|
Regarding the aRyuujin case:
I went through his filter one more time. On the first impression there is not much. It's more like a case against a lurker than a scum.
What surprised me though is that aRyuujin had posted reads on other players using haiku whereas when he stopped using haiku he also stopped the reads. That would acutally fit goodkarma's argument about using haiku to make it more difficult to get a correct read on him. I thought it was a rather weird argument but now ... aRyuujin, I would like to see you make some effort in scum hunting.
|
Promethelax - Have you read through my suspicions of you? do you have any response?
I am going to the movies to see the new batman movie, i'll return in a few hours.
|
On July 31 2012 17:53 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:17 Obvious.660 wrote:
See one of my more recent posts for my thoughts on alan133 and DarthPunk. Might be best to also make him aware of how you used a complete misrepresentation of what I actually posted to come to your conclusion. The fact that after I corrected you, you are still willing to refer people to that post without any clarification on how misleading/wrong it was is astounding.
Just so it's in my filter again, Darth. I am admitting to typing the wrong word at 5:57AM my time. Again. You seem to think this was intentional. I'm sorry.
|
On July 31 2012 17:53 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:17 Obvious.660 wrote:
See one of my more recent posts for my thoughts on alan133 and DarthPunk. Might be best to also make him aware of how you used a complete misrepresentation of what I actually posted to come to your conclusion. The fact that after I corrected you, you are still willing to refer people to that post without any clarification on how misleading/wrong it was is astounding.
What are you referring to?
Regarding lurker lynches:
I would differ between MrMedic and Zork. I strongly hope that MrMedic will be modkilled or at least replaced as he has not posted anything of importance at all while as Zork has posted little and therefore can be judged by what he has posted or when he has decided to not post/lurk.
I strongly disagree in lynching lurkers day 1. Sometimes real life issues are there and people can't manage to play. But if the lurking still continues after 72 hours I am inclined to say that it is intentional lurking. If we manage to find scummy things in lurkers I am not against lynching them. Right now I would put both Zork and aRyuujin in the scummy lurker category and strongly advise both to step up your scum hunting.
|
On July 31 2012 18:09 Obvious.660 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:53 DarthPunk wrote:On July 31 2012 17:17 Obvious.660 wrote:
See one of my more recent posts for my thoughts on alan133 and DarthPunk. Might be best to also make him aware of how you used a complete misrepresentation of what I actually posted to come to your conclusion. The fact that after I corrected you, you are still willing to refer people to that post without any clarification on how misleading/wrong it was is astounding. Just so it's in my filter again, Darth. I am admitting to typing the wrong word at 5:57AM my time. Again. You seem to think this was intentional. I'm sorry.
It's not the typo. It is the fact that you assumed I would vote for Golbat and then stated it as a fact. I completely understand that you can make a typo. But the conclusions you drew from an incorrect assumption just make no sense without that assumption. This still would be fine if you didn't then direct people to your post without stating that as the assumptions that preceded you argument were invalid the conclusions you drew from it were, if not invalid, far less meaningful.
|
On July 31 2012 18:13 Ange777 wrote:
What are you referring to?
I am referring to this
On July 31 2012 00:43 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 18:57 Obvious.660 wrote:
DarthPunk also explained that he would be willing to change his vote from Mordanis to Golbat to avoid a mislynch with his post 40 minutes later. Sounds appropriate given the situation, from a town perspective. But again, we're at the two scenarios as above where we're either seeing avoiding looking bad for the mislynch, or staying around to ensure there is a lynch. OK when I read this I lol'd. This is just wrong and made me question whether he even read my filter. Let me clear things up for you. Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 04:35 DarthPunk wrote:
With that being said at the moment we are headed towards a no lynch which I am certainly not in favour of. I am willing to alter my vote to ensure this does not happen. Hopefully this gets resolved shortly as I would love to get some sleep. So after reading this post. you summarize it as this: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 18:57 Obvious.660 wrote:
DarthPunk also explained that he would be willing to change his vote from Mordanis to Golbat to avoid a mislynch Where did I say I would vote for Golbat? I voted for my best read. I didn't want a no-lynch and as my biggest scum read was pushing the case and band-waggoning his main rival for the lynch concurrently I didn't really want to vote for either of them. You entirely misrepresented what I said and I fail to see the reason behind it. I need to read your filter very carefully.
|
On July 29 2012 04:35 DarthPunk wrote:
With that being said at the moment we are headed towards a no lynch which I am certainly not in favour of. I am willing to alter my vote to ensure this does not happen. Hopefully this gets resolved shortly as I would love to get some sleep.
