|
JB defended BKEXE several times throughout the game. (see Adam's earlier quotes)
BH just showed how BKEXE tried to change the target away from JB's lynch.
Most of BKEXE's defense is simply wifom.
##Vote: BroodKingEXE
|
BKEXE has been defending JB all game long so,
##Vote: BroodKingEXE
|
On December 10 2011 08:10 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote:I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scumFirst he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: On December 05 2011 09:38 ey215 wrote:
I agree we need to get votes on record due to time zones.
For previously stated reasons:
##Vote: Adam4167 On December 05 2011 06:18 ey215 wrote:
He says here in his read that he even needs to more posts to confirm his claim!
Adam4167 - not willing to call pro town. Will see how he posts after sleeping it off.
Ok, I have only read the first 2 quotes, but take a look at the time stamps. ey215 actually said the 2nd quote first, wanting to give me a bit more time to explain my shitty behavior, then 3 hours later he drops his vote on me. BKE, you are trying to make it look like ey215 is backpedaling on his vote. Stop misrepresenting the truth.I'm now going back to entirely read this - very skeptically.
Adam, I said he has no evidence, you are reading too far into his post he never says anything about the shitty behavior. He just says you are not protown, and that need he needs more evidence to prove or disprove that. Other people have analyzed your behavior, yet he says to refer back to a post (in his vote post), where he says he wants to hear more from you. He did not say in his vote post that it was a pressure vote, instead he refers to information that was non-existent.
|
I wrote this above post as the night ended. Did not realize adam died.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 10:47 BroodKingEXE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 08:10 Adam4167 wrote:On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote:I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scumFirst he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: On December 05 2011 09:38 ey215 wrote:
I agree we need to get votes on record due to time zones.
For previously stated reasons:
##Vote: Adam4167 On December 05 2011 06:18 ey215 wrote:
He says here in his read that he even needs to more posts to confirm his claim!
Adam4167 - not willing to call pro town. Will see how he posts after sleeping it off.
Ok, I have only read the first 2 quotes, but take a look at the time stamps. ey215 actually said the 2nd quote first, wanting to give me a bit more time to explain my shitty behavior, then 3 hours later he drops his vote on me. BKE, you are trying to make it look like ey215 is backpedaling on his vote. Stop misrepresenting the truth.I'm now going back to entirely read this - very skeptically. Adam, I said he has no evidence, you are reading too far into his post he never says anything about the shitty behavior. He just says you are not protown, and that need he needs more evidence to prove or disprove that. Other people have analyzed your behavior, yet he says to refer back to a post (in his vote post), where he says he wants to hear more from you. He did not say in his vote post that it was a pressure vote, instead he refers to information that was non-existent.
Honestly, the best way to help your case, if you're town, is to identify a mafia player and build a strong case against him. If you do this, you will help the town, and if I'm more convinced that say, Velinath, or whoever, is more likely to be mafia than you, i'll vote for him, as will the others.
Defending yourself is important, but if you're innocent, make sure you actually find us a good lynch candidate. In theory, that's what everyone has been doing for the past 24 hours-- writing a good analysis.
I'll read up on your EY analysis. I think it's worth your time to defend your EY analysis with quotes from EY and quotes from yourself, rather than just text-- refute using evidence.
I want you to build a solid case. (which arguably you may have done). I want you to defend it with evidence. Act like a town player, and that will be your strongest exculpation.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 10:49 BroodKingEXE wrote:
I wrote this above post as the night ended. Did not realize adam died.
._.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 10:52 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 10:49 BroodKingEXE wrote:
I wrote this above post as the night ended. Did not realize adam died. ._.
Srsly go build a strong case on someone, or strengthen your existing cases.
|
##Vote ey215
[spoiler]On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote:I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scumFirst he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 09:38 ey215 wrote:
I agree we need to get votes on record due to time zones.
For previously stated reasons:
##Vote: Adam4167 Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:18 ey215 wrote:
He says here in his read that he even needs to more posts to confirm his claim!
Adam4167 - not willing to call pro town. Will see how he posts after sleeping it off.
Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 08:00 ey215 wrote:On December 05 2011 07:15 jaybrundage wrote:
BKEXE
Nice great to see some content from you i do agree with you on adam but for different reasons I also think your town reads are pretty spot on. What do you think about my reads they actually are pretty close ot yours. Im curious what you thinkg about ey he has posted alot and is not in your reads. He posted a his reads but mostly town.
And Ey if you had to choice a someone to vote for now who would it be. You said BKEXE. But i dont find him a viable vote imo I still think hes new townie unless i see a post that changes my mind about him anyone else on your radar Until he posted his last post, BKEXE was probably where I'd throw my vote. For the moment, that's just enough to get by. I'd like to see him answer your questions well. So now, if we were coming to deadline I'd probably vote for Adam4167. Feels like a lot of filler, and a couple of his points I haven't agreed with. I'm honestly not really solid on anyone at the moment. Wait, what fillers? Adam has only made three posts in the game 1) A question for the host, 2) an opinion on the prompt, and 3) an error filled response to BH. How can he have a filler if all of his posts have meaning behind it. At the same time Hassy and Bbyte had made barely any posts why not look at their lack of posts as opposed to the posts of Adam which had content (although false, but why not comment on that? + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:34 Grackaroni wrote:The thing that really seemed suspicious about Ey215 to me was this. On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 21:14 xtfftc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:52 xsksc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:35 xtfftc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:06 xsksc wrote:
What do you guys think of policy lynches in general? Do you think they are a good idea, if so, why?
Personally I disagree with lynching a lurker JUST because they're lurking, in a game like this anyway. The risk of hitting a townie is way too high.
