I Can't Believe it's not Themed MiniMafia - Page 15

On July 12 2012 09:49 Risen wrote:


Any particular reason you're trying to push something on people with a low post count in thread so early? Didn't even know lurking was possible at this point. So you're either an extremely eager townie or scum looking for easy targets to push early.

On July 12 2012 16:38 Risen wrote:


Yes, this is going places. I like your thinking. I just like your style, my dude. You have my vote!

##vote: Vivax

On July 13 2012 02:55 Risen wrote:
I've had experience with Mattchew being scum, as we were both godfathers who flipped vigis in some other game I can't remember the name of. I think he's WAY, WAY, WAY more active and useful this game ALREADY than he was that game.

On July 12 2012 15:22 Risen wrote:


For example: this could be DropBear bussing/giving his teammate a way to backtrack on his plan or it could be scum calling out a townie. I'm not saying I even have a scumread on drop as he seems to want a pro-town environment, which is something I'm all for, but this is something that could be used to confirm a connection in my mind at a later point in time.

On July 12 2012 15:18 Risen wrote:


I think it's too early for anything. I don't really like to make reads without any connections (this might be a bad thing to do). I just think it's easier for me to make cases when I consider people as members of a team, not as individual scum members.

On July 12 2012 17:39 Miltonkram wrote:
Hey everybody I'm finally able to get in the thread. I'll make this my quick introductory post and then get to scumhunting. I find that policy talk naturally transitions into a scumhunt over the course of D1. I think we all know the major points of policy that get talked about, and I tend to take each policy on a case by case basis anyway, so I won't waste much time on policy talk other than to say that talismania's proposal is pretty obviously a bad idea.

First things first, here is a list of games I've played in as well as links to my filters from those games. I think I'll be starting all my games with a list like this because it helps me improve. If I'm scum, I have to avoid playing closely to my scum meta. If I'm town, I put pressure on myself to make good reads. The list is spoilered so as not to take up too much space.
+ Show Spoiler +

Risen wrote, some:time:ago:

Yes, this is going places. I like your thinking. I just like your style, my dude. You have my vote!

##vote: Vivax

On July 12 2012 11:33 austinmcc wrote:

That's because there's basically nothing to my first post except "Millers claim," which isn't helpful.

What I can add is that I think talismania's 3-case plan is bad, but that seems to be the general sentiment. Forcing arbitrary requirements on everyone isn't really going to help us, and is going to clog up the thread later. People are going to make halfhearted cases to try to reach that number, someone will inevitably only find 1-2 people scummy and we'd end up in some "does x not making 3 cases = scummy?" discussion, and we also might end up lynching people that EVERYONE finds a little bit scummy rather than someone that a few people have a strong scumread on for good reasoning.

Can also add that I haven't played with gonzaw, but I've obsed his recent games. Anyone here feel like they do a good job reading him, and if so, can you post some tips? I've found that I almost always end up reading him as scum, because he is active enough and posts enough that I keep finding scummy things to latch on to. Had him scum at the end of liar game just prior to the katina lynch, but also found him really scummy in the recent MTG because I felt like some of the plans he pushed hard were anti-town (check the obsqt early on, although I didn't post much there). So...any magical tricks for getting the right read on Gonzaw?

On July 13 2012 01:31 austinmcc wrote:


Talis, underlined portions of Marv's posts are what I interpret as his reactions to your plan. Underlined portions of mine are my reaction that I wrote.

Two things.
One, this. If you think I'm just "expanding on" marv, that IS adding something. Otherwise Marv's initial "no" is it, and EVERYONE who disagreed is just "expanding on no."
Two, here WAS new content, specific scenarios that I noted your plan could lead to, which I think are bad and weren't mentioned by others:

• someone will inevitably only find 1-2 people scummy and we'd end up in some "does x not making 3 cases = scummy?" discussion
• we also might end up lynching people that EVERYONE finds a little bit scummy rather than someone that a few people have a strong scumread on for good reasoning