The correction would read:
On July 30 2012 18:57 Obvious.660 wrote:
DarthPunk also explained that he would be willing to change his vote from Mordanis to Golbat to avoid a mislynchNO LYNCH
'mislynch' replaced by 'no lynch', do you still take issue with the intent here?
|
On July 31 2012 18:26 Obvious.660 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 04:35 DarthPunk wrote:
With that being said at the moment we are headed towards a no lynch which I am certainly not in favour of. I am willing to alter my vote to ensure this does not happen. Hopefully this gets resolved shortly as I would love to get some sleep. The correction would read: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 18:57 Obvious.660 wrote:
DarthPunk also explained that he would be willing to change his vote from Mordanis to Golbat to avoid a mislynchNO LYNCH 'mislynch' replaced by 'no lynch', do you still take issue with the intent here?
Yes. please read above post.
|
If I missed anything I'm really sorry, this took up 27 pages in word so I'm pretty sure I got it all but something may have slipped through my fingers.
Here is my original case on Karma. Although he says it was thoughtless and without merit it still convinces me.
On July 30 2012 10:02 Promethelax wrote:SNIP On to a case on GoodKarma: We begin with this early assertation that lynching lurkers is not the best idea Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 15:12 goodkarma wrote:
snippy snippy
I'm much more interested in seeking out those who have been somewhat active but haven't really said anything useful.
Or have been active about being inactive (e.g. I have to go to the donut store be back in 12 hours k thx bye). Not saying these claims can't be legit, but if the person isn't contributing anything when they're not afk, and using irl activities as a convenient excuse for remaining inactive, that's pretty scummy to me.
snip snip Karma wants us to look for guys who are somewhere in the middle, not lurking but not leading either. Okay, that seems reasonable, I don;t agree with his opinion but it is one that makes some sense as long as he sticks with it. Show nested quote +On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote:
I still would like to assert my opinion that removing lurkers from the game on day one is the most valuable play for town. Obviously, lurkers are hard to read. Mafia can easily hide as lurkers without any worry of slipping up. Meanwhile, day one, the most vocal people are sure to say some things that don't resonate quite right with the town. It is easy to start a lynch bandwagon on these people, while the lurkers sit back and provide no further information about themselves or their agendas. Lynch the vocal individuals day one, and you'll know just as little about the lurkers come day two.
-SNIP-
TL;DR:
My call to action:
Lurkers will perish
If you will follow my vote
aRyuujin you're first Oh...well. I guess he changed his mind based on...something? He follows this post with an assertion that lynching a green lurker is good for town which doesn't resonate well with me. Having one less townie is bad more townies is good. Having a pants-on-head retarded townie is still better than not having them, townies are the life blood of town our win-con is getting all the scum before they get us. We need townies alive so that MYLO and LYLO are postponed, even if the townies we have suck they are an asset to town. After Golbat flips our man Karma says this Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 02:18 goodkarma wrote:
Just a small update:
I've finished reading through all the filters again, and have some new thoughts on who is scum. I have decided to follow the advice posted by alan and postpone discussion of those thoughts until day 2 begins in a few hours here. It seems everyone else is doing the same...
I would, however, like to make a few comments on the Golbat debacle. While Golbat certainly is to blame for not sticking up for himself, so is the town for voting him.
Very obvious, but one of the bigger issues I have with some people's current scum-hunting tactics is they think that scum just have to present in one or two very particular ways. And I will confess I have been guilty of this too...
Things like: Scum are sneaky. They hate to make coherant arguements against players. They love to slip up on statistics that don't really have much bearing on their arguements. They can only sit back and lurk (yeah, I was guilty of this one...).