Lynch all liars is a great idea though. It discourages people from lying right from day 1, the only people with a good reason to lie are scum. Both sound great but in reality they don't work. Lynch All Liars.. People get lies and opinions mixed up all the time, and even when a lie is a lie, eventually you realise that there are different types of lies and lynching for some of them is a bit too much. Then comes the argument that if we lynch everyone caught in a lie, townies would stop lying, so we would not have to deal with all of this. But the reality is that you lynch a townie for lying, then you lose the game because of wasting a lynch in order to teach the liars a lesson, then you join another game and you realise that there's so many other players you have to teach that same lesson, and so on. If we start doing it in every single game, it might work after a while. But when you've invested a week in the game, you don't want to throw it away just because some townie attempted a stupid gamble. All you are focused on is lynching mafia. And townies tend to get lynched for lying all the time anyway, even without having the policy in place - simply becase when someone is caught lying, they are usually accused of being mafia. Agreeing upon whether someone is lukring or not is easier but simply lynching all lurkers is not optimal. What's important is that people realise that sometimes every active player is a townie. If your analysis leads you to the conclussion that the active players are townies, then you start lynching lurkers. That's the best we can do. I don't understand your part about lynch all liars. Think about it logically, if we say, "Lie and you're gonna get lynched" then no townie is going to lie, are they? It's not just to teach a lesson, scum benefit greatly from lies and deceit. I want lynch-all-liers in effect today. Also, on day 1 it's very easy for scum to post nonsense and get away with it, because day 1 can be such a mess, hell, sometimes the most active players are scum. Just because someone posts a lot doesn't make them town, lol. Look at the last newbie mini-game. Ciryandor was scum, and he posted more analysis than anyone, everyone assumed he was town and that was a big reason why town lost. If we say lynch all liars, townies will carry on lying like they always do. If we do lynch all liars, townies will eventually realise that they should stop. Activity doesn't prove that someone is a townie, of course. But if you have a town read on all the active players, lynching a lurker is great. On December 04 2011 13:01 ey215 wrote:
On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. 100% agree, this was pretty much my point anyway. And there's a lot of similar views expressed later in the thread by others, so can we say that we've reached consensus? If we don't get a good case, we lynch a lurker. Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A LURKER TO LYNCH, I wish every one of these players would start doing their part and contribute to town. My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. Instead of looking at active players your first priority is to look for a lurker to lynch, which i consider just finding an easy lynch without having to justify why you actually think that the player is scum. First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking!No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This quote shows EY contradict himself. + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 11:19 ey215 wrote:
While I'm not convinced Blazing didn't push him too hard and thus pushed him away I do notice a couple of times that ElectricBlack has said not to vote for people unless it's going to put pressure on them. Blazing's vote alone may not be enough, but I'm willing to switch mine to apply said pressure.
He also stated in his first post that breadcrumbing is bad. While it is bad if it lets the mafia know that you're the blue role, it's important to get people's names into post so that if you're blue and get shot we can go back and figure out the people you've checked out.
I'm fine with applying some pressure.
Okay you are putting some pressure on EB to get him to vote.
##Unvote: Adam4167
##Vote: ElectricBlack On December 06 2011 06:43 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 20:54 ElectricBlack wrote:
Yes.
Pressure is stupid. Either you're killing people or not. There should never exist no such thing as a pressure vote. But clearly we don't agree on that. I need to re-think my stance on you.
I am not willing to commit to a lynch candidate at this moment, I will however within a few hours explain and elaborate on my statement about hassybaby. Ok, finally got back to the thread after a long day. I apologize that I haven't been back sooner. I'm going to respond to posts as I go through the thread so if anything I say gets contradicted later by someone else I want y'all to understand why. On this post where you say you're either killing people or not, I'm more than willing to kill you tonight. I don't vote only for pressure, if I put a vote on someone I'm willing to let them hang. Wait, you just said you were voting for pressure. Don't you also say something about voting without evidence later? + Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 07:18 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 07:11 jaybrundage wrote:ey are you planning on voting for hassybaby. So far bbyte is gonna get lynched regardless unless we have a change.I would still like to see his defense. But so far it doesnt look good. But honestly last minute switches always put me at unease. I still plan to stick to adam i would like to see what he has to say about whats going on so far. And EB if you think adam is not a good candidate plz state why this post. On December 06 2011 05:45 ElectricBlack wrote:
reconsider that, he's the worst candidate. Isn't going to change anything. Put in some content i would like to see more of your thoughts. But besides Hassybaby's case which was actually pretty good. And you arguing with xsksc which granted showed that you can post very well when you want too. Why give me this one liner it's not gonna change anything I voted for BByte on the lurker/not contributing line of reasoning. I was really hoping we wouldn't have to use it, but if someone's inactive even if town they're not really doing us any good. Here is another one of his contradictions. + Show Spoiler +On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote:
Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff.
Blames most established townie for starting a bandwagon.
On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:
Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.
Jumps on a bandwagon himself
On December 07 2011 13:58 ey215 wrote:I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us.No reasoning whatsoever first time he mentions JB is scummy. He even says in his read (the only time he analyzes JB) On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:Ok, back from my final. For those that might care I think it went well.  On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts. Wait, he says jay is hedging but then he says there is a lot of hedging in the early game. How does that justify hedging? If everyone lurked in the early game does that make lurking okayOk, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters: Show nested quote +On December 08 2011 03:55 jaybrundage wrote:LOl question then why didn't you claim responsibility before instead of blaming the town.You know before i called you outLook at me im Blazinghand i use fonts and different text to make my point instead of analyze I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Votes for him nothing provided beforehand even states that he is jumping on a bandwagon, has not provided any info Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. And this random vote catches him in one last lie: + Show Spoiler +On December 08 2011 07:55 ey215 wrote:
I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I don't think voting haphazardly is a good idea. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte..
This is my reasoning, where was EY's?.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 11:02 BroodKingEXE wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:34 Grackaroni wrote:The thing that really seemed suspicious about Ey215 to me was this. On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 21:14 xtfftc wrote:If we say lynch all liars, townies will carry on lying like they always do. If we do lynch all liars, townies will eventually realise that they should stop. Activity doesn't prove that someone is a townie, of course. But if you have a town read on all the active players, lynching a lurker is great. On December 04 2011 13:01 ey215 wrote:
On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. 100% agree, this was pretty much my point anyway. And there's a lot of similar views expressed later in the thread by others, so can we say that we've reached consensus? If we don't get a good case, we lynch a lurker. Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A LURKER TO LYNCH, I wish every one of these players would start doing their part and contribute to town. My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. Instead of looking at active players your first priority is to look for a lurker to lynch, which i consider just finding an easy lynch without having to justify why you actually think that the player is scum. First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking!No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This is my reasoning, where was EY's?.
