote:
It's acceptable for not everyone to agree on "lynch all liars"-- as long as a fair majority of us do, Nobody will lie. But lying or not, I think the thing we should focus on here is lynching lurkers. I say this because we NEED to make it so mafia talks. Everyone has to contribute. The reason lurking is considered a "viable strategy" is because the less a mafia guy talks, the less mistakes he makes, and the less chances there are that he'll seriously blunder.
If there were no serious repercussions, a Mafia guy will barely talk at all. This game begins with assymetric information-- Mafia know who's town (but not blue), but each individual townie/blue doesn't know anything but his own alignment. In this case, it's absolutely vital we encourage mafia members to talk so we can flush them out. They won't slip up unless they have the opportunity to do so.
This is the prime reason why lynching lurkers is a good idea. If we all strongly believe in this policy, there will be no lurkers. All the townies will be contributing, and all the mafia members will be torn between contributing AND trying to be unhelpful. It puts a huge amount of pressure on the mafia members. The additional reason for lynching lurkers is that we need all of the help the townspeople can give. It's important also to provide a lively conversation for the Blues (we have 2) to take part in. We have a cop and/or a rolechecker and they can't adequately get their information into the conversation without there being a conversation to begin with.
If it turns out we have a lot of townie lurkers even implementing this policy, we're dead anyways. The idea that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because there might be a lot of townie lurkers is inherently flawed-- if there's 1 townie lurker, it's good to get rid of him anyways, and if there are a lot of townie lurkers we're basically boned.
So, we should Lynch All Lurkers. Anyone who disagrees with me better have a damn good reason why. While I agree wit this idea in theory, you have to remember that this is a special case. For a start, the game is very newbie based, and despite the fact that you ant them to talk, people just don't feel like that they can contribute, even though just stating opinions is better than nothing. On top of this, the game has barely been 12 hours, and started quite suddenly. Going after lurkers this early is just not a good idea because odds are people don't even know the game's started. Later on, I'm all for it. But not Day 1 imo, and especially not less than 24 hours since the start of the game. Still reading! Ah, yeah, I didn't know the game at first either. That's a fair point, and I don't hold your previous inactivity against you. However, I think it's exceptionally important to not lurk since this is a newbie game, and the town tends to lose in newbie games. Furthermore (and this is even more important), we have no info on the first day. We have to lynch, but our Detective and/or Watcher haven't had a chance to do any checks yet. At this moment in time, the Mafia hold all the cards and we have no info (yet). Because we're flying the most blind on the first day, it's on this day that it's most important to get the pot stirring, imo. My vote isn't on you because I want to lynch you-- my vote is on you because I don't want to lynch you. I want you to prove yourself, so my vote can move on to Adam where it belongs. Please help me.
Agreed. Lurking in a game this small has to be discouraged, especially considering you won't lean anything through it. However, the pot should be stirred through responses of policies, not open call outs. You have an interesting way of getting people to participate. It may be working, but it really shouldn't be encouraged.There is no sense of cohesion if you start off by accusing people.
As for cases, I'll go back through everyone's filter one by one, and see if i spot anything. initial reads have not made me feel like there's a definitive scum read, or a totally strong one yet, but I may have easily missed something.
|
On December 04 2011 13:31 Velinath wrote:
[color=green]Mods: Do I rescind votes by using (double pound sign)Unvote: (player name)?[/color]
Yes, you may rescind a vote with ##Unvote: (playername). Keep in mind that in this game, rules require you to have a vote in place on someone at the end of the day.
On December 04 2011 13:45 Blazinghand wrote:
Does capitalization matter in ##Vote statements?
No, voting is not case-sensitive.
For everyone's information, you do not need to unvote to change your vote, if you simply vote for someone else, your vote will automatically be changed. If a post contains both a vote and unvote for the same player, both will be ignored.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 05 2011 01:49 Hassybaby wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 00:32 Blazinghand wrote:On December 05 2011 00:26 Hassybaby wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ok, firstly, I want to actually say why I haven't posted since the game started: in all honestly, I didn't even know we were starting tonight. So I basically was out all day, and I come back to see the game's begun and I'm already lurking. Now that i know that the game's started, I will be posting plenty more to share my views. About Lynching all Liras/Lurkers: On December 04 2011 13:06 Blazinghand wrote:
It's acceptable for not everyone to agree on "lynch all liars"-- as long as a fair majority of us do, Nobody will lie. But lying or not, I think the thing we should focus on here is lynching lurkers. I say this because we NEED to make it so mafia talks. Everyone has to contribute. The reason lurking is considered a "viable strategy" is because the less a mafia guy talks, the less mistakes he makes, and the less chances there are that he'll seriously blunder.