Everyone plays scum a little differently, making finding them not a science but an art form. Looking back at the Golbat lynching, I couldn't help but notice that while he played badly, he did it consistently. There wasn't one "scumslip," or one particular bandwagon he was willing to ride. He was like, "I want to ride every bandwagon that presents any semblance of a case." I mentioned this too in passing, that he was either a bad town (for bandwagoning without thinking) or a bad mafia (for being so out in the open). But he wasn't afraid to change his mind. Repeatedly. And he did stick his neck out in getting behind cases, being only the second person to do so in something like 3 different spots... Mafia could do all these things, but I find it highly unlikely that they would, especially in a newbie game where I figure first-time Mafia would prefer to play more cautiously to avoid being exposed than to jump into the spotlight like that. In retrospec, and I know it doesn't mean much, but looking at how he was consistent in his terrible play and was completely unafraid to change his mind I don't see how he could have been anything but really bad town.
I encourage everyone, as they're making their new cases, to not have their "scum check-list." Try to show some empathy and really assess if a town could make the posts your suspect has made.
Anyway, my 2 cents. I'll catch up here in a few hours, once day 2 has begun. Someone who feels this strongly must have defended their read in the thread and actively worked to make sure such an obvious townie wasn't lynched. Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 03:25 goodkarma wrote:I am going to change my vote, but first I'd like to explain a few things. Now is the time to get behind a lynch candidate, and that is the intention of this post. -SNIPPY- Since I'm still not 100% convinced that anyone is scum right now, I'm going to look at the worst case scenario. The person we lynch flips town. This makes the candidate for lynching much easier to choose. Golbat has flip-flopped on candidates several times. He seems content to try to form bandwaggons around candidates with what I consider to be a lack of satisfactory analysis of his own. This seems to be a general sentiment of several others voting for him, so I'll leave their well formulated analysis (which I mostly agree with) to stand in right now for why I'm behind this lynch. The one thing I want to add to the "Lynch Golbat" case is that even if he flips town, bandwaggoning is only going to hurt the town. Townies need to look through the arguements and think for themselves if we're going to have a shot at winning this. His multiple efforts to form bandwaggons around candidates along with his weak analysis indicates he's either a bad mafia or bad townie. If he's scum we're that much closer to winning. And if he's town: lynching a bad townie day one is still bad, but it should at least add clarity to town discussion, which is a good thing. Just very briefly, why not shady sands?: I feel that shady sands is still suspicious, mainly due to his misrepresented stats on day one lynches which he has tried to address. But he has provided some meaningful discussion for the town, and hasn't jumped on every bandwaggon he sees... I hope that everyone can get behind a candidate before the deadline. We're dangerously close to a no-lynch, and Golbat has done enough scummy things to deserve a vote. ##unvote aRyuujin##Vote GolbatPS: + Show Spoiler +I've kind of rushed this post due to deadline. If you find anything unclear please let me know... oh, I see, all those things which you totally knew were townie traits were scum traits when you swapped on to him but you weren't really sure he would flip mafia. This seems like scum trying to distance themselves from a mislynch and buy townie cred for having the 'right' read before the flip. That is what I have for now. I hope you all will look at my case on SS from yesterday as I still feel that he is scummy, with this new look at Karma though I think that he may be even scummier. Right now I am torn between these two for my vote; I know its still early but I want to lynch scum our Power Role (or scum incompetence) has bought us an extra day, I plan on not letting it go to waste.
Since this case he has continued to play in a way that makes him seem scummy to me.
IN this post which follows on the lack of NK he says
On July 30 2012 06:22 goodkarma wrote:ghost, you gave me such a heart attack lol. When I first read your post I thought I was dead... Great story though. Five stars  .
which is odd given that he had been playing as if he was sure he would live to the morning and this is a really subtle way to say to people “I'm town too, I'm scared of dying” without coming out and saying that you are town.
He follows that up with
On July 30 2012 07:58 goodkarma wrote:
Okay. I'm putting together my notes and writing my long-promised suspect list.
Wouldn't usually waste a post stating this, but one-line fluff posts seem to be all the rage.. -_- (MrMedic and Zorkmid...)
Tbh it shouldn't really matter exactly how no one died last night. Now that Golbat has flipped, and day two has begun, let's not waste any time getting our cases put together.
where he adds fluff to the thread because it is “all the rage” he also talks about the lack of night kill in a way that reminds me of my MTG game where scum tried to both emphasize and ignore the lack of a night kill. (this second point is essentially a gut feeling).
His case against me, now that I look at it more deeply is totally empty. Here it is.