Ah, ok, I think you're actually confused here. When EY says "I am not looking for a lurker to lynch", this is a semi-idiomatic expression in english. He doesn't mean he literally won't try to figure it who is lurking; he's saying that lynching lurkers is not his chief goal. He follows up that sentence with: "My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. "
So yeah I think you need to read a little more carefully.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 11:08 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 11:02 BroodKingEXE wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:34 Grackaroni wrote:The thing that really seemed suspicious about Ey215 to me was this. On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 21:14 xtfftc wrote:If we say lynch all liars, townies will carry on lying like they always do. If we do lynch all liars, townies will eventually realise that they should stop. Activity doesn't prove that someone is a townie, of course. But if you have a town read on all the active players, lynching a lurker is great. On December 04 2011 13:01 ey215 wrote:
On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. 100% agree, this was pretty much my point anyway. And there's a lot of similar views expressed later in the thread by others, so can we say that we've reached consensus? If we don't get a good case, we lynch a lurker. Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A LURKER TO LYNCH, I wish every one of these players would start doing their part and contribute to town. My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. Instead of looking at active players your first priority is to look for a lurker to lynch, which i consider just finding an easy lynch without having to justify why you actually think that the player is scum. First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking!No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This is my reasoning, where was EY's?. Ah, ok, I think you're actually confused here. When EY says "I am not looking for a lurker to lynch", this is a semi-idiomatic expression in english. He doesn't mean he literally won't try to figure it who is lurking; he's saying that lynching lurkers is not his chief goal. He follows up that sentence with: "My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. " So yeah I think you need to read a little more carefully.
That, or you're scum and you think nobody would actually read the stuff you quote. You know, it could go either way.
|
On December 10 2011 11:02 BroodKingEXE wrote:##Vote ey215+ Show Spoiler +On December 10 2011 08:03 BroodKingEXE wrote:I am now starting to suspect ey215 as scumFirst he accuses Adam, but he has no evidence: Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 09:38 ey215 wrote:
I agree we need to get votes on record due to time zones.
For previously stated reasons:
##Vote: Adam4167 Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:18 ey215 wrote:
He says here in his read that he even needs to more posts to confirm his claim!
Adam4167 - not willing to call pro town. Will see how he posts after sleeping it off.
Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 08:00 ey215 wrote:On December 05 2011 07:15 jaybrundage wrote:
BKEXE
Nice great to see some content from you i do agree with you on adam but for different reasons I also think your town reads are pretty spot on. What do you think about my reads they actually are pretty close ot yours. Im curious what you thinkg about ey he has posted alot and is not in your reads. He posted a his reads but mostly town.
And Ey if you had to choice a someone to vote for now who would it be. You said BKEXE. But i dont find him a viable vote imo I still think hes new townie unless i see a post that changes my mind about him anyone else on your radar Until he posted his last post, BKEXE was probably where I'd throw my vote. For the moment, that's just enough to get by. I'd like to see him answer your questions well. So now, if we were coming to deadline I'd probably vote for Adam4167. Feels like a lot of filler, and a couple of his points I haven't agreed with. I'm honestly not really solid on anyone at the moment. Wait, what fillers? Adam has only made three posts in the game 1) A question for the host, 2) an opinion on the prompt, and 3) an error filled response to BH. How can he have a filler if all of his posts have meaning behind it. At the same time Hassy and Bbyte had made barely any posts why not look at their lack of posts as opposed to the posts of Adam which had content (although false, but why not comment on that? + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 07:00 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:34 Grackaroni wrote:The thing that really seemed suspicious about Ey215 to me was this. On December 05 2011 04:49 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 21:14 xtfftc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:52 xsksc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:35 xtfftc wrote:On December 04 2011 12:06 xsksc wrote:
What do you guys think of policy lynches in general? Do you think they are a good idea, if so, why?
Personally I disagree with lynching a lurker JUST because they're lurking, in a game like this anyway. The risk of hitting a townie is way too high.
Lynch all liars is a great idea though. It discourages people from lying right from day 1, the only people with a good reason to lie are scum. Both sound great but in reality they don't work. Lynch All Liars.. People get lies and opinions mixed up all the time, and even when a lie is a lie, eventually you realise that there are different types of lies and lynching for some of them is a bit too much. Then comes the argument that if we lynch everyone caught in a lie, townies would stop lying, so we would not have to deal with all of this. But the reality is that you lynch a townie for lying, then you lose the game because of wasting a lynch in order to teach the liars a lesson, then you join another game and you realise that there's so many other players you have to teach that same lesson, and so on. If we start doing it in every single game, it might work after a while. But when you've invested a week in the game, you don't want to throw it away just because some townie attempted a stupid gamble. All you are focused on is lynching mafia. And townies tend to get lynched for lying all the time anyway, even without having the policy in place - simply becase when someone is caught lying, they are usually accused of being mafia. Agreeing upon whether someone is lukring or not is easier but simply lynching all lurkers is not optimal. What's important is that people realise that sometimes every active player is a townie. If your analysis leads you to the conclussion that the active players are townies, then you start lynching lurkers. That's the best we can do. I don't understand your part about lynch all liars. Think about it logically, if we say, "Lie and you're gonna get lynched" then no townie is going to lie, are they? It's not just to teach a lesson, scum benefit greatly from lies and deceit. I want lynch-all-liers in effect today. Also, on day 1 it's very easy for scum to post nonsense and get away with it, because day 1 can be such a mess, hell, sometimes the most active players are scum. Just because someone posts a lot doesn't make them town, lol. Look at the last newbie mini-game. Ciryandor was scum, and he posted more analysis than anyone, everyone assumed he was town and that was a big reason why town lost. If we say lynch all liars, townies will carry on lying like they always do. If we do lynch all liars, townies will eventually realise that they should stop. Activity doesn't prove that someone is a townie, of course. But if you have a town read on all the active players, lynching a lurker is great. On December 04 2011 13:01 ey215 wrote:
On the lurker bit, I do think there's a time and place for lynching. If we don't have a case on someone it's better to lynch a lurker than someone active. If they're lurking then they're not contributing or giving us something to go on. Of course, if we've got a good case on someone it's better to lynch them. 100% agree, this was pretty much my point anyway. And there's a lot of similar views expressed later in the thread by others, so can we say that we've reached consensus? If we don't get a good case, we lynch a lurker. Ok, just got back to the thread and I'll respond to things as I see them. I agree that we've reached a consensus to get rid of a lurker. That means lurkers, it's your time to step up and contribute. I AM NOT LOOKING FOR A LURKER TO LYNCH, I wish every one of these players would start doing their part and contribute to town. My first priority is to analyze the active players and if as a town we cannot agree upon a scummy player then we should choose a lurker because they will remain a null read. Instead of looking at active players your first priority is to look for a lurker to lynch, which i consider just finding an easy lynch without having to justify why you actually think that the player is scum. First he says no one is looking for a lurker to lynch, but in the last sentence he says we should get rid of someone for not contributing. Okay, let's not look for lurkers, but still be able to lynch them for not contributing! There is no way to figure out if someone is lurking without paying attention to who is lurking!No one is looking for a lurker to lynch. Go back and read my filter I have argued that we need to be looking at quality of posts over quantity of posts. With that being said, it's hard as hell to have a solid scum read on anyone day one, and if I have to make a choice I'm choosing someone not posting, or posting hardly anything of consequence to lynch over someone that has been active. You don't lynch for information, you lynch scum. Barring having a good read, we should get rid of someone not contributing since they're not doing anything to help the town anyways. This quote shows EY contradict himself. + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 11:19 ey215 wrote:
While I'm not convinced Blazing didn't push him too hard and thus pushed him away I do notice a couple of times that ElectricBlack has said not to vote for people unless it's going to put pressure on them. Blazing's vote alone may not be enough, but I'm willing to switch mine to apply said pressure.