If there were no serious repercussions, a Mafia guy will barely talk at all. This game begins with assymetric information-- Mafia know who's town (but not blue), but each individual townie/blue doesn't know anything but his own alignment. In this case, it's absolutely vital we encourage mafia members to talk so we can flush them out. They won't slip up unless they have the opportunity to do so.
This is the prime reason why lynching lurkers is a good idea. If we all strongly believe in this policy, there will be no lurkers. All the townies will be contributing, and all the mafia members will be torn between contributing AND trying to be unhelpful. It puts a huge amount of pressure on the mafia members. The additional reason for lynching lurkers is that we need all of the help the townspeople can give. It's important also to provide a lively conversation for the Blues (we have 2) to take part in. We have a cop and/or a rolechecker and they can't adequately get their information into the conversation without there being a conversation to begin with.
If it turns out we have a lot of townie lurkers even implementing this policy, we're dead anyways. The idea that we shouldn't lynch lurkers because there might be a lot of townie lurkers is inherently flawed-- if there's 1 townie lurker, it's good to get rid of him anyways, and if there are a lot of townie lurkers we're basically boned.
So, we should Lynch All Lurkers. Anyone who disagrees with me better have a damn good reason why. While I agree wit this idea in theory, you have to remember that this is a special case. For a start, the game is very newbie based, and despite the fact that you ant them to talk, people just don't feel like that they can contribute, even though just stating opinions is better than nothing. On top of this, the game has barely been 12 hours, and started quite suddenly. Going after lurkers this early is just not a good idea because odds are people don't even know the game's started. Later on, I'm all for it. But not Day 1 imo, and especially not less than 24 hours since the start of the game. Still reading! Ah, yeah, I didn't know the game at first either. That's a fair point, and I don't hold your previous inactivity against you. However, I think it's exceptionally important to not lurk since this is a newbie game, and the town tends to lose in newbie games. Furthermore (and this is even more important), we have no info on the first day. We have to lynch, but our Detective and/or Watcher haven't had a chance to do any checks yet. At this moment in time, the Mafia hold all the cards and we have no info (yet). Because we're flying the most blind on the first day, it's on this day that it's most important to get the pot stirring, imo. My vote isn't on you because I want to lynch you-- my vote is on you because I don't want to lynch you. I want you to prove yourself, so my vote can move on to Adam where it belongs. Please help me. Agreed. Lurking in a game this small has to be discouraged, especially considering you won't lean anything through it. However, the pot should be stirred through responses of policies, not open call outs. You have an interesting way of getting people to participate. It may be working, but it really shouldn't be encouraged.There is no sense of cohesion if you start off by accusing people. As for cases, I'll go back through everyone's filter one by one, and see if i spot anything. initial reads have not made me feel like there's a definitive scum read, or a totally strong one yet, but I may have easily missed something.
It's always good to have more analysis. Thanks for the help, and I can't wait to hear your insights.
However, I'd like to defend my methods. You say there's no sense of cohesion if I start off by accusing people. You'll note, however, that I never explicitly state that someone is scum. I haven't stated any reads yet because I dont' have any.
In fact, I've been doing the opposite-- I'm concerned because there's so little content I literally am not able to form reads. I explicitly state in the message of mine you quote that I'm not voting you because I think you're scum-- i'm voting you because I want you not to be.
I'm just trying to flush out lurkers. Some criticize me because my votes are "weak" and i'm flinging them around. Some criticize me because of my strong accusations.
Either criticism has some validity. But I'm not convinced yet that I should change my ways. So far I have forced some activity out of a very quiet town. As people start posting and lurk no more, I may not need to be as aggressive going forwards. However, I refuse to back down. There will be no silence as long as I have a say in things.
We need all the information we can get, so I will go and get it.
|
Hey guys, just woke up  reading through thread now.
|
Ugh, just woke back up. Hi to all the posters who have popped in!