On July 30 2012 14:53 goodkarma wrote:Please note: First, there are probably some format issues as I am not yet a pro at working with stupidly long posts. Some things aren't italicized that I meant to be, a few things aren't spoilered as heavily as I intended... But you're going to have to live with it. I'm sorry, but this has taken so long to put together I'm through with it right now. Feel free to pick it apart and analyze it as you see fit All the content should be there, even if the format isn't... And yes, I started calling Promethelax Prox. I'm that worn-out. Happy reading Also, the part to Ange was written long before Promethelax's case against me, which is why that part may feel a little out of context compared to the rest of the post. Also note: because this post took so long I might not have addressed something in the last couple hours or so. I will review this thread again and see if there's something I didn't address yet, possibly as late as tomorrow morning. I have been reading and re-reading threads, and assessing and reassessing my reads. Putting my thoughts together for this post has taken way longer than I thought it would... A quick note directly to Ange: Ange, I did notice your FoS, and have read through your arguements. I still strongly recommend you look through my thread closely. I have provided some analysis of other individuals, and will be doing much more analysis here. I adopted a controversial, not-so-well liked lurker lynching policy day one, which I would hardly call "blending in," as is one of your points of accusation. Please recognize (to use an analogy directly from a mafia guide) this isn't twitter. I don't feel the need to fend off an attack when I feel the points of the case made against me are defended by some of my prior postings. Please read what I have already posted about my thoughts on scum-hunting in general, and come back and tell me what you think. I feel I have clearly stated my day one objectives. Okay, off of my soapbox, and into my analysis: I will discuss the one person I feel I have a strong scum read on right now. Unfortunately, due to the time it took to put this together, the second person I originally planned will have to wait...: Prometheax is the first of these. I'm not trying to come into a position of OMGUS here, but it really feels like his arguments were poorly put together, as if he was going out of his way to try to find statements that condemn the current subject of scrutiny to put him in a better light. I find it interesting that instead of address directly Keir's suspicions about him he decides to go after me. It feels like a move that allows him to blend in, or (in other words) scummy. Let's start by looking at what Prometheax has to say about me. I will address his case against me and my scum read on him both at the same time. First, one small thing about your symantics: You call it "A case for Goodkarma." Why don't you call it "My case for Goodkarma?" You need to stand behind what you write. A minor point, but deserves +1 scum points in my mind. But onto the arguement, with my comments in italics: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 10:02 Promethelax wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Back, after the night deadline but still back. I feel really bad about the minimal amount of time I've been putting into this game. I would like to say I'm sorry to my fellow towines and you're welcome to all the scum players.
Keir: I /in'd this game even with limited time because I really like playing this game. I find joy in it and chose to play for that joy. I had more free time when I /in'd which was about six years before this game actually started as you may remember. I recently switched to night shifts and one of my co-workers in on vacation so I'm working fifty hours weeks mostly between dusk and dawn. I am trying to put real thoughts into my posts and give you something to work with, in all honesty I think the fact that you had me so pegged in XIX should help you here, keep an eye on me look deep into my filter whatever it is you want to do. Just know that town and I hope that my posting will prove that to you.
I was tunneling Shady because he is playing scummily. I am, as I write this, looking into other people and making a case or two.
I've been going back and forth in my head on the issue of where scum voted, I originally thought that Golbat couldn't have all the scum on him and than I started to think, it is day one so mislynching doesn't reflect too badly on you, bad day one reads are a fact to most players of mafia, TL mafia players don't believe in thinking through day one like any other day. But a no-lynch would be a problem for mafia, they need to kill us quickly so I was wondering about the last vote(s) on Golbat maybe a scum came over to hammer him, although as town I too would switch to ensure a lynch on d1. As such I'll be looking particularly closely at SS and Zork but am not entering their filters with the assumption that they are scum based on their votes.
I'd like to take a moment to laugh about this NK, that is 100% percent of my town games where there has been an unexplained lack of a night hit.
@(probably)The Medic: you da man. I just want to remind you that the Roleblocker might have blocked scum so you don't have a 100% green guy and RB, the medic might have saved so you don't have a 100% red guy. It isn't worth revealing yourself over this information, keep doing what you are doing and: thanks!