He also stated in his first post that breadcrumbing is bad. While it is bad if it lets the mafia know that you're the blue role, it's important to get people's names into post so that if you're blue and get shot we can go back and figure out the people you've checked out.
I'm fine with applying some pressure.
Okay you are putting some pressure on EB to get him to vote.
##Unvote: Adam4167
##Vote: ElectricBlack On December 06 2011 06:43 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 20:54 ElectricBlack wrote:
Yes.
Pressure is stupid. Either you're killing people or not. There should never exist no such thing as a pressure vote. But clearly we don't agree on that. I need to re-think my stance on you.
I am not willing to commit to a lynch candidate at this moment, I will however within a few hours explain and elaborate on my statement about hassybaby. Ok, finally got back to the thread after a long day. I apologize that I haven't been back sooner. I'm going to respond to posts as I go through the thread so if anything I say gets contradicted later by someone else I want y'all to understand why. On this post where you say you're either killing people or not, I'm more than willing to kill you tonight. I don't vote only for pressure, if I put a vote on someone I'm willing to let them hang. Wait, you just said you were voting for pressure. Don't you also say something about voting without evidence later? + Show Spoiler +On December 06 2011 07:18 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2011 07:11 jaybrundage wrote:ey are you planning on voting for hassybaby. So far bbyte is gonna get lynched regardless unless we have a change.I would still like to see his defense. But so far it doesnt look good. But honestly last minute switches always put me at unease. I still plan to stick to adam i would like to see what he has to say about whats going on so far. And EB if you think adam is not a good candidate plz state why this post. On December 06 2011 05:45 ElectricBlack wrote:
reconsider that, he's the worst candidate. Isn't going to change anything. Put in some content i would like to see more of your thoughts. But besides Hassybaby's case which was actually pretty good. And you arguing with xsksc which granted showed that you can post very well when you want too. Why give me this one liner it's not gonna change anything I voted for BByte on the lurker/not contributing line of reasoning. I was really hoping we wouldn't have to use it, but if someone's inactive even if town they're not really doing us any good. Here is another one of his contradictions. + Show Spoiler +On December 04 2011 14:55 ey215 wrote:
Fuck, I can say you've hardly posted anything but baseless accusations therefore you're scum just trying to get the town fighting among themselves. Not to mention you're trying to get a bandwagon started on someone for either not posting because they're asleep or because of some assumed fluff.
Blames most established townie for starting a bandwagon.
On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:
Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.
Jumps on a bandwagon himself
On December 07 2011 13:58 ey215 wrote:I'm personally of the opinion that we should lynch the scummiest of jayb, xtf, or hassey and see where that leads us.No reasoning whatsoever first time he mentions JB is scummy. He even says in his read (the only time he analyzes JB) On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:Ok, back from my final. For those that might care I think it went well. On the Jay case: yes, he was hedging but there's a whole lot of hedging going on early in the game. Is it because he's trying to not take a definitive stand so he can't be held accountable for it later or is it because he truly doesn't know and is offering options? To me it felt like hedging, he's been pretty definitive in some of his other posts. Wait, he says jay is hedging but then he says there is a lot of hedging in the early game. How does that justify hedging? If everyone lurked in the early game does that make lurking okayOk, this got posted while I was typing this and going through filters: Show nested quote +On December 08 2011 03:55 jaybrundage wrote:LOl question then why didn't you claim responsibility before instead of blaming the town.You know before i called you outLook at me im Blazinghand i use fonts and different text to make my point instead of analyze I'm not 100% sold that he's scum, but I'm sold his behavior has been anti-town. ##vote: jaybrundage Votes for him nothing provided beforehand even states that he is jumping on a bandwagon, has not provided any info Fuck, I can't believe I'm jumping on the bandwagon but at the moment I don't see a better lynch option.Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. And this random vote catches him in one last lie: + Show Spoiler +On December 08 2011 07:55 ey215 wrote:
I was responding to two different people, why is this so hard to understand? To further clarify the point I was making is not scummy it is important. I don't think voting haphazardly is a good idea. I'll go on and respond to your upcoming response, my vote on Jay is not haphazardly throwing my vote around. I think he's the best case and am willing to lynch him. the same way I was willing to lynch BByte.. This is my reasoning, where was EY's?.
