So either he's lying, which means he's mafia.
Or he's telling the truth, because he's intimidated to play mafia.
I will still catching up with the posts, BTW.
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
So either he's lying, which means he's mafia. Or he's telling the truth, because he's intimidated to play mafia. I will still catching up with the posts, BTW. | ||
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
So either he's lying, which means he's probably mafia. Or he's telling the truth, which means he's probably mafia as well. | ||
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 06 2012 08:49 Mackin wrote: Oh and I might as well put my thoughts on Jingle since I won't be back for hours... Jingle looks like the type of Mafia player who is so good they cruise along for days without people realising he's Mafia (when he is playing as it). I'm totally not saying he is scum, I honestly just can't get a good read from checking through his posts so far. Everyone else I'm meeeh on because I'll fall asleep on the keyboard if I read for much longer Honestly, while me saying this won't be convincing, especially because of WIFOM, I'm much more careful when I'm playing scum. I need to work on consistency, really. Sorry I've been away, I randomly get busy with my three year old son, TKD, or books I suddenly decide to re-read. Or the tech board. Uhm, right now, I'm going to say Jiexian doesn't look scummy based on the meta, in XVIII when he said good night in the thread, he generally used it as an excuse to get out of the thread and would stay in the QT for quite a while chatting. His "oh yeah" type posts after saying good night earlier suggest less paranoia, so based purely on meta, I'm guessing townie at this point, but the statistical sampling IS kind of small. | ||
Radfield
Canada2720 Posts
| ||
Release
United States4397 Posts
But, where did that suspicion on me go? For a moment there, on page 10, there was suspicion on me and poof... It suddenly vanished? Maybe both of them went to sleep after they posted that, they sure left in a hurry | ||
Hopeless1der
United States5836 Posts
On July 06 2012 06:19 Hapahauli wrote: EBWOP: @Hopeless1der: And just so you don't mistake my post as "underlying suspicion," I would like to make it perfectly clear what I think about your last two posts. You brought attention to a player who had not yet been attacked using false and out of context evidence. You immediately flip-flopped and avoided confrontation when presented with this. You are not pro-town, your goal has been to discredit my analysis so far and incite paranoia amongst the town. You are mafia. ## Vote: Hopeless1der When you responded to my suspicions you completely flew off the handle about there being no case and how I was completely making shit up. All your "false evidence" claims are based on there being no case. There hasn't been anything else from you to comment on, and trying to push my read would have come off as either blind tunnelling or an OMGUS, neither of which really help town and make me look scummier than choosing to let it go. My issue is with what happened after you asked Release to clarify his position. He completely ignores your post, and you pretty much completely give him a pass on your next post about him. The one thing here is that you make a statement about how his meta doesn't match with a previous game and it might be scummy behavior: On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote: Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. The whole last paragraph...I don't know if you're saying it makes Lazer and/or Release look townie or scummy, but its very nonchalant and easy to overlook. You seem to be pro-Release in your overall posting but I saw something suspicious and brought it up. I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. | ||
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I'm not accusing you only because you made a bad case (poor analysis isn't always a mafia trait). Rather, I'm accusing you because your case is misleading. The only point of your case is to rile up suspicion rather than providing sound, townie analysis. For example, look at the difference between your original post and the analysis you just posted. Your first post immediately jumps on me questioning Release as a strong case against him. This most recent post is a huge change in viewpoint from your original post. If this was your original position, why didn't you post it in your original analysis? I have no choice but to conclude that you didn't read my posts, didn't properly analyze, and tried to discredit me. You also clearly use clearly false evidence in your original case: On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote: He pushed him for a bit, and then finally let up once everyone else had suspicions on Release. His change of stance is well timed to distance himself from his provoking, but he still leaves himself an open avenue to target Release later on based on his meta from a game where Lazer played the same but got a different response from Release than this game.. The underlined part goes beyond poor analysis - this is straight up untruthful. I asked Release a question, then very quickly shifted towards accusations against TMG26 and Mackin. No one changed their opinion on Release between those two posts. My two posts for the record (note the lack of suspicions of Release between the posts) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=9#161 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=9#168 Townies can bring up baseless cases to incite discussion (re: JingeHell and sex toys), however, using misleading information in a case is a decidedly mafia trait. In addition, a townie has no motivation to start an accusation against a player actively posting reads. The only function your post served was to discredit me, as opposed to providing any actual analysis. You have said nothing that will convince me to change my vote. Now to reply to your suspicions about my posts on Release: On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: My issue is with what happened after you asked Release to clarify his position. He completely ignores your post, and you pretty much completely give him a pass on your next post about him. I dropped perusing Release because I've found a much better case to chase - you. On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote:The one thing here is that you make a statement about how his meta doesn't match with a previous game and it might be scummy behavior: Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote: Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. The whole last paragraph...I don't know if you're saying it makes Lazer and/or Release look townie or scummy, but its very nonchalant and easy to overlook. You seem to be pro-Release in your overall posting but I saw something suspicious and brought it up. Great. This deserves an FOS for what reason? How is this even suspicious? I'm being a good townie and dumping all the reads and information I see on the thread. This continues to make you look bad. First you post you have a case against me, then you back off in your previous post, then you post that I look suspicious? The hell? On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. Holy scum-tells batman! This one deserves a separate post! I'll get to work on this one right away. | ||