On Zork, I've just read through your filter and while I don't get any real scum vibes from you (besides hammering a vigi) I also don't get townie vibes. The most important thing a townie can do is prove themselves town. Make cases, your defense, while probably true that you are/were busy doesn't add anything to town just as the fact that I was working a lot adds nothing. Make some cases backed up with evidence and commit to some reads, if you are town this helps town and if you are scum this helps town since you have to appear town let me say this: if you continue without making a case I will view you as scum. Don't leave yourself so many outs; tell us what you think of somebody and why. On to a case on GoodKarma: We begin with this early assertation that lynching lurkers is not the best idea On July 27 2012 15:12 goodkarma wrote:
snippy snippy
I'm much more interested in seeking out those who have been somewhat active but haven't really said anything useful.
Or have been active about being inactive (e.g. I have to go to the donut store be back in 12 hours k thx bye). Not saying these claims can't be legit, but if the person isn't contributing anything when they're not afk, and using irl activities as a convenient excuse for remaining inactive, that's pretty scummy to me.
snip snip Karma wants us to look for guys who are somewhere in the middle, not lurking but not leading either. Okay, that seems reasonable, I don;t agree with his opinion but it is one that makes some sense as long as he sticks with it. So yes, this is by my definition "lurker." People who have been sitting around, post meaningless crap, and then go back to doing nothing. Unless you think I meant people who don't post at all, but I don't see how that's what you could think since those guys get modkilled. So, it would seem that I have been seeking the same type of policy lynch all day one. No surprises there...Regarding his quote below: Prometheax, why not the full quote? Oh wait, you're in it. Nothing too condemning, but interesting to note that back then you were sitting around, not posting much. Right now, you’re making your first big case. I don’t consider this suspicious in itself, but I do find it suspicious that you would deliberately “snip snip” omit yourself. And I’m no hypocrite. It’s spoilered for clarity:+ Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 15:12 goodkarma wrote:I'm hesitant to join the Mordanis lynch bandwagon. Mordanis's arguements were definitely incredibly flimsy, but I find it hard to believe that a mafia would stick his neck out that far when it seems many successful mafia are content to stick their heads in the sand. His opening statement indicates he desires to start a hunt for who's mafia: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:43 Mordanis wrote:
Rather than sitting in a circle and deciding whom to lynch based on who sing "Kum ba yah, My Lord" the most off key (what kind of villainous scum would do such a thing?), I think its time to begin the scumhunt. Anyways, I apologize in advance if this seems somewhat rushed. I want to get the hunt going as early as possible, and I feel we've wasted the first hour and a half. So without further ado, here comes (hopefully) the first case of the game:
It's also worth noting he has not yet explicitly voted for who he accused. I don't feel we can find that guy with one flimsy lynch arguement and assume he's guilty, especially when it's the first arguement of the game. I don't see him having any investment in who's accused if he's really mafia, especially when most day one lynchings tend to hit town. I'm much more interested in seeking out those who have been somewhat active but haven't really said anything useful. Or have been active about being inactive (e.g. I have to go to the donut store be back in 12 hours k thx bye). Not saying these claims can't be legit, but if the person isn't contributing anything when they're not afk, and using irl activities as a convenient excuse for remaining inactive, that's pretty scummy to me. For these reasons, my top picks right now are: Ayruujin has had a minimal number of posts about very little. He's been lurking, and while people may disagree, I'm all for trying lurkers on day 1. We don't have a lot to go on, and it feels more probable to me that a lurker will turn mafia than someone who makes a stupid arguement and is jumping at the opportunity to get hanged. MrMedic, who's had plenty of posts that amount to nothing. He could be a bad town, but it also could mean mafia. Promethelax (to a far lesser degree), who's claiming an irl excuse. I understand irl commitments can keep us from doing fun things, but if it becomes a habit that keeps you from posting then you're on my suspect list. This is more of an example of what I consider a scummy play more than a suspect person. It's too early to tell here.As outlined above I consider Ayruujin suspect and am therefore voting for him. ##Vote AyruujinCould Mordanis be mafia? Most definitely. But as I've discussed above I feel that his play would be a poor one if he were really mafia. Ayruujin's lurking is more suspicious to me right now. On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote:
I still would like to assert my opinion that removing lurkers from the game on day one is the most valuable play for town. Obviously, lurkers are hard to read. Mafia can easily hide as lurkers without any worry of slipping up. Meanwhile, day one, the most vocal people are sure to say some things that don't resonate quite right with the town. It is easy to start a lynch bandwagon on these people, while the lurkers sit back and provide no further information about themselves or their agendas. Lynch the vocal individuals day one, and you'll know just as little about the lurkers come day two.