[spoiler]On December 10 2011 08:23 ey215 wrote:Alright, going on the line of reasoning that I had previously stated I would here's jay's first set of reads from Day 1: Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:25 jaybrundage wrote:My reads so far Adam4167- Ok so far i have a scum read on adam I you can see in my last post why click He just comes off happy to stay off the radar I dont like how he is going about his game. Just posting ot barely keep up. And in general comes off apathetic. He says hes a bored townie but i think it could be a lurking mafia BByte- He has posted but not alot he seems content to just respond to people. He did comment about breadcrumbs which is true. Its funny because in my game of Mini Mafia X WBG claimed a blue role and because he breadcrumbed it people beleived him. He did post his reads on people which is good. I would like to see more posting from him. My question is what do you think of adam Bbyte . Blazinghand- Blazinghand has been the biggest posting factor atm. Trying to keep people from lurking and in general trying to generate discussion. While it may not be kosher its seems like its working great. People have responded to his prods. My biggest concern is if he was mafia he would be doing a terrific job. I agree that he has been very pro town. But remember guys putting to much trust in someone is always a mistake. So be wary BroodKingEXE- Ok so far i posted a little to nothing. I gave my read on him before. clickerz Well i said previously that he gave off a non pro-town vibe off. I have to disagree now. Rereading his posts I just think hes just new town. Well he can be a bit hard to read i still think hes just a newbie that doesnt know whats scummy and whats townlike. However Regardless We do need to see some posts from you about what you think about other players. If you continue to post like you are you are prolly gonna get lynched. So post your content. If its wrong is not what matters what matters is that you gave your opinion. ElectricBlack- Ok so far ElectricBlack hasnt posted much so far. His last post was pretty good containing content about the lynching policies. His respond to BH and about how he though BH was doing a decent job of making discussion. I would really would like to get your reads on the town tho. He does bring up a good point while BH is prolly town we can completly rule anyone out as scum. Establishing thread presence is a good think for both townies and mafia to do. But again i would like you reads. So far i have a null read ey215- Has posted alot. Mostly because of the arguement between him and and BH. BH called him out for a no content post ey responded by saying BH was making baseless accusations. And it escalated from there. Veli was trying to bring the heat down a bit (good by him). But eventually they decided to just settle things, ey defended himself well. Although to be honest im not sure of his alignment as far. He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself or a townie who made sure that BH is not going to unchecked. Im going to keep my eye on him. Grackaroni- So far he has posted his reads and gave a good bit of content. Giving his reads and trying to keep everyone on the same page He mentioned that he agrees with hassybaby about not making straight up accusations like Tunkeg did so early in the game when people havent posted alot. Will i dont really agree with this. I think coming out with your town reads is always good. Premature sometimes but good. I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the scummiest in my book. So far i got a pretty good town read on him. Hassybaby- Ok so Hassybaby got outright accused of mafia with out even posting. Maybe we should go with people guts and just lynch him lol. Well his first post comes out and talks about the LaL policy. He mentions that we should not just lynch a lurker or liar if we have a good read on someone. I think that we all agreed on this. He then talks about how he doesnt like Tunkeg accusations However i mentioned before i dont think It is the wrong thing to do to put your reads out there. I personally like waiting for everyone to post but regardless. He then tells Tunkeg that He is accusing people to much. I still disagree with this. Tunkeg is generating discussion. I honestly think aggressive scum hunting is completely fine. I don't agree with him on his points. Weather he is scum or not is hard to tell i would like his reads before jumping to conclusions Tunkeg- Ok So i have mixed feelings on Tunkeg First off he comes out with his alignment posts and calls out a nonposter and me as being scum. Honeslty i think you should let people post before calling them mafia lol. I do like how he is poking and generating discussion. While i think his biggest disappointment thing was still stupid which he mentions as well. Hassy mentions that he thinks tunkeg is accusing to many people early in the game. But i think that while Tunkeg has said somethings that i dont neccesary agree with i do think its furthing a town agenda. I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right. Tunkeg what d Velinath- Well as far i see Veli as being at townie. he talks about the policies a good bit Actually alot but that what the current conversation was about. he kind of gets on BKEXE case. Which i kinda did at the start as well Its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie. And then he gives his reads alot of them were null reads but it is still hard to place alignments on people this early in the game. I do find his amount of posting comforting tho. Makes it a bit easier to disguish his alignment. xsksc- Ok so i like his first post. It pretty much generated the discussion we had on policy lynches and so forth it was good to get out of the way. He mentions posts about breadcrumbs not proving blues which i agree with. talks about policies a good bit. and then tell BH to not be trigger happy. Its kinda funny that everyone gave an opinion on BH. Again aggressive scumhunting is good imo and making people post is great. He got called out on not scum hunting. Which i kinda agree with. he started the conversation about lynching talked about that for a while and then goes and doesnt give much of his reads or even analyzes any posts. I want to see his reads but im leaning scummy xtfftc- Well so far i dont really agree with his policy posts. I do think lynch all liars is a fine policy. He mentions that last minute lynches are a bad thing and i have to agree. he strongly agrees that everyone should post regardless of how we get them to post so he agrees with BH method. He calls out Ey as his strongest mafia read tho. Ill have to go over ey's posts again. As my read was no where near strong on Ey. He also mentions that While people can buddy up for instance BH and Veli that they can often be town and posts an example Syllogism and Sandroba. I do agree that both. So far a null read. I would like to see more of your reads tho Well thats what i got so far plz everyone tell me what yall think this took fucking forever thank god for filters tho. As I read it what he's saying: Adam - trying to get a lynch going on him early by saying that "I think he's a lurking mafia". Goes on a couple more times that day to try to get a lynch train going on Adam. I'd say this is a good thing for Adam. BByte - Basically agrees with him on breadcruming, but doesn't really give a read. BH - Starts laying the groundwork to get him when a lynch goes bad. BK - Backs off an earlier statement that he gave off a "non pro-town vibe". Then proceeds to paint him as a newbie town and even gives him some tips on how not to get lynched. EB - Listed as null read. Me - Thougth i defended myself well, then proceeds to state "He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself... I'm going to keep my eye on him." I will allow others to read/not read what they want into this. Grackaroni - "I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the summiest in my book. So far I have a pretty good town read on him." Disagreed with him on one point, but was in a safe way to do so at the time. Hassybaby - Basically disagrees with a lot of what Hassy said in his few posts. Null read. Tunkeg - Points out Tunkeg had called him scum. Ends up with, "I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right". I think this was his way to get Tunkeg off his back. This reads well for Tunkeg. Velinath - Uses the opportunity to reinforce BK as town, "Which I kinda did at the start as well its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie." Says, "Well as far as I see Veli as being townie" I honestly think this was a case of him just trying to get on Vel's good side. xsksc (was still him at this point): "I want to see his reads but im leaning scummy" xtfftc: "Well so far i dont really agree with his policy posts. I do think lynch all liars is a fine policy. He mentions that last minute lynches are a bad thing and i have to agree. he strongly agrees that everyone should post regardless of how we get them to post so he agrees with BH method. He calls out Ey as his strongest mafia read tho. Ill have to go over ey's posts again. As my read was no where near strong on Ey. He also mentions that While people can buddy up for instance BH and Veli that they can often be town and posts an example Syllogism and Sandroba. I do agree that both. So far a null read. I would like to see more of your reads tho" I'll let you make your own read, I don't think I can do it in an unbiased way. So what do I take from all of this? I think it strengthens the case for BH, Adam and Tunkeg being scum. I think it puts the nail in the coffin on BK. It's enough additional evidence to at least convince me that the case on BK is stronger than any other case currently out there. Hell he even tried to reinforce the "newbie town" thing that a lot of Vel's case is built off of. Until I read this in context I hadn't fully comprehended the case on him. Nice catch on them defending each other all game Adam. From this post I'll be taking a further look at the filters for (listed in order of Jay's post): Grackaroni xsksc (but that's a pain in the ass at the moment) Vel (but if BK turns scum I think we're good there)
On December 10 2011 10:26 ey215 wrote:
Based on Val's case, Adam's adding onto it, convincing myself after looking through Jay's posts:
##vote: BroodKingEXE
It's fun watching you try to save yourself by trying to get me lynched.