On December 04 2011 23:23 Tunkeg wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 15:59 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:56 xsksc wrote:On December 04 2011 15:52 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:48 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:25 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:22 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:11 jaybrundage wrote:On December 04 2011 15:01 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 14:42 Velinath wrote:
[quote]
[quote]
Hi,
this also feels noncontributive. I feel like what Blazinghand was looking for was more of an opinion on one of the matters we've been discussing in the thread. If you wouldn't mind, I'd like to hear what you have to say about the Lynch All Lurkers policy discussed a couple of pages back. Adding questions but no answers isn't really posting content, at least not in my eyes. I'd just like to point out that Blazinghand is calling out people for giving their opinions. I guess if it's not groundbreaking then it's fluff. While I agree with you that just posting a question isn't enough, giving an opinion that agrees with others shouldn't be considered not participating. If we're going to win, the town needs to work together and discouraging newer townies to post by slapping them around when they do is probably not the right answer. Well you could say blazinghand is coming off aggressive. However honestly i think its just scum hunting. You should be aggressive and state your opinion if you think someone is scum. And remember just because someones new doesn't mean there town. You could be new and still draw mafia. I honestly am not sure how to read BKEXE hes obviously new. But is he a newbie townie or a newbie mafia. On December 04 2011 13:11 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Hey guys!
Great to be joining. I think that when we vote we should make sure people did not mispeak.
I think that we all need to figure out what we want to do as a group.
What do you think? This was his first post and while there was alot of discussion going on in the thread he just posts this. Not even commentating on what was going on in the thread. Then talking about what we need to do as a group. When we already were talking about policy lynches. I would not straight out call him scum at this point. I just dont see him as being pro-town I didn't think Blazing was trying to do anything but scum hunt. However, I don't fully agree with his methods. Creating a contentious atmosphere in a game full of newbies who are likely intimidated is probably not the best way to get the town working together. Did it get me to post more, sure. Will it everyone else? I'm not totally convinced. I'm also not sure browbeating everyone into posting is going to help us figure out the scum lurkers over the town lurkers. I don't think that asking people to post is too much to ask. I see voting them (given the more than 40 hours till deadline) as an easy way to prod them into saying something. It's not as if the vote can't be removed once they post. I just think it's dangerous and is how bandwagons get started, of course at some point someone is going to have to start voting on someone I just don't want another new player coming in and seeing ##votewhoever a couple of times while trying to catch up and think that obviously that must be the person to vote for. As long as the rest of us are careful to not let the bandwagon get going, then I'm fine with whatever. It is just really easy to let one person make the decisions through sure force of personality or constantly posting ( I would think in a newbie game especially) by getting a ball rolling. As long as we're vigilant and step i and say, "Hold the fuck on that doesn't make sense" then I'm fine with whoever doing whatever they think will help the town win. Just like I think I've been doing the last few posts with Blaze. I completely agree here. We have voices of moderation in this town, obviously - I don't think it'll be easy to get incorrect bandwagons started given that we have some very vocal posters that are not necessarily willing to lynch on a whim (you being one of them). While one person can make decisions through personality (Palmar in 46 springs to mind), I feel like we've got a pretty vocal group that is able to balance each other out leading the town right now. If someone new steps in and votes blindly, I don't think it's out of line to ask them to justify their vote - the grou pthat we have right now will probably do a good job of discouraging sheeping, from what I've seen so far. Agreed on the above. However I want you guys to be very careful not to be too trusting. Do not assume the mafia will just be the lurkers posting 1 liners. It wouldn't suprise me if we have a scum member in this "voices of moderation" group, as you call it. All I'm saying is don't trust anyone, and use your heads. Oh, absolutely. While I think that anyone who is willing to stick their neck out and be vocal about a given player is less likely to be mafia (as mafia has no interest in contributing to constructive discussion), I definitely agree that leading the town down an incorrect path is certainly a viable strategy and one that the mafia may be employing here. That said, there's nothing in the posts from any of our active posters so far that screams "scum" to me - and so far our policy decisions are furthering a town agenda, IMO. You are the number one poster quantitywise in this thread, you are also one of those who have voted early. You are also perhaps the one I consider to be most likely (as of now) to get a bandwagon started on someone (either as number one voter or two). Based on that, my question is: Are you trying to give yourself an alibi with the statement above?
No. I feel like you missed my intent with wording here. I was referring to the people that would defend other people against bandwagons (hence the discussion about voices of moderation that you quoted). I guess it's kinda WIFOM, but I feel like it's less likely for scum to vocally defend other scum when a bandwagon gets started, since they would tend to be under scrutiny if the lynch goes through.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 05 2011 02:43 Velinath wrote:Ugh, just woke back up. Hi to all the posters who have popped in! Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 23:23 Tunkeg wrote:On December 04 2011 15:59 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:56 xsksc wrote:On December 04 2011 15:52 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:48 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:25 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:22 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:11 jaybrundage wrote:On December 04 2011 15:01 ey215 wrote:
[quote]
I'd just like to point out that Blazinghand is calling out people for giving their opinions. I guess if it's not groundbreaking then it's fluff. While I agree with you that just posting a question isn't enough, giving an opinion that agrees with others shouldn't be considered not participating.