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. So this post is rife with contradiction and scumtells. Let's break it down. I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. You did not claim it was a huge case. I got angry because you had a misleading case and I've made that clear multiple times. What does that second sentence even mean? That's the scummiest thing I've read so far! You posted a weak/half-assed read as your original case then you're saying you don't want it to get brushed off as a weak/half-assed read and therefore you posted it? WHAAAAT. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? When did I even suggest that I had 3 scum locked down? Where did that even come from? That's some suspicious shit right there. | ||
YourHarry
United States1152 Posts
##Vote Hopeless1der | ||
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
I would like to make a formal accusation of Hopeless1der. As you’ll find in the argument below, Hopeless1der is showing several common mafia traits, and his behavior is inconsistent with his meta as a Vanilla Townie in Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII (all underlined messages henceforth are relevant hyperlinks – click for reference). Meta Analysis on Hopeless1der Hopeless1der’s Filter Hopeless opens the game discussing policy. While it is mostly fluff, he is very direct, never backs down, and states his opinion clearly. Notable quotes in the spoilertag below (bolding is my emphasis): + Show Spoiler + On June 25 2012 10:16 Hopeless1der wrote: No more sheriff...well ain't that something special. What in the Sam Hill do we do now? Surely someone knows who else could be behind these treacherous murders. I say we root these varmints out and string em right up in the middle of town, just like that VisceraEyes. Now to do this we're gonna need a couple of...'Rules'. I will say that I am a firm believer in the truth. Anyone caught in a lie deserves to die! Who's with me? On June 25 2012 12:53 Hopeless1der wrote: To further clarify my response to Release: I'm saying lynch people that we can collectively agree have been dishonest in something they have said or done. Further discussions on what constitutes 'dishonesty' may follow at a later time, or right now if whoever is reading this should so happen to desire. On June 25 2012 12:13 Hopeless1der wrote: Any statement preceeded by "I think..." is inherently true until a contradictory "I think.."or similar statement is made. Nevertheless Release's logic should be addressed and I will concede that I committed the same error that he did prior to his EBWOP: equating truth to honesty, which are not the same. Basically if someone decides to flip flop on a decision without some ironclad reasoning, I'm saying lynch the sucker On June 25 2012 13:13 Hopeless1der wrote: And thus we've arrived at the point of my original policy: dishonesty is a move for scum. Townies shouldn't have a reason to lie, at least not a good one. It's hard to imagine a game where someone instantly knows every scum and townie correctly - what would be the point of the game? We're going to have times where we're completely convinced of someones scumminess and manage to flip them as town. It happens, but I'd also rather Mislynch (when you're really really sure) than No-Lynch. No-Lynching basically gives Mafia a free kill while denying us a chance to get rid of someone, at the very least someone that is not necessarily scum but definitely not helping the town. Only if such a person can not be found would I actively pursue a No-Lynch. @Release: I pretty much agree with your stance on 'honesty'. Hence I moved on to Mis vs No Lynches Note all the bolded “townie principles” he states. He breaks every single one in this current game Townie Hopeless1der makes his first move, firing an FOS against Esspen. While his FOS is flimsy at best (and targets a joke post made by Esspen), he is very direct. In addition, when confronted about this FOS by BioSC later in the day, Hopeless1der directly defends himself and directly confronts his attacker. Hopeless then votes BioSC. He is very direct about his accusation, accusing BioSC directly and undiplomatically. Hopeless is counteraccused by BioSC. Hopeless does not back down and continues to build a good case against BioSC. In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite in this current game. Current Game Analysis on Hoepless1der Hopeless opens the game with fluff. However, he attacks posts on general/advice and policy, unlike his townie game where he made them himself. (This is minor) Hopeless fires an FOS at YourHarry. Note that he doesn't give any direct reasoning for it, unlike his Townie persona. + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 08:05 Hopeless1der wrote: Yeah if it was just another FoS, who cares, but a straight up VOTE? Oh man thats harsh. btw, who's this hopeless guy? I'm Hopeless1der =P And seriously, Lazer's long "DONT FAKECLAIM" was followed by "role claim by claiming your role if your blue". It just sounded weird in that context so I took a stab. YourHarry pointed out multiple ways I could have interpreted it that would have been fine. I'm gonna stick with a FoS YourHarry for now. I really can't see his vote sticking to me like that so early when we're still waiting for half the people to start posting. In a followup post, Hopeless talks policy. It sounds completely different from his townie persona (quote in spoiler, my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 10:19 Hopeless1der wrote: This will be a good test to see how a bandwagon gets started then I suppose. Jingle's done this before, just calling someone out based on their name being strange or the icon next to their name. The early posts are just random crap to get people talking. His post about lurkers is suspicious, but if we let people lurk, there's going to be some scum in the pile. Throwing an early lynch at lurkers forces them to be more active, so there is more chance at scumslips instead of nothing to go on at all for those players. They all look scummy when they say and do nothing. The last couple games I've played/obs'd have been riddled with people being replaced and lurking and it completely screws with town's ability to make consistent reads. However, most of those games were majority lynch so the lurker problem had a much bigger impact. Has an obsession with lurkers and discusses them ad nauseum - all filler. Completely different from his emphasis on policy and lynching lairs. If we have scum reads we should definitely push them. I don't think a lynch lurker mentality is that beneficial to town given our voting system. Any lurking scum can jump on any suspicion very easily and not