|
EBWOP: Well that didn't work, but you get the gist.
|
[QUOTE]On December 08 2011 06:06 ey215 wrote:
Yes, because I did such a great job laying under the radar before. Let's see, pissing match with the most active/aggressive player in the thread. Check. Wait a pissing match I must have missed something.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 04 2011 15:51 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 15:45 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:39 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:24 Blazinghand 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. You realize that if both scum and town lurkers don't have to post at all, there's no way to differentiate them at all? Even if I have to "browbeat" them into talking, it's better to have browbeaten info than no info. We don't have much to work off right now, so I'd rather produce some information. So far, 100% of lurkers who aren't asleep that i've targetted have come forward. I just don't want some random intimidated townie getting lynched because you deemed a paragraph or two on the question on hand isn't enough and decided to throw out a ##vote on them. I just don't think an combative atmosphere this early on is the way to go, and I think you're creating one. I don't think BH is saying this. Right now we have nothing on lurkers. If they throw out one-liners, as you said, it's a red flag. If they throw out well reasoned responses, that's not. It seems like you're assuming the town will follow BH's lead if he makes a judgment call, and that's not necessarily true. It's still early in the game, and the votes are only meant to provoke discussion right now. The threat of being lynched is far more effective than a simple "Hey, X, come post!" Neither you nor BH are helping the atmosphere of the town with what you're saying. I think both of you should step back for a second and think about how we're all trying to work for the good of the town here. I agree. (omygoshtwoword post I'm in trouble!)  Okay agree with Velinath for defending BH. That's not a piss at BH. + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 11:24 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 11:17 BroodKingEXE wrote:Hey BH what is up with this? On December 05 2011 10:46 Blazinghand wrote:
To clarify, ElectricBlack CLAIMS to have good evidence/details to lynching HassyBaby, and not only does he refuse to give this information in a timely fashion for those of us in different time zones, he won't even vote. He has well earned my vote, and deserves yours as well. You neglected to mention this fact until after EB refused to vote. Are you holding back any other pieces of information? Yeah, I'm missing this too. What the heck are you talking about BK? Okay, agree with BH that my quote was misguided. Well, agreeing is not pissing on BH. + Show Spoiler +On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:
Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.
At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource.
It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully.
So he says that being over the radar involves a couple of light kiss ups to two of major players in town,and a WIFOM logic assumption. Well, the only over the radar thing I see here is a lie.
Getting myself warned for inactivity in big blue letters to point it out to everyone. Check.
Great job I'm doing staying under the radar.
Wait, staying under the radar is not posting. You got warned for inactivity (not posting) and you say you were not staying under the radar?
Oh and you may have missed it, but let's see:
[quote]Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.
At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource.
It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully.
That's analysis of our current game state, and potentially pushing the conversation. You may or may not ever get a post with 10 quotes of someone from me. If I decide it is needed I will do it, but I'm not going to push some made up case that I come up with just for the sake of looking good. I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said. Anything you get from me on specific players will be a gut instinct or hunch and I don't like going on that.
Well this one kind of sums it up. He is not willing to defend his case, because he does not have anything unique to say. This is complete and utter BS. If you do not think it is worth the time to look for reasons to lynch the mafia, then I say you are mafia.
Can't wait for your case, I'll be happy to respond.[/QUOTE]
|
Man, format your posts...
ey215's been posting pro-town. I'm still waiting on you to come up with a defense to my case, BKEXE. I'm still waiting for a defense to Adam's note of you defending JB forever. Let's go. Defend yourself or make a more plausible case.
|
+ Show Spoiler +[QUOTE] On December 10 2011 12:31 BroodKingEXE wrote:[QUOTE] On December 08 2011 06:06 ey215 wrote:Yes, because I did such a great job laying under the radar before. Let's see, pissing match with the most active/aggressive player in the thread. Check. Wait a pissing match I must have missed something.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 04 2011 15:51 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 04 2011 15:45 Velinath wrote:On December 04 2011 15:39 ey215 wrote:On December 04 2011 15:24 Blazinghand 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. You realize that if both scum and town lurkers don't have to post at all, there's no way to differentiate them at all? Even if I have to "browbeat" them into talking, it's better to have browbeaten info than no info. We don't have much to work off right now, so I'd rather produce some information. So far, 100% of lurkers who aren't asleep that i've targetted have come forward. I just don't want some random intimidated townie getting lynched because you deemed a paragraph or two on the question on hand isn't enough and decided to throw out a ##vote on them. I just don't think an combative atmosphere this early on is the way to go, and I think you're creating one. I don't think BH is saying this. Right now we have nothing on lurkers. If they throw out one-liners, as you said, it's a red flag. If they throw out well reasoned responses, that's not. It seems like you're assuming the town will follow BH's lead if he makes a judgment call, and that's not necessarily true. It's still early in the game, and the votes are only meant to provoke discussion right now. The threat of being lynched is far more effective than a simple "Hey, X, come post!" Neither you nor BH are helping the atmosphere of the town with what you're saying. I think both of you should step back for a second and think about how we're all trying to work for the good of the town here. I agree. (omygoshtwoword post I'm in trouble!) Okay agree with Velinath for defending BH. That's not a piss at BH. + Show Spoiler +On December 05 2011 11:24 ey215 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 11:17 BroodKingEXE wrote:Hey BH what is up with this? On December 05 2011 10:46 Blazinghand wrote:
To clarify, ElectricBlack CLAIMS to have good evidence/details to lynching HassyBaby, and not only does he refuse to give this information in a timely fashion for those of us in different time zones, he won't even vote. He has well earned my vote, and deserves yours as well. You neglected to mention this fact until after EB refused to vote. Are you holding back any other pieces of information? Yeah, I'm missing this too. What the heck are you talking about BK? Okay, agree with BH that my quote was misguided. Well, agreeing is not pissing on BH. + Show Spoiler +On December 08 2011 04:15 ey215 wrote:
Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on.