The first scenario is bad because a really good plan is going to end up "follow this or get lynched." Look at the pick your power games, liar game, etc. With your plan, we'd have to derail the thread from scumhunting and have a policy discussion later in the game about whether someone who didn't follow "the plan," didn't post 3 suspicions, was scummy or just wasn't suspicious of 3 people. Not posting 3 cases wouldn't be alignment-indicative, so we couldn't just lynch them. There'd have to be discussion of that, which would gunk up the thread. That's the full thought process behind that point. As to the second point I made, having players*3 cases in the thread could lead us to a situation where we were lynching based on case quantity and not case quality. Oh, 70% of people are suspicious of X, so we lynch him. Even if he was most people's third choice, and we had a few folks highly suspicious of Y. Ta da.

Overall, I think your plan is bad if you want us to follow, and still bad if you want to gauge reactions to it. You got responses from a little more than half the thread, which is alright, but you need a plan that SOME people want if you're going to actually generate "discussion." You got reactions, but not actual discussion. People weren't weighing the pros and cons of the plan, people were just saying no to it. That doesn't get you the sort of interactions that I want to draw conclusions from, because nobody gains town OR scum points for being the 5th or 6th person to pooh pooh a plan that nobody likes.

---

---

I'm more interested in Risen though. Need to read him and see if he actually doesn't have scumreads early, but does that sit alright with people? My D1 reads are AWFUL, but I still have them. How do you read the game as town and not have scumreads?


Anyway, Risen's filter is a lot of talking about how he's going to play this game. Which is helpful, lets us know his plan and can explain away some differences in behavior. But it's basically filler about oneself.

Early interaction with Gonzaw, which ends with this:

When he speaks about DropBear later, we get:


He could be scum bussing a scumbuddy. He could be scum calling out town. He's probably a townie. He's a townie but I don't like what he's doing. A lot of filter, but nothing really said.

Dunno. Being wrong as a townie is plenty forgiveable. It's going to happen, especially on the early days. But not scumhunting, or not having reads until later in the game, isn't helpful to town at all. Even if you don't trust your reads early as much as your reads late, you've got to contribute. Apart from just not having contributed much except the discussions concerning Gonzaw and DropBear, neither of whom he has any strong feelings on, it just doesn't feel like Risen has done anything this game despite having a lot of posts.

I'm more interested in Risen though

He's probably a townie. He's a townie but I don't like what he's doing. A lot of filter, but nothing really said.

On July 12 2012 16:51 strongandbig wrote:
Hey bros
For people who weren't in ssb or mtg mafias, just wanted to let you guys know I am currently in Europe, where I don't have a cell phone data plan. This means I can only post when I have wifi, which is a change from my normal method. I've also been busy at work so please don't expect much from me before 8pm CET.

---

Now for serious stuff: I'm going to be watching marv like a motherfuking hawk.

I think hosts tend to try to "balance" games sometimes by tweaking their scum team selection; however, that can and has led to extra info from town through balance speculation. Marvellosity makes an extremely tempting player for hosts to do this kind of balancing, because his scum play is empirically very good, but he isn't a "veteran" so he's not likely to be the subject of balance speculation.
I also suspect bugs of doing this kind of balancing.
+ Show Spoiler [reasons, from wheel of fortune.] +

So what does this mean? I am NOT proposing to policy lynch marvellosity; if he's town he can be a great asset, and besides that's totally against the spirit of the game. What I AM saying is that I think when someone points out something scummy he does, we should take it pretty seriously. Pure chance wouldn't explain why he has rolled scum in something like half his games since our first game together (noob 6) while I have rolled it once - him being good and me not does explain that.

---

NOW: having told you why you should pay attention, I'm going to point out something scummy marv has done. That thing is: propose/say he would be okay with lynching Talismania.

Talismania's plan IS anti town. When Ace is host and he tells an obs QT how good a plan is for scum, you better believe he knows what he's talking about. Systematic case proposing plans give scum an excuse to make shitty reads and blend in, because everyone is making shitty cases and dumb reads. That kind of plan dilutes good information and adds bad information.