look any worse than the next lurker that just follows the pack. Good scum reads will force them out of the woodwork to cast suspicion on someone else. More filler. "Good scum reads are useful." What else is new? And I'm still not casting a vote as we're still waiting on 4 players to make a post and for Evulrabbitz and zen_man to do something relevant. The way rabbitz has disappeared concerns me as he ducked out just as we started getting to the not completely useless posts. Note the emphasis on stalling. He also notes suspicious activities and doesn't FOS or accuse people. Very different from townie Hopeless. Things start to get extremely suspicious when Hopeless makes his first accusation. Hopeless points fingers at multiple people and uses straight-up untrue premises to draw his conclusion (For more information, read my responses here and here). This is completely unlike his direct accusation of BioSC in his townie game. + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote: So while catching up, it looks like Release isn't making any friends. YourHarry has also disappeared after resolving his shouting match with Jingle. He's said he'll re-read for scum vibes and hasn't been heard from since. (Fingerpoint #1) Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote: Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling Mackin on the other hand disappeared about the same time as Rabbitz: just before what I consider the 'real discussion' started. A very suspicious time to start lurking because they could very easily have been watching and just let the town shred itself so I'll be watching them both going forward for avoiding discussions. Not that they're both necessarily scum, but its definitely looks scummy to me. Fingerpoint #2 and #3 Rabbitz came back and had a read on Release that looks pretty good, but there are a couple other fingers pointed at Release concern me:Fingerpoint #4 + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote: Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. Hapahauli is doing a big backslide from his previous case on Release, after seeing + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote: On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote: Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons. While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. and just jumps all over it, building a huge case:+ Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 15:40 Hapahauli wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote: On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote: On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote: Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons. While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. Exactly what has Lazer done to be a "top-priority lynch?" According to your filter, you have two posts detailing cases against Lazer. The first is an analysis of his first post: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote: I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote: YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here 1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true. 2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day. While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue. I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy. Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons. 1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2. 2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more. 3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still. We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him. Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post! Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now, Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution. Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch. I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long." ##vote: Lazermonkey Yourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer. Fos: yourharry Fos: lazermonkey It's worth saying that Lazer's first post was made 12 minutes after the game started. I'm not sure when the mafia separate forum-thingy goes online (at the start of the game or when the role PM's are sent out?,) but his message seems innocent and hardly "an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies" - as you call it in a later post. Him warning about townie fake-claiming is a legitimate concern, as it led to the downfall of the town in one of his previous games. While this may seem common-knowledge to the both of us, it is clearly not obvious to some players, and thus is worth mentioning. While I agree his post is "fluffy," it does not seem like an attempt to "brainwash" townsfolk, and his actions can be seen as having a pro-town mentality. This is hardly FOS material. Your second case against Lazer is a response to his case about JingleHell. Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 11:08 Release wrote: On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote: I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote: So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote: Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point. Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things. Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote: EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote. Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious. Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote: I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end. In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote: I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end. In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell are you outing Jingle as your scumbuddy? or maybe trying to drag him down with you? YOU ARE SO CONFUSING. OMGUS. Why are you promoting your first post as a discussion starter? It isn't. It is an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies and get us talking about useless things. I commend him for shutting your down your post with this authority. If you are actually using the discussion of sex toys as a reason to call him scum, you really are just grasping at straws for lack of any real substance. In terms of day1, i don't think setting a tone on lynching lurkers is necessarily a bad thing. should we decide on lynching a lurker, the lurkers will feel a need to speak up in order to avoid getting the lynch. In other words, saying "let's lynch lurkers" promotes discussion. And "to make a point" states exactly that. "speak up or die." Jingle should probably reply to the next part, but as far as i can see, it goes - OMGUS OMGUS OMGUS ##vote -##vote x 10 - no discussion, the guy who got OMGUS'd has nothing to attack/defend. Checkmate. Turns out, he was VT o.O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ That being said, Jingle has only made very light commitments and commented on very obvious/easy things. Lazer, you still look worse. What ever his stance may be, he clearly took the time to