At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource.
It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully.
So he says that being over the radar involves a couple of light kiss ups to two of major players in town,and a WIFOM logic assumption. Well, the only over the radar thing I see here is a lie.Getting myself warned for inactivity in big blue letters to point it out to everyone. Check.Great job I'm doing staying under the radar.Wait, staying under the radar is not posting. You got warned for inactivity (not posting) and you say you were not staying under the radar?Oh and you may have missed it, but let's see: [quote]Now that I've voted I do want to talk about the EB killing. I know it's WIFOM, but I keep going around about it and it just doesn't make sense unless he was on to something or a threat to BH (if he's scum). I'm not convinced he had Hasseybaby right, but I think one of the three he had listed is for sure scum. He just hadn't posted enough to be a huge threat and may have even been someone they could get a lynch going on. At the moment, I'm willing to give BH the benefit of a doubt. After seeing how well he's baited jaybrundage into slipping I think, if town, he's a valuable resource. It seems like we've got two mini battles going on right now xtsc(or replacement)/tunkeg and jaybrundage/BH. I notice that they both involve names that EB threw out. If jay flips town I think we look at lynching BH, if he's mafia he manipulated jay into slipping masterfully. That's analysis of our current game state, and potentially pushing the conversation. You may or may not ever get a post with 10 quotes of someone from me. If I decide it is needed I will do it, but I'm not going to push some made up case that I come up with just for the sake of looking good. I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said. Anything you get from me on specific players will be a gut instinct or hunch and I don't like going on that. Well this one kind of sums it up. He is not willing to defend his case, because he does not have anything unique to say. This is complete and utter BS. If you do not think it is worth the time to look for reasons to lynch the mafia, then I say you are mafia. Can't wait for your case, I'll be happy to respond.[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]
Spoilered his horribly formatted post.
I can't believe I'm responding to this.
Apparently you weren't paying a lot of attention day one. I seem to recall BH and I getting into a pretty heated discussion, or in the colloquial a pissing match.
No, staying under the radar would have been posting in that 24 hours at least once so as not to get warned.
"Well this one kind of sums it up. He is not willing to defend his case, because he does not have anything unique to say. This is complete and utter BS. If you do not think it is worth the time to look for reasons to lynch the mafia, then I say you are mafia."
Um, where did I say I wasn't looking? I said I didn't have anything unique to add to the case on Jay at that point. In fact, just above your red text I said:
"I've read the filters, along with the thread to get it in context, multiple times and have yet to see anything unique that hasn't been said."
You're cute BK, I like you.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
BKEXE, I'd be more careful about how I post, were I you. I personally feel a great deal of frustration in my attempts to parse the tomato-stained spaghetti that you call "analysis", and I am one of the more patient folk here. Please, for the good of the town (if you are town) make your case in a legible fashion.
Thank you.
|
Alright, final in the morning. See y'all tomorrow.
|
On December 10 2011 11:11 ey215 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On December 10 2011 08:23 ey215 wrote:Alright, going on the line of reasoning that I had previously stated I would here's jay's first set of reads from Day 1: Show nested quote +On December 05 2011 06:25 jaybrundage wrote:My reads so far Adam4167- Ok so far i have a scum read on adam I you can see in my last post why click He just comes off happy to stay off the radar I dont like how he is going about his game. Just posting ot barely keep up. And in general comes off apathetic. He says hes a bored townie but i think it could be a lurking mafia BByte- He has posted but not alot he seems content to just respond to people. He did comment about breadcrumbs which is true. Its funny because in my game of Mini Mafia X WBG claimed a blue role and because he breadcrumbed it people beleived him. He did post his reads on people which is good. I would like to see more posting from him. My question is what do you think of adam Bbyte . Blazinghand- Blazinghand has been the biggest posting factor atm. Trying to keep people from lurking and in general trying to generate discussion. While it may not be kosher its seems like its working great. People have responded to his prods. My biggest concern is if he was mafia he would be doing a terrific job. I agree that he has been very pro town. But remember guys putting to much trust in someone is always a mistake. So be wary BroodKingEXE- Ok so far i posted a little to nothing. I gave my read on him before. clickerz Well i said previously that he gave off a non pro-town vibe off. I have to disagree now. Rereading his posts I just think hes just new town. Well he can be a bit hard to read i still think hes just a newbie that doesnt know whats scummy and whats townlike. However Regardless We do need to see some posts from you about what you think about other players. If you continue to post like you are you are prolly gonna get lynched. So post your content. If its wrong is not what matters what matters is that you gave your opinion. ElectricBlack- Ok so far ElectricBlack hasnt posted much so far. His last post was pretty good containing content about the lynching policies. His respond to BH and about how he though BH was doing a decent job of making discussion. I would really would like to get your reads on the town tho. He does bring up a good point while BH is prolly town we can completly rule anyone out as scum. Establishing thread presence is a good think for both townies and mafia to do. But again i would like you reads. So far i have a null read ey215- Has posted alot. Mostly because of the arguement between him and and BH. BH called him out for a no content post ey responded by saying BH was making baseless accusations. And it escalated from there. Veli was trying to bring the heat down a bit (good by him). But eventually they decided to just settle things, ey defended himself well. Although to be honest im not sure of his alignment as far. He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself or a townie who made sure that BH is not going to unchecked. Im going to keep my eye on him. Grackaroni- So far he has posted his reads and gave a good bit of content. Giving his reads and trying to keep everyone on the same page He mentioned that he agrees with hassybaby about not making straight up accusations like Tunkeg did so early in the game when people havent posted alot. Will i dont really agree with this. I think coming out with your town reads is always good. Premature sometimes but good. I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the scummiest in my book. So far i got a pretty good town read on him. Hassybaby- Ok so Hassybaby got outright accused of mafia with out even posting. Maybe we should go with people guts and just lynch him lol. Well his first post comes out and talks about the LaL policy. He mentions that we should not just lynch a lurker or liar if we have a good read on someone. I think that we all agreed on this. He then talks about how he doesnt like Tunkeg accusations However i mentioned before i dont think It is the wrong thing to do to put your reads out there. I personally like waiting for everyone to post but regardless. He then tells Tunkeg that He