-SNIP-
TL;DR:
My call to action:
Lurkers will perish
If you will follow my vote
aRyuujin you're first Oh...well. I guess he changed his mind based on...something? No I didn’t buddy. In this posting I’m still after lurkers. You’re making up something that just isn’t there...He follows this post with an assertion that lynching a green lurker is good for town which doesn't resonate well with me. Having one less townie is bad more townies is good. Having a pants-on-head retarded townie is still better than not having them, townies are the life blood of town our win-con is getting all the scum before they get us. We need townies alive so that MYLO and LYLO are postponed, even if the townies we have suck they are an asset to town. I said that establishing an environment of critical discussion is important, and to that end, lynching a lurker can provide some benefit to town. Nowhere did I say "let's kill our confirmed pants-on-head retarded townies." I want the "damning quote" from you here, as all I'm seeing is unsubstantiated speculation. After Golbat flips our man Karma says this On July 30 2012 02:18 goodkarma wrote:
Just a small update:
I've finished reading through all the filters again, and have some new thoughts on who is scum. I have decided to follow the advice posted by alan and postpone discussion of those thoughts until day 2 begins in a few hours here. It seems everyone else is doing the same...
I would, however, like to make a few comments on the Golbat debacle. While Golbat certainly is to blame for not sticking up for himself, so is the town for voting him.
Very obvious, but one of the bigger issues I have with some people's current scum-hunting tactics is they think that scum just have to present in one or two very particular ways. And I will confess I have been guilty of this too...
Things like: Scum are sneaky. They hate to make coherant arguements against players. They love to slip up on statistics that don't really have much bearing on their arguements. They can only sit back and lurk (yeah, I was guilty of this one...).
Everyone plays scum a little differently, making finding them not a science but an art form. Looking back at the Golbat lynching, I couldn't help but notice that while he played badly, he did it consistently. There wasn't one "scumslip," or one particular bandwagon he was willing to ride. He was like, "I want to ride every bandwagon that presents any semblance of a case." I mentioned this too in passing, that he was either a bad town (for bandwagoning without thinking) or a bad mafia (for being so out in the open). But he wasn't afraid to change his mind. Repeatedly. And he did stick his neck out in getting behind cases, being only the second person to do so in something like 3 different spots... Mafia could do all these things, but I find it highly unlikely that they would, especially in a newbie game where I figure first-time Mafia would prefer to play more cautiously to avoid being exposed than to jump into the spotlight like that. In retrospec, and I know it doesn't mean much, but looking at how he was consistent in his terrible play and was completely unafraid to change his mind I don't see how he could have been anything but really bad town.
I encourage everyone, as they're making their new cases, to not have their "scum check-list." Try to show some empathy and really assess if a town could make the posts your suspect has made.