read through JingleHell's post. He's also taking a firm stance against a player, and making a clear attempt at analysis (even if it is only day 1). You spend half your post talking about his first post, then address one of his points... then the rest I don't even understand. You have very strong feelings about Lazer, care to solidify your case for him to be a "top priority lynch?" (He calls this a "huge case" which is clear exaggeration. Hell I don't even hint suspicion at Release.) He pushed him for a bit, and then finally let up once everyone else had suspicions on Release. His change of stance is well timed to distance himself from his provoking, but he still leaves himself an open avenue to target Release later on based on his meta from a game where Lazer played the same but got a different response from Release than this game.. (This order of events is easily proven false. See the first half of this post) The other thing that I found scummy about him was his reason for suspecting Jingle in this case: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 11:37 Hapahauli wrote: --SNIP-- In conclusion, FOS on JingleHell. His actions regarding D1 voting are contradictory, and he's taken a very suspicious stance on anti-bandwagnoning so early into day 1. I don't get how being anti-bandwagon can be seen as suspicious. Bandwagoning is terrible and I completely agree with Jingle's stance on it, seeing as I was the victim of a D1 mislynch in XVIII. Scum don't have to push for a majority vote this game, they can let us rile ourselves up and can vote with little risk of getting themselves caught in the mislynch votecount. FoS: Hapahauli However, my case against Hopeless1der goes from simple suspicion to VOTE LYNCH HIM when you analyze his responses to my counter-accusations. When counteraccused by BioSC as a Townie in his previous game, he forcefully sticks to his argument, is never apologetic, and never changes his mind (re-read the first segment/meta analysis if you forgot). In this game, he is a completely different person while defending himself. Analysis of Hopeless's Scummy Defense Hopeless's "drops his case" against me. He also does not answer any of my attacks against him and tries to avoid conflict (my commentary is bolded in spoiler). + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 05:45 Hopeless1der wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 15:56 Hapahauli wrote: On July 05 2012 15:44 BassInSpace wrote: Apologies for the late entrance, but my time zone makes it a bit hard to post concurrently with the rest of you. First of all, I don’t think harry’s lightning fast vote is as terrible as you make it out to be jingle; town has shown that it can obviously think for itself without jumping on mindless bandwagons. However, I would like to ask you hapahauli, what exactly is wrong with an anti-bandwagon stance? We want to actually encourage people to post their reads and think before voting, not going with the flow of the thread, which is what mafia likes doing. I can’t think of any situation where bandwagoning helps town, much like fake claiming doesn’t help. Lazermonkey’s long first post is similar to jingle’s anti-bandwagon stance, no? I’ll have a look at the other points against him later, as it seems a few others are FOSing him, but I need to head out now and just wanted to clarify with hapahauli. Also, Mackin seems to have completely dropped off with no significant contributions whatsoever, and we KNOW he was around during most of the discussion during this first 24 hours. Not too sure about the other lurkers yet obviously, but I know JieXian and I will have similar post timing (see NMM XVIII) because we’re only 2 hours apart. Hi Bass and welcome to the game! My argument (re: anti-bandwagonning) is that it is more appropriate to take such a stance closer to the lynch deadline. I feel that taking such a strong policy early in the cycle stance can limit the amount of posts that players make. Players can post with less inhibition without such a stance in place, which makes for additional opportunities to make reads for townies (i.e, I may be discouraged from posting analysis on Mackin because I maybe seen as "bandwagonning" off of you). I'm all for this stance closer to lynch time, but it serves as nothing but an inhibition on posting this early in the game. Bandwagoning allows for the exact opposite of what you say. Its to place a vote without looking at the reasoning or thought behind it. If you were to post analysis on Mackin, thats analysis not bandwagoning to me. Perhaps we're disagreeing on the meaning and taken in the context of your post, sounds like a fair statement. I disagree with your definition of 'bandwagon'. (Focuses on bandwagoning as a side-track instead of addressing my arguments. Townie Hopeless would be much more concerned that I called him out for lying) Between the posts that I quoted regarding Release, two players had FOS'd him. You didn't explicitly say you had a FOS on Release but it did feel like it to me. Calling it 'huge' was overstepping things, and you maintain it wasn't a case at all, so I'll drop it, but I'm still seeing some underlying suspicion about Release. (Incredibly wishy-washy, and drops his case against me! This is completely opposite from Townie Hopeless!) Hopeless defends against my ##Vote. In this post, he is diversionary, emotional, tries to draw pity, changes his stance multiple times... just read my commentary. Read the spoiler! This is all the proof you will need! This last post is shockingly different from Townie Hopeless. + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 06:19 Hapahauli wrote: EBWOP: @Hopeless1der: And just so you don't mistake my post as "underlying suspicion," I would like to make it perfectly clear what I think about your last two posts. You brought attention to a player who had not yet been attacked using false and out of context evidence. You immediately flip-flopped and avoided confrontation when presented with this. You are not pro-town, your goal has been to discredit my analysis so far and incite paranoia amongst the town. You are mafia. ## Vote: Hopeless1der When you responded to my suspicions you completely flew off the handle about there being no case and how I was completely making shit up. All your "false evidence" claims are based on there being no case. There hasn't been anything else from you to comment on, and trying to push my read would have come off as either blind tunnelling or an OMGUS, neither of which really help town and make me look scummier than choosing to let it go. (Read that last sentence again. He says that not addressing my arguments makes him look less scummy. This is the polar opposite of Townie Hopeless) My issue is with what happened after you asked Release to clarify his position. He completely ignores your post, and you pretty much completely give him a pass on your next post about him. The one thing here is that you make a statement about how his meta doesn't match with a previous game and it might be scummy behavior: (Changes