HOWEVER: Talismania proposes this plan as town. All the time. Like, every game. Usually "pushing scummy plans" is a decent scum tell; but this specific player pushing this specific plan is not. And Marvellosity should know this. Marv has obs'd at least two games where Talismania proposed this plan or a variation of it (ssb, bangbang). Tali has proposed this in other games. Marv is the kind of player who pays attention; he should also know that I've pushed tali hard for these plans in the past, as have others. Marv putting tali forward as his first lynch candidates comes down to an easy push on an easy target for reasons he should know are bad.

Marv, I'm watching you.

+ Show Spoiler [on Talismania, briefly] +

On July 12 2012 22:39 Mattchew wrote:
Strong I feel like the entirety of your posts could easily be made by either town or scum, if this is you trying to establish your alignment you have done a poor job with me. Your post is longwinded and looks to explain your thought process, but we both know that 95% of your posts content has nothing to do with this game at all. Not only that but your early attempt at a read on marv does not even account for his other posts in the thread. And your reasoning for voting him from this game is too, extremely weak.

On July 12 2012 23:35 strongandbig wrote:


Sorry bro, but that's kind of the nature of the game I guess - any post could be made either by scum or by town? Do you have any suggestions as to how to be more townie?

Meanwhile, I feel like there's something to be read in Gonzaw's post about Derpbear - I'm just not sure what. Dropbera accuses Gonzaw of tryharding overmuch, when he's just Gonzawing - then Gonzaw attacks him in a way that I'm pretty sure either exaggerates or straight up mischaracterizes dropper's tiny filter.

hmmmmmmmmmmm...... I'll think some more about this later tonight.

Gonzaw, have you and DropBurp ever played together before?

On July 13 2012 01:54 strongandbig wrote:


I'm getting some seriously bad vibes from the first half of this post - it seems like there's way too much detail responding to Talis's "you copied marv" thing, when one or two sentences would do. (and when I'm telling you you put too much detail into a post, you've got a problem.) Then you jump back into actually arguing about whether or not the plan is a good idea, which even tali has moved on from.

On July 12 2012 08:19 Keirathi wrote:


Well, ideally since this is not a newbie game, we shouldn't have townies lurking much. Its a bit different in newbie games because people don't really know how to play, and since everyone here should have a decent idea of how to play, then people lurking is strategy rather than ignorance.

That's not to say that I think lynching lurkers is a particularly good idea, but looking into lurkers has more merit in this type of game than a newbie one.

As far as claims, I myself haven't played in a game where masons/roleblockers claimed, so I'll have to look into it, but I agree with the points made about RB'ers so far, so that at least makes sense. An unclaimed miller causes more confusion than its worth though, and I can't really think of a situation in which a miller wouldn't want to claim.

On July 12 2012 11:54 Keirathi wrote:


Sorry was getting dinner.

I was verbose because I have some shared experience with sciberbia, whom I was replying to. I know that most (all?) of his TL mafia experience was in newbie games, and the dynamic is just different when you can assume that people know how to play the game.

As far as talismania's plan, I feel like it makes it too easy for mafia to blend in. The more townies you have making arguments against other townies, the easier you can push mislynches and not have to take any blame for them. There are other things wrong with it, but Mattchew and austin beat me to it. No need rehashing what they said.

On July 13 2012 03:33 Keirathi wrote:



So I was going back through the thread looking for more information, when this leaped out at me. When I read it the first time through, I didn't think anything of it because I don't have previous experience with you, but if you propose the same plan in every game you play in, then how is it "half-assed musing" this time?

It feels like you're pre-emptively making an excuse for a bad plan. And why, as a townie, are you half-assing things anyways?

On July 13 2012 03:04 talismania wrote:
if you mean this



then I don't see you calling him suspicious, but just asking him questions. Implied suspicion I'll give you, but not calling him out as being suspicious by any means.

Also good to know you're just as angry as in bastard 2 :-)

On July 13 2012 04:02 Mattchew wrote:

are you actively lurking or is it a coincidence that you respond quickly when you are mentioned and then are quiet in other times

On July 13 2012 05:52 marvellosity wrote:
Still reading, but one thing on austin:

"He could be scum bussing a scumbuddy. He could be scum calling out town. He's probably a townie. He's a townie but I don't like what he's doing. A lot of filter, but nothing really said."