Anyway, my 2 cents. I'll catch up here in a few hours, once day 2 has begun. Someone who feels this strongly must have defended their read in the thread and actively worked to make sure such an obvious townie wasn't lynched. On July 29 2012 03:25 goodkarma wrote:I am going to change my vote, but first I'd like to explain a few things. Now is the time to get behind a lynch candidate, and that is the intention of this post. -SNIPPY- Since I'm still not 100% convinced that anyone is scum right now, I'm going to look at the worst case scenario. The person we lynch flips town. This makes the candidate for lynching much easier to choose. Golbat has flip-flopped on candidates several times. He seems content to try to form bandwaggons around candidates with what I consider to be a lack of satisfactory analysis of his own. This seems to be a general sentiment of several others voting for him, so I'll leave their well formulated analysis (which I mostly agree with) to stand in right now for why I'm behind this lynch. The one thing I want to add to the "Lynch Golbat" case is that even if he flips town, bandwaggoning is only going to hurt the town. Townies need to look through the arguements and think for themselves if we're going to have a shot at winning this. His multiple efforts to form bandwaggons around candidates along with his weak analysis indicates he's either a bad mafia or bad townie. If he's scum we're that much closer to winning. And if he's town: lynching a bad townie day one is still bad, but it should at least add clarity to town discussion, which is a good thing. Just very briefly, why not shady sands?: I feel that shady sands is still suspicious, mainly due to his misrepresented stats on day one lynches which he has tried to address. But he has provided some meaningful discussion for the town, and hasn't jumped on every bandwaggon he sees... I hope that everyone can get behind a candidate before the deadline. We're dangerously close to a no-lynch, and Golbat has done enough scummy things to deserve a vote. ##unvote aRyuujin##Vote GolbatPS: + Show Spoiler +I've kind of rushed this post due to deadline. If you find anything unclear please let me know... oh, I see, all those things which you totally knew were townie traits were scum traits when you swapped on to him but you weren't really sure he would flip mafia. This seems like scum trying to distance themselves from a mislynch and buy townie cred for having the 'right' read before the flip. When you claim I “knew he would flip town,” you missed two very important words in that post: IN RETROSPECT. That post you are quoting is my attempt to put some light on how town can go about scum-hunting so that we don’t have another lynch like Golbat. It was a reassessment of what got him lynched and my stance on him. It wasn’t some “I told you so but didn’t stand by my convictions” post. Try to put yourself in your suspect’s shoes, and see if their actions make sense if they are town. I would say that a serious reassessment of how we hunt for scum would fit for a town. I don’t claim credit for knowing Golbat is town anywhere in that post. You either have serious issues reading, or you are desperately trying to find something that sticks to get town points.That is what I have for now. I hope you all will look at my case on SS from yesterday as I still feel that he is scummy, with this new look at Karma though I think that he may be even scummier. Right now I am torn between these two for my vote; I know its still early but I want to lynch scum our Power Role (or scum incompetence) has bought us an extra day, I plan on not letting it go to waste. This isn’t completely out of the blue. I originally had you on my list of suspects. And that is for this one post, another which you seem to have selectively forgotten: Show nested quote +On July 29 2012 23:18 Promethelax wrote:On July 29 2012 00:39 Keirathi wrote:@Promethelax Really? You were gone for 14 hours and that's all you have to comment on? What are your current feelings on my Golbat case? Mordanis? goodkarma?What about people like aRyuujin who was getting some heat as well? I don't understand how "townie" Promethelax can be a worse player than the scum Promethelax I played with in XIX.
Shady SandsThe main argument against him seems to be him saying + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 20:39 Shady Sands wrote:
1) He flips red, in which case we've gotten a D1 red lynch which puts us in the 75% win range
2) He flips green or blue, in which case Mordanis will be under quite a bit of pressure. . I maintain that this kind of connection theory isn't in and of itself alignment indicative. For instance, from my last game (I Can't Believe Its Not Themed [non-newbie game]) + Show Spoiler +On July 18 2012 08:10 Risen wrote:
Why should we not lynch you? Your flip gives us so much information. If you're scum Mattchew is in a rough spot, if you're town scib/Keir are pretty much dead men (unless mason claim) . This was said by our COP. My only grief with what Shady said is that it's a bit too early in the game, and any hard connection theories are purely speculation until a flip. He gets some townie points back though for his active scumhunting. I dunno if he's been right or not, but he has what no one else has had yet this game: conviction. He lays out his reads without caring what other people think of them. He's pushed cases on Mordanis and Golbat that for the most part had solid reasoning based on fact and logic rather than WIFOM. Honestly, I find the townie points in his filter to outweigh his scummy points, and therefor I would be highly against with lynching Shady today. There are just flat-out better candidates imo. As to your points I can't argue that I am not playing as well as I was when I knew everyone's alignment. I have to play blind which is not easy for me, I'm working on figuring out what I think of people and Shady is, in my opinion, the most scummy of players in this game. I didn't comment on Golbat/Mordanis because I think