positions, reverts to calling me scummy after dropping my case) Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote: Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. The whole last paragraph...I don't know if you're saying it makes Lazer and/or Release look townie or scummy, but its very nonchalant and easy to overlook. You seem to be pro-Release in your overall posting but I saw something suspicious and brought it up. (Incredibly indecisive. This would be enough for Townie Hopeless to directly cast suspicion on me. He instead is unclear and diplomatic. Note that this reasonable stance was not included in his accusation against me.) I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. (Red sentence makes absolutely no sense. Confronts me sarcastically, saying I have all 3 scum locked down - a townie would never attack another townie like this. Finally, he appeals to pity with his last sentence. In summation, take a look at the "townie principles" that I noted in my meta-analysis of Hopeless. I will say that I am a firm believer in the truth. Anyone caught in a lie deserves to die! Who's with me? I'm saying lynch people that we can collectively agree have been dishonest in something they have said or done. And thus we've arrived at the point of my original policy: dishonesty is a move for scum. Townies shouldn't have a reason to lie, at least not a good one. Basically if someone decides to flip flop on a decision without some ironclad reasoning, I'm saying lynch the sucker He has been dishonest in his arguments and has relentlessly flip-flopped. Townie Hopeless would lynch this game's Hopeless on principle alone. Hopeless1der is a completely different character from his townie-persona in a mafia-oriented way. He is an easy D1 lynch. | ||
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
Holy geezus that took me hours to write. Bedtime for me. | ||
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
After my first quotation block: In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite in this current game. This should read: In summary, townie Hopelessness is direct, unapologetic, and unafraid. His posts early game posts in this current game are the exact opposite. | ||
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
| ||
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 11:49 Hapahauli wrote: Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. So this post is rife with contradiction and scumtells. Let's break it down. Show nested quote + I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. You did not claim it was a huge case. I got angry because you had a misleading case and I've made that clear multiple times. What does that second sentence even mean? That's the scummiest thing I've read so far! You posted a weak/half-assed read as your original case then you're saying you don't want it to get brushed off as a weak/half-assed read and therefore you posted it? WHAAAAT. Show nested quote + How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? When did I even suggest that I had 3 scum locked down? Where did that even come from? That's some suspicious shit right there. He did actually call it a huge case. And I believe he's saying that he didn't want his read to be brushed off as half assed, not that his post IS half assed (not that this really helps him). Now, on to zen man. On July 06 2012 05:44 The_Zen_Man wrote: Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 05:36 Lazermonkey wrote: On July 06 2012 05:19 The_Zen_Man wrote: My point was that you can only analyze a player like Mackin that much.On July 06 2012 05:08 Lazermonkey wrote: Zen_Man, I'd really appreciate if you put some thoughts about the other players. I think you are over reading Making. I would hardly call his first post an attempt to bandwagon. On July 06 2012 04:33 The_Zen_Man wrote:When Hopeless later states that he had no intention of anything like a bandwagon on Lazer, Mackin quickly change his opinion again, not mentioning anything about Lazer again, as his bandwagon failed. Mafia tends to want to not have opinions alone, and rather have some other people to back them up, while town has no reason to not go after someone alone. Your just making so many assumptions. Talking about how mafia will play is just impossible. Unless you are mafia. Instead of actually responding to what happends in the thread you choose to FoS a player who basically havn't said anything yet. Lazermonkey, i made one post about him, and it is my second since the game started, so i have not really over read him. I was going to post about other players too. And yes, you can actually say how mafia will play, otherwise there would be no point in analysis, would it? Well a player can push scum agenda in several ways and saying that Mackin was trying to bandwagon when he write the first post is imo assuming too much. I stated in my last post that i would post about other things too, so please let me do that now. It was only one post, which did not have that much text, so i was not over reading him . Though I am still unsure on what else to post about right now. Where is the promised contribution? He comes in after his lengthy absence, puts a FOS on Mackin (easy to do, others area already suspicious of him) with very little in the way of original content, promises to post more about other players and does not deliver. There was quite a bit to post about at that point, yet he didn't do it. Note that he also leaves after the Hopeless vs zen man debate starts, so he could've said something about that. TMG I wasn't attacking you for your English skills. + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 01:02 TMG26 wrote: So basically you guys are acusing me based on my heplessness and the lack of new content in my post... Ok, its my very first game here, and i only played mafia twice on a totally different community and on a different language, so its a litle bit natural to me to be a litle bit "scared" You may say its scummy atitude, all that i can say to defend myself is that it was a newbie atitude... Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 22:18 BassInSpace wrote: On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote: Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions I don't quite understand. So you think that hopeless and jingle are mafia because hopeless defended jingle, but jingle and harry are actually your prime suspects? I'd just like this point clarified. well i wasnt very clear it seems.. Lets see what happenned before that post: >Harry voted Hopeless >jingle isnta voted Harry for that vote >Harry voted Jingle >Hopeless returns and gives some suport to Jingle i believe that the part that confused you was saying that harry and jingle were the prime ones, not jingle and hopeless. Well, what i was trying to say was that harry and jingle were the ones with bigger chance to be scum due to OMGUS, of course that if jingle is revealed scum Hopeless chances of being scum increases __________________________________ It seem people want me to take a stance, fine! Reading the new posts it to me that Release is trying to force a lynch on Lazer, and i see no motive for that Release main acusation is that Lazer first post is really bad, sure, it wasnt good, he wrote so much, and almost no decent content... But your main acusation is that Lazer's first post if it had really started a discussion on the subject as he intended to do we would loose tremendous amount of time discussing meangless stuff, and I ask you, how could we loose that much time discussing why VT shouldnt fake claim? Its a little obious what lazer said, so it wouldnt wast us as much time as you want us to believe Show nested quote + If you actually think the discussion about sex toys is designed to shit up the thread, i don't know what to say. It's maybe a page long, it shut down your attempt (in an awkward fashion), and he hasn't tried to rehash it once it died off I dont see the point of the sex toys discussion not being rehashed, Lazer did not tried to rehash what he pointed out in the first post, and it seems like you are saying that the sex toys discussion was positive Basically, i agree that Lazeer first post was bad, but it wasnt the work of the scum Devil that you want us to believe, it seems to me that you are trying really hard to see Lazer lynched at all costs when there werent another topic going on that you didnt pay atition FoS Release My points against you were that you did not add any of your own original ideas in your post. The post quoted above still does not provide anything original. You also didn't explain this line of yours to me: With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous As for this part, you're saying that you think Jingle and Harry are scum because they use OMGUS cases against each other? >Harry voted Hopeless >jingle isnta voted Harry for that vote >Harry voted Jingle >Hopeless returns and gives some suport to Jingle i believe that the part that confused you was saying that harry and jingle were the prime ones, not jingle and hopeless. Well, what i was trying to say was that harry and jingle were the ones with bigger chance to be scum due to OMGUS, of course that if jingle is revealed scum Hopeless chances of being scum increases However, the points raised by hapahauli combined with the meta analysis of hopeless is going to mean that I put my vote on him for now, rather than zen man or TGM. I say "for now" because I'll probably be asleep when (if) he posts his defense against the formal case, and I'd like to actually read it before deciding to leave the vote on him. I have a birthday to attend later, so I'll be gone till much later in the night. ##Vote Hopeless1der | ||
BassInSpace
Australia165 Posts
"Note that he also leaves after the Hopeless vs zen man debate starts, so he could've said something about that" Should of course read "Note that he also leaves after the Hopeless vs Hapahauli debate starts, so he could've said something about that" | ||
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. lololololololol you're right. I played NMMXIII with hopeless and this doesn't sound like him at all #Vote Hopeless | ||
JieXian
Malaysia4677 Posts
| ||
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
What catches my attention is his indecisiveness, especially compared to the other game he played. In that game he focused on the persons he thought was most suspicious. This game... Just look at this post. On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote: So while catching up, it looks like Release isn't making any friends. YourHarry has also disappeared after resolving his shouting match with Jingle. He's said he'll re-read for scum vibes and hasn't been heard from since. Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote: Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling Mackin on the other hand disappeared about the same time as Rabbitz: just before what I consider the 'real discussion' started. A very suspicious time to start lurking because they could very easily have been watching and just let the town shred itself so I'll be watching them both going forward for avoiding discussions. Not that they're both necessarily scum, but its definitely looks scummy to me. Rabbitz came back and had a read on Release that looks pretty good, but there are a couple other fingers pointed at Release concern me: + Show Spoiler + On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote: Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. Hapahauli is doing a big backslide from his previous case on Release, after seeing + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote: On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote: Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons. While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. and just jumps all over it, building a huge case:+ Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 15:40 Hapahauli wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote: On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote: On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote: Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons. While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. Exactly what has Lazer done to be a "top-priority lynch?" According to your filter, you have two posts detailing cases against Lazer. The first is an analysis of his first post: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote: I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote: YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here 1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true. 2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day. While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue. I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy. Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons. 1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2. 2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more. 3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still. We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him. Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post! Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now, Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution. Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch. I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long." ##vote: Lazermonkey Yourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer. Fos: yourharry Fos: lazermonkey It's worth saying that Lazer's first post was made 12 minutes after the game started. I'm not sure when the mafia separate forum-thingy goes online (at the start of the game or when the role PM's are sent out?,) but his message seems innocent and hardly "an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies" - as you call it in a later post. Him warning about townie fake-claiming is a legitimate concern, as it led to the downfall of the town in one of his previous games. While this may seem common-knowledge to the both of us, it is clearly not obvious to some players, and thus is worth mentioning. While I agree his post is "fluffy," it does not seem like an attempt to "brainwash" townsfolk, and his actions can be seen as having a pro-town mentality. This is hardly FOS material. Your second case against Lazer is a response to his case about JingleHell. Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 11:08 Release wrote: On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote: I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote: So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote: Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point. Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things. Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote: EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote. Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious. Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote: I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end. In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote: I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end. In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell are you outing Jingle as your scumbuddy? or maybe trying to drag him down with you? YOU ARE SO CONFUSING. OMGUS. Why are you promoting your first post as a discussion starter? It isn't. It is an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies and get us talking about useless things. I commend him for shutting your down your post with this authority. If you are actually using the discussion of sex toys as a reason to call him scum, you really are just grasping at straws for lack of any real substance. In terms of day1, i don't think setting a tone on lynching lurkers is necessarily a bad thing. should we decide on lynching a lurker, the lurkers will feel a need to speak up in order to avoid getting the lynch. In other words, saying "let's lynch lurkers" promotes discussion. And "to make a point" states exactly that. "speak up or die." Jingle should probably reply to the next part, but as far as i can see, it goes - OMGUS OMGUS OMGUS ##vote -##vote x 10 - no discussion, the guy who got OMGUS'd has nothing to attack/defend. Checkmate. Turns out, he was VT o.O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ That being said, Jingle has only made very light commitments and commented on very obvious/easy things. Lazer, you still look worse. What ever his stance may be, he clearly took the time to read through JingleHell's post. He's also taking a firm stance against a player, and making a clear attempt at analysis (even if it is only day 1). You spend half your post talking about his first post, then address one of his points... then the rest I don't even understand. You have very strong feelings about Lazer, care to solidify your case for him to be a "top priority lynch?" He pushed him for a bit, and then finally let up once everyone else had suspicions on Release. His change of stance is well timed to distance himself from his provoking, but he still leaves himself an open avenue to target Release later on based on his meta from a game where Lazer played the same but got a different response from Release than this game.. The other thing that I found scummy about him was his reason for suspecting Jingle in this case: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 11:37 Hapahauli wrote: --SNIP-- In conclusion, FOS on JingleHell. His actions regarding D1 voting are contradictory, and he's taken a very suspicious stance on anti-bandwagnoning so early into day 1. I don't get how being anti-bandwagon can be seen as suspicious. Bandwagoning is terrible and I completely agree with Jingle's stance on it, seeing as I was the victim of a D1 mislynch in XVIII. Scum don't have to push for a majority vote this game, they can let us rile ourselves up and can vote with little risk of getting themselves caught in the mislynch votecount. FoS: Hapahauli So let's see. That is a whole total of 5(!) people who you cast some dirt on in just one post. YourHarry, Mackin, Evul, Release and Hapa. Except for Hapa, all you are doing here is very softly pressuring them. And I'm not even sure you can call it that. You havn't said anything about these people since you posted this case, why? You say they look suspicious but yet you don't follow up with more pressure. It's like you prepare to jump on the bandwagon here. I kinda want to hear your response tho before I decide to vote you or not. Hapa has somewhat overwhelmed you with suspicion atm and you havn't even been close to be able to defend youself. | ||
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
On July 06 2012 02:31 JieXian wrote: What is this? Stupid disagreement? This is like the strangest post ever. You first decide that all you the originall discussion is just a stupid disagreement, you don't even comment on it. Saying that all discussion before this post(page 10) is about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. is a lie. Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 19:21 Hapahauli wrote: Un-FOS JingleHell As I've taken some time to cool down a bit, I'm growing worried that this thread is going to turn into a giant post-bang between the four most active/reckless players on the thread so far (YourHarry, JingleHell, Release, LazerMonkey, and Me). Such a situation would be extremely harmful to the town and would let the Mafia sit in the shadows while we war over one another. Perhaps we can turn our attention to two suspicious posts by some lurkers in an effort to get them to speak up: TMG26 His first post is rife with a desire to look helpless, lots of fluff, and indecision (my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler [First Post] + On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote: It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1 Megafluff, and downplaying the importance of day 1 reads With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable? I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing trying to look helpless And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker more helplessness About what being happening here.. Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing Note the language - "in my opinion" as opposed to saying it outright. Overly diplomatic and indecisive My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken Despite stating two suspects, immediately reverts to indecision When JingleHell replies to TMG26's passive accusation, TMG is apologetic, passive, and does not address the issue (commentary bolded again). + Show Spoiler [Response to JingleHell's Defense] + On July 05 2012 08:47 TMG26 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 08:41 JingleHell wrote: Wait, so my actual reasoning is supposed to be an OMGUS, and Harry's suggestion that 23% is gambling odds is only equally suspicious as my case? When my case was based purely off of suspicious behavior, and my defense was based on the lack of substance, which was the grounds for my accusation? Not only does that not make any logical sense, it also feels like exactly what you just accused me of doing. Sorry, dont know what OMGUS is, i will search An apology... says he will search instead of just searching for the damn thing. Fluff. About the 23% odds, i didnt read that..... because of the time that it took me to type, i'll will make sure to check new replies before i post something that took a litle bit of time to type Does not address JingleHell and posts irrelevant information - "I'll make sure to read before I post..." More fluff/half-hearted accusations. + Show Spoiler [Response to Harry] + On July 05 2012 09:02 TMG26 wrote: Show nested quote + On July 05 2012 08:53 YourHarry wrote: A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False) B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably) Thanks for the welcome A: We cant know for sure what you are trying to do, a statment like "i'm not trying to mislynch" is worth notting... scum wont say they are trying to mislynch B: Well, there no eveindence that he wanted to start a bandwagon, there was only a acusation of lazer's contradiction, BUT you told us what you tought about it... thats your opinion, so its recorded now What?! What's even the point of that. What i believe he condemns you most is for the "early" vote... And then you came with the odds not being bad..................... Further indecision Makes another overly diplomatic/indecisive/fluff post that points suspicions to JingleHell and Harry + Show Spoiler [Another Diplomatic/Accusatory Post] + On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote: Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions Mackin I have less of a case on Mackin, but his first post is very very suspicious. Inaccurate/Bandwagon post on LazerMonkey. + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 07:06 Mackin wrote: Hey guys, just putting it out there Lazer is already on my FoS list and we're only just beginning, long contradictory post with almost too much effort put in. Underlined part is simply not true. The post only has one contradiction, and it isn't very long. Criticizing someone for putting "almost too much effort" into posting is a huge red flag. This sounds like someone who saw someone's criticism of a lone contradiction and immediately jumped on the bandwagon without any analysis. Very anti-town mentality. His next few posts are comprised of one-liners and fluff: + Show Spoiler + On July 05 2012 07:17 Mackin wrote: HellJingle, that's an interesting name... On July 05 2012 07:28 Mackin wrote: On July 05 2012 07:22 Hopeless1der wrote: Mackin give the poor guy a chance, he's just a little excited I think. I just wanted to give him a heads up so he checks his posts more carefully, that way we can narrow down our scum lists earlier rather than later. Fair enough point, but I just want to stir up some conversation to get people talking. Ain't that what Mafia's all about? On July 05 2012 07:56 Mackin wrote: @Harry We have a clever one here methinks. I'm going to put aside the babble between the loudest players who are having a stupid disagreement about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. TMG is clearly new, not a native speaker and deserves some BOTD. My FOS is on Mackin for trying to light up fires and disappearing as town burns. His thoughtless posting reminds me so much of mafia behavior. You are completely dismissing the case on TMG because he is 1.) new (played two games already) 2.) english is not his mother tongue(can you please show me where you had a hard time understanding what he was saying). None of these are actually arguments for why TMG is not scum tho. You then start to put pressure on Mackin out of all players. I don't see how his only few post atm left town burning. Noone even took notice of them untill later. Basically Mackin is a lurker at this point, why focus on him? Also what part of the posting reminds you of mafia behavior? You are trying to pull the action away from where it really matters and instead point it towards a lurker, an attempt to slow down town progress. On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote: More on Mackin.Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling [B]On July 06 2012 18:14 JieXian wrote: Show nested quote + On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote: I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again. lololololololol you're right. I played NMMXIII with hopeless and this doesn't sound like him at all #Vote Hopeless I'm not sure if this is a joke, but if it isn't... Bandwagon much? Overall, this guy has it all. Lurks, tries to kill discussion about scum hunting, WIFOM accusations against lurkers and bandwagoning(assuming he wasn't joking). The only thing that somewhat points towards him being town is that his teammates probebly would be kinda upset with such a bad play and thus told him to step his posting up... | ||
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
On July 05 2012 23:08 JingleHell wrote: I do wish we could stop looking at Lazer's first post as "contradictory". Actually, for that matter, I wish we would leave alone all the initial burst of posting, the entire purpose is to get people talking, which was accomplished. Frankly, I don't think Lazer's first post felt scummy, because while it was only very basic, it was an effort to do the same thing I accomplished by bringing up sex toys. I've just discovered that something meaningless works better. Instead of cluttering things up, I'll just say that Bass and Lazer's analysis on TMG sounds good, and I'll be interested in seeing what he has to say. So instead of actually answering any of the questions from me he starts getting nice etc. My first post was not contradictory, I have already said that a dozen of times, you don't need to tell me that. This just feels like him wanting to avoid any questions. You are just posting town reads all over the place. I made a quick overlook at Newbie XVIII where you were town and it looked like you were posting quite alot of suspicions and not many town reads at all. This game is the complete oppsosite. You havn't taken any clear stance on who you are suspicious of yet. You only mention those who you think is town. This is great scum play, as when they get misslynched/killed, you will look better for claiming they were innocent. I am still VERY suspicious of you Jingle... | ||
| ||
Next event in 28m
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney 31610 StormgateSea 3286 Jaedong 1039 BeSt 507 PianO 114 GoRush 108 Sea.KH 78 Backho 72 SilentControl 45 HiyA 44 [ Show more ] Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games FrodaN1716 B2W.Neo1260 hiko970 DeMusliM667 crisheroes471 Hui .434 Lowko312 Beastyqt308 ArmadaUGS239 Liquid`VortiX149 QueenE93 FunKaTv 48 Organizations
StarCraft 2 • AfreecaTV YouTube StarCraft: Brood War• intothetv • Kozan • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamezSOOP • Laughngamez YouTube • Migwel • sooper7s Dota 2 League of Legends |
Replay Cast
StarCraft2.fi
OSC
StarCraft2.fi
The PondCast
StarCraft2.fi
OlimoLeague
|
|