Here, as I read it, he was summarizing what Risen had said and pointing out how wishy washy it was. He was not giving his own view on Risen.

This makes a pretty big difference.

Dunno. Being wrong as a townie is plenty forgiveable. It's going to happen, especially on the early days. But not scumhunting, or not having reads until later in the game, isn't helpful to town at all. Even if you don't trust your reads early as much as your reads late, you've got to contribute. Apart from just not having contributed much except the discussions concerning Gonzaw and DropBear, neither of whom he has any strong feelings on, it just doesn't feel like Risen has done anything this game despite having a lot of posts.

On July 10 2012 17:31 Miltonkram wrote:
Eh, screw it. I'll /in this game if people don't mind me being a little inactive for the first 12-24 hours. The players in this game look too good to pass up.

On July 13 2012 05:15 gonzaw wrote:
However, his "kind" attitude and way he's posting make me wary. Like, the way he posts is very weird and would certainly call people's attention....but isn't it too obvious perhaps? Like, it seems he doesn't really care how people see him, which doesn't make me that confident in thinking he's scum.
But meh, I'd appreciate people's thoughts on him

On July 13 2012 06:00 Keirathi wrote:


Err what?








Those posts are reasonably close together, and his response to me was the only one where he had been mentioned. Granted, its just the last 3 posts in his filter before you made this accusation, but it seems like a pretty baseless accusation.

Pre-Post edit: sorry I'm replying to this late. I've been working through the 75 posts that were made while I was asleep/at work making notes.

On July 13 2012 05:46 gonzaw wrote:
austinmcc:
I'll ignore his 1st post since it has nothing worthwhile in it.


Big fluffy post. Like talis said, he seems to "add" something to the "talis' plan is bad" discussion....but he doesn't add much at all.
Saying it will clog up the thread is not news, and Mattchew and others said what was wrong with the plan before.
The worst thing is he makes a great deal out of it by basing his whole post on that part.
I say basing his "whole" post because his 2nd paragraph is like the biggest pile of fluff ever. Did you really need to post so much just to ask "What do you guys think of gonzaw's scum play?" or something?
Like...your whole post could be reduced to "tali's plan is bad and I want to know how you guys catch gonzaw as scum", which means your post is SOLELY filler, and as you can see that statement alone doesn't contribute anything about the game either.
Really...that post is pretty bad.


Talking about bad posts.

That 1st part is absolutely unnecessary. He keeps talking about tali's plan and tali's accusation of him, but why?
Talis said that austin was suspicious because he didn't add much about his criticism of his plan before.....so why did he feel the need to explain everything about how bad that plan is after being called out?
Talis didn't tell him "you are suspicious because you can't find reasons why my plan is bad", so why did he spend like 4 paragraphs and a wall of text to explain so?
Even more importantly....why does it matter? How could heavily debating why tali's plan was bad (even after 90% had already stated why) be any helpful at all? It just clutters things up and makes your post look big, and of course it just makes it so you appear active and contributing when you haven't done shit until then.

The 2nd part is equally bad:




WTF!!??

So the player you find most interesting is one you think is town?
Also I don't get it, he seems to accuse Risen of many things, but then says he thinks he's town, but then he keeps accusing Risen. That seems very inconsistent, what does he actually think of Risen?
If he thought Risen was town...why waste his post on posting his thoughts on someone he thinks is town? Why not ignore it and post about someone he thinks is scum?

As you can see...later he never posts anything at all about who he thinks is scum, nothing. Just like S&B's accusation of austin, austin accuses Risen but never mentions him later (albeit he didn't have that many posts).
That seems fishy as fuck.

---

Strong&Big


I fully agree with Mattchew here:


S&B gets very defensive at being called "active lurker", and says he wants to "establish his innocence" but he's not doing anything like that at all.

Check the next posts in his filter, it's just him bickering against marv about the "balance" issue (that has nothing to do with the game).