If we're going to win, the town needs to work together and discouraging newer townies to post by slapping them around when they do is probably not the right answer.
Well you could say blazinghand is coming off aggressive. However honestly i think its just scum hunting. You should be aggressive and state your opinion if you think someone is scum. And remember just because someones new doesn't mean there town. You could be new and still draw mafia. I honestly am not sure how to read BKEXE hes obviously new. But is he a newbie townie or a newbie mafia. On December 04 2011 13:11 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Hey guys!
Great to be joining. I think that when we vote we should make sure people did not mispeak.
I think that we all need to figure out what we want to do as a group.
What do you think? This was his first post and while there was alot of discussion going on in the thread he just posts this. Not even commentating on what was going on in the thread. Then talking about what we need to do as a group. When we already were talking about policy lynches. I would not straight out call him scum at this point. I just dont see him as being pro-town I didn't think Blazing was trying to do anything but scum hunt. However, I don't fully agree with his methods. Creating a contentious atmosphere in a game full of newbies who are likely intimidated is probably not the best way to get the town working together. Did it get me to post more, sure. Will it everyone else? I'm not totally convinced. I'm also not sure browbeating everyone into posting is going to help us figure out the scum lurkers over the town lurkers. I don't think that asking people to post is too much to ask. I see voting them (given the more than 40 hours till deadline) as an easy way to prod them into saying something. It's not as if the vote can't be removed once they post. I just think it's dangerous and is how bandwagons get started, of course at some point someone is going to have to start voting on someone I just don't want another new player coming in and seeing ##votewhoever a couple of times while trying to catch up and think that obviously that must be the person to vote for. As long as the rest of us are careful to not let the bandwagon get going, then I'm fine with whatever. It is just really easy to let one person make the decisions through sure force of personality or constantly posting ( I would think in a newbie game especially) by getting a ball rolling. As long as we're vigilant and step i and say, "Hold the fuck on that doesn't make sense" then I'm fine with whoever doing whatever they think will help the town win. Just like I think I've been doing the last few posts with Blaze. I completely agree here. We have voices of moderation in this town, obviously - I don't think it'll be easy to get incorrect bandwagons started given that we have some very vocal posters that are not necessarily willing to lynch on a whim (you being one of them). While one person can make decisions through personality (Palmar in 46 springs to mind), I feel like we've got a pretty vocal group that is able to balance each other out leading the town right now. If someone new steps in and votes blindly, I don't think it's out of line to ask them to justify their vote - the grou pthat we have right now will probably do a good job of discouraging sheeping, from what I've seen so far. Agreed on the above. However I want you guys to be very careful not to be too trusting. Do not assume the mafia will just be the lurkers posting 1 liners. It wouldn't suprise me if we have a scum member in this "voices of moderation" group, as you call it. All I'm saying is don't trust anyone, and use your heads. Oh, absolutely. While I think that anyone who is willing to stick their neck out and be vocal about a given player is less likely to be mafia (as mafia has no interest in contributing to constructive discussion), I definitely agree that leading the town down an incorrect path is certainly a viable strategy and one that the mafia may be employing here. That said, there's nothing in the posts from any of our active posters so far that screams "scum" to me - and so far our policy decisions are furthering a town agenda, IMO. You are the number one poster quantitywise in this thread, you are also one of those who have voted early. You are also perhaps the one I consider to be most likely (as of now) to get a bandwagon started on someone (either as number one voter or two). Based on that, my question is: Are you trying to give yourself an alibi with the statement above? No. I feel like you missed my intent with wording here. I was referring to the people that would defend other people against bandwagons (hence the discussion about voices of moderation that you quoted). I guess it's kinda WIFOM, but I feel like it's less likely for scum to vocally defend other scum when a bandwagon gets started, since they would tend to be under scrutiny if the lynch goes through.
The tactic you're referring to is also known as "Bussing" (as in, to throw your ally under a bus). http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Bussing
However, It's probably not worth it for mafia to bus on the first day-- only if they're backed into a weird spot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