the whole thing between them is dumb. They seem (to me) to be two guys going at each others throats with a whole lot of vigor but very little proof. No cases on either of them have been convincing to me, I will look over yours again though with the no bias instead of my: ignore these nubs bias. I commented on what I had time to comment on. I don't have as much free time as I did when XIX was going on which is why you are seeing the drop in my play. ah, just read the day post. I guess I'll re-read looking at Golbat as one of us. I'm sorry I wasn't here near the end of day 1 to push Shady since pretty much anyone would have been better than a town vigi. I still feel that Shady is the most scummy player thus far but haven't yet had time to do more than a first read through the thread. I worked a 13 hour shift and I'm dead tired. I'm putting this into the thread now so that I can make sure my reads are in the thread in case I die tonight. I will be awake before the night deadline tomorrow to post again in case I feel the need to get more reads into the thread. Keir: talk to me about your thoughts on other people now that Golbat has flipped green. What connections do you see? Who is the scummiest player to you now and why? On July 29 2012 14:39 Shady Sands wrote:On July 29 2012 13:19 Obvious.660 wrote:
In regards to my activity, should be able to pick it up by Monday if I haven't been decimated. Going for quality over quantity til the wedding stuff (not my wedding) is finished. (double spacing to keep things grouped) Weird, why didn't he mention he had a wedding to attend in any of his earlier posts in the thread? This seems like a pretty strange after-the-fact excuse for any strange patterns of activity. One thing that is important for everyone in town to start watching for now is activity patterns and posting patterns. Scum will tend to post with an identifiable ringleader and others following in their footsteps... and they will often all make excuses about IRL commitments to assuage any doubts about odd patterns in their collective posting histories. This seems like a pile of horse shit to me. Obvious is a null read for me, I'm not defending him at all. (anyone who knows they will have things that will eat into their game time should claim it, seriously) Shady really wants us to think that having to go to a wedding is a scum tell though. That is at least as silly as people saying that I am lurking while I'm at work. I could be lying about that I guess but why would I? I like playing this game which is why I signed up for it and, when I'm around, I play it like crazy. On July 29 2012 07:57 goodkarma wrote:On July 29 2012 06:56 MrMedic wrote:
I am back, I am very sorry I was unexpecditatly very busy. But now my sechdule is free. Welcome back. Since you skipped out on the vote, I think it's only fair you give us an update on who you feel is scummy and why. I've read through some of your posting history, and understand that what you've been posting to date is fairly consistent with how you've posted with other threads in the past. I feel I may have come down a bit hard on you earlier with your first attempt at real analysis. I just want to ask you not to feel discouraged, and encourage you to give it another try . This is a newbie game after all, and we're all still trying to figure out how to play this game. And regarding some general questions about a few of my actions, most of it I feel I've already covered in prior posts and will not repeat myself here. There is, however, one point that I would like to discuss a little further. And that is why I selectively set out after aRyuujin. I laid out a few other "lurkers," including people such as MrMedic, Obvious, and Zorkmid. So why did I only set after aRyuujin? It had to do with two factors: 1) posting history and general activity outside this thread 2) writing style and post readability Why aRyuujin sticks out here: 1) I will confess I was a little more whimsical in choosing him on this point than I should have been. I remember looking at one of his posts that was two hours later in another thread than his last mafia post and going "Why didn't he post again in the mafia thread? He still hasn't contributed anything..." But in retrospect, I stand by my decision. Stylistically he doesn't always use haiku in his posts. This choice could have been intentional, so it warranted further investigation. 2) Obviously, haikus obfuscated everything he posted, hiding any real chance at reading his intentions. I may have come across as some madman who wanted to lynch only on policy and not on other qualities but there is some method to my madness. It's been brought up that I should have gone after all of them. The problem with that is that I only have one vote. It would be kind of meaningless to pressure all the people on my "lurker list," as they could just sit there and be like "my bad." You pressure one of them with a vote and you can get a real response, as was the case with aRyuujin. With the day passed, and our first flip, I plan on making a rather lengthy analysis thread on top suspects. I promise to have it before night ends, but don't expect to see it for several hours. Talking about that shit is again the rules (I'm pretty sure). Keep your head down dude, we can only refer to posts outside the thread for 1) Meta and 2) nothing else. I'm quite pleased that he isn;t posting in Haiku though and I feel that stopping is a townie trait since he could have continued to post in a way that was annoying to some but not enough to get him lynched (in my opinion, I would have fought hard, assuming I was here, against a lynch based on being annoyed by his posting style) and hidden or obscured his thoughts; changing his style seems townie to me but he (super super WIFOM here) have read MTG mini 1 where Marv says almost the same thing about Mattchew and decided to replicate the strategy so, while it puts him in my green column it isn't very far in. I'll post again in an hour or so before the sleep madness takes over. Here