is accusing people to much. I still disagree with this. Tunkeg is generating discussion. I honestly think aggressive scum hunting is completely fine. I don't agree with him on his points. Weather he is scum or not is hard to tell i would like his reads before jumping to conclusions Tunkeg- Ok So i have mixed feelings on Tunkeg First off he comes out with his alignment posts and calls out a nonposter and me as being scum. Honeslty i think you should let people post before calling them mafia lol. I do like how he is poking and generating discussion. While i think his biggest disappointment thing was still stupid which he mentions as well. Hassy mentions that he thinks tunkeg is accusing to many people early in the game. But i think that while Tunkeg has said somethings that i dont neccesary agree with i do think its furthing a town agenda. I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right. Tunkeg what d Velinath- Well as far i see Veli as being at townie. he talks about the policies a good bit Actually alot but that what the current conversation was about. he kind of gets on BKEXE case. Which i kinda did at the start as well Its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie. And then he gives his reads alot of them were null reads but it is still hard to place alignments on people this early in the game. I do find his amount of posting comforting tho. Makes it a bit easier to disguish his alignment. xsksc- Ok so i like his first post. It pretty much generated the discussion we had on policy lynches and so forth it was good to get out of the way. He mentions posts about breadcrumbs not proving blues which i agree with. talks about policies a good bit. and then tell BH to not be trigger happy. Its kinda funny that everyone gave an opinion on BH. Again aggressive scumhunting is good imo and making people post is great. He got called out on not scum hunting. Which i kinda agree with. he started the conversation about lynching talked about that for a while and then goes and doesnt give much of his reads or even analyzes any posts. I want to see his reads but im leaning scummy xtfftc- Well so far i dont really agree with his policy posts. I do think lynch all liars is a fine policy. He mentions that last minute lynches are a bad thing and i have to agree. he strongly agrees that everyone should post regardless of how we get them to post so he agrees with BH method. He calls out Ey as his strongest mafia read tho. Ill have to go over ey's posts again. As my read was no where near strong on Ey. He also mentions that While people can buddy up for instance BH and Veli that they can often be town and posts an example Syllogism and Sandroba. I do agree that both. So far a null read. I would like to see more of your reads tho Well thats what i got so far plz everyone tell me what yall think this took fucking forever thank god for filters tho. As I read it what he's saying: Adam - trying to get a lynch going on him early by saying that "I think he's a lurking mafia". Goes on a couple more times that day to try to get a lynch train going on Adam. I'd say this is a good thing for Adam. BByte - Basically agrees with him on breadcruming, but doesn't really give a read. BH - Starts laying the groundwork to get him when a lynch goes bad. BK - Backs off an earlier statement that he gave off a "non pro-town vibe". Then proceeds to paint him as a newbie town and even gives him some tips on how not to get lynched. EB - Listed as null read. Me - Thougth i defended myself well, then proceeds to state "He could be mafia who just did a great job defending himself... I'm going to keep my eye on him." I will allow others to read/not read what they want into this. Grackaroni - "I do agree with his case on Adam tho so far hes still the summiest in my book. So far I have a pretty good town read on him." Disagreed with him on one point, but was in a safe way to do so at the time. Hassybaby - Basically disagrees with a lot of what Hassy said in his few posts. Null read. Tunkeg - Points out Tunkeg had called him scum. Ends up with, "I do think hes coming off protown even if his accusations are not always right". I think this was his way to get Tunkeg off his back. This reads well for Tunkeg. Velinath - Uses the opportunity to reinforce BK as town, "Which I kinda did at the start as well its really hard to read BKEXE but i still do think hes a townie." Says, "Well as far as I see Veli as being townie" I honestly think this was a case of him just trying to get on Vel's good side. xsksc (was still him at this point): "I want to see his reads but im leaning scummy" xtfftc: "Well so far i dont really agree with his policy posts. I do think lynch all liars is a fine policy. He mentions that last minute lynches are a bad thing and i have to agree. he strongly agrees that everyone should post regardless of how we get them to post so he agrees with BH method. He calls out Ey as his strongest mafia read tho. Ill have to go over ey's posts again. As my read was no where near strong on Ey. He also mentions that While people can buddy up for instance BH and Veli that they can often be town and posts an example Syllogism and Sandroba. I do agree that both. So far a null read. I would like to see more of your reads tho" I'll let you make your own read, I don't think I can do it in an unbiased way. So what do I take from all of this? I think it strengthens the case for BH, Adam and Tunkeg being scum. I think it puts the nail in the coffin on BK. It's enough additional evidence to at least convince me that the case on BK is stronger than any other case currently out there. Hell he even tried to reinforce the "newbie town" thing that a lot of Vel's case is built off of. Until I read this in context I hadn't fully comprehended the case on him. Nice catch on them defending each other all game Adam. From this post I'll be taking a further look at the filters for (listed in order of Jay's post): Grackaroni xsksc (but that's a pain in the ass at the moment) Vel (but if BK turns scum I think we're good there) Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 10:26 ey215 wrote:
Based on Val's case, Adam's adding onto it, convincing myself after looking through Jay's posts:
##vote: BroodKingEXE It's fun watching you try to save yourself by trying to get me lynched.
Well I suppose this question: this is a unique group of evidence on jay, so why did EY not post it until jay was dead? It must be because he wrote it just now to make it look like he was not bandwagoning on JB, but look at the time of his vote:
December 08 2011 04:15. This was after three other people had made a vote for JB, and both Grack and I had suspected JB was scum. It looks to me that EY has bandwagoned, without reason, both votes after criticizing bandwagoning and voting without reason.
|
On December 10 2011 13:19 Blazinghand wrote:
BKEXE, I'd be more careful about how I post, were I you. I personally feel a great deal of frustration in my attempts to parse the tomato-stained spaghetti that you call "analysis", and I am one of the more patient folk here. Please, for the good of the town (if you are town) make your case in a legible fashion.
Thank you.
What about it makes it hard to read?
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On December 10 2011 13:49 BroodKingEXE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 13:19 Blazinghand wrote:
BKEXE, I'd be more careful about how I post, were I you. I personally feel a great deal of frustration in my attempts to parse the tomato-stained spaghetti that you call "analysis", and I am one of the more patient folk here. Please, for the good of the town (if you are town) make your case in a legible fashion.
Thank you. What about it makes it hard to read?
You know what, if you think your posts are legible, then by all means, please continue. Don't let me stop you from your lucid and easily-understood discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