The next thing he does is make half-assed accusations he never seems to follow through:





I don't see a vote, I don't see him trying to get other people's thoughts on them, and most importantly I don't really see him as actually interested in pressuring those people...he just seems to softly accuse them and nothing else.
For instance take his austin "accusation".....does he think austin is scum or not? Like...what does he conclude?
He just calls him out on something, but we don't know if he's accusing him or pressuring him or whatever, since he doesn't follow up on it later at all.

For claiming he's trying to "establishing his innocence" he's doing a very bad job, he makes a fluffy post about "balance" and about "keeping an eye on marv", then keeps cluttering up the thread with that "balance" issue, then makes half-assed accusations against me+austin.

---

This post seems a very "I'm trying to contribute here!" one. Spends WAY too much time talking about lurkers and policies, and doesn't even take any interesting stance in the mason/RBer issue (i.e if he had an interesting stance it would be actually a contribution). He just spouts some fluffy stuff about them that only serves to make his post bigger

solstice called him out as "verbose" (which was right):



Yet he keeps doing the same thing. He's still "verbose", and his post doesn't contribute shit at all. He says "I'm verbose because of something irrelevant" and "Rehash of what other people said".
Not only that, he acknowledges himself that he's rehashing what other people said....yet that doesn't prevent him from posting it and doesn't prevent him from trying to find something else to contribute.

His other posts don't call too much attention, yet then he comes out of nowhere with this:


...????

This is so out of place it's not funny. Like, Vivax had 2 votes on him and a case against him, some other FoSes were flowing around (marv on S&B at first, then Vivax on Mattchew, etc); yet when Kei posts he thinks it's more useful to discuss tali's plan again?
Not only that, but discuss something so pointless and irrelevant like tali's "motive" for making the plan because it was "half-assed" or some shit?

Like....he completely ignored everything else in the thread, wtf?

---

Now here's my dilemma:

Who the fuck do I vote? I want all 3 dead
Hmm, I think austin+Keirath are more likely scum than S&B, but I guess Keiarth could be just noob and plays like this because he's noob, so lets go with this.

##Vote: austinmcc

On July 13 2012 05:46 gonzaw wrote:
Keirathi:



This post seems a very "I'm trying to contribute here!" one. Spends WAY too much time talking about lurkers and policies, and doesn't even take any interesting stance in the mason/RBer issue (i.e if he had an interesting stance it would be actually a contribution). He just spouts some fluffy stuff about them that only serves to make his post bigger

On July 13 2012 05:46 gonzaw wrote:
solstice called him out as "verbose" (which was right):



Yet he keeps doing the same thing. He's still "verbose", and his post doesn't contribute shit at all. He says "I'm verbose because of something irrelevant" and "Rehash of what other people said".
Not only that, he acknowledges himself that he's rehashing what other people said....yet that doesn't prevent him from posting it and doesn't prevent him from trying to find something else to contribute.

On July 13 2012 05:46 gonzaw wrote:
His other posts don't call too much attention, yet then he comes out of nowhere with this:


...????

This is so out of place it's not funny. Like, Vivax had 2 votes on him and a case against him, some other FoSes were flowing around (marv on S&B at first, then Vivax on Mattchew, etc); yet when Kei posts he thinks it's more useful to discuss tali's plan again?
Not only that, but discuss something so pointless and irrelevant like tali's "motive" for making the plan because it was "half-assed" or some shit?

Like....he completely ignored everything else in the thread, wtf?

On July 13 2012 06:18 marvellosity wrote:
Keirathi, can you stop catching up and provide your views on a person or two?

On July 12 2012 20:46 strongandbig wrote:
Plus he even referred to the fact that he does this as town and I find him scummy for it in the same post where he did it.

On July 13 2012 02:58 DropBear wrote:

I called him out as being suss last page, do you read boy?

Obviously, we should be lynching every day until we have good reason not to. I will push to get my scumreads lynched, but I will prefer any lynch to a No-Lynch.

I'm not a big fan of lynching lurkers. Obviously, lurking hurts town, but I don't think lurking is all that alignment-indicative. Seeing as our goal is to lynch scum, I will only give slight preference to lynching the lurker over the active player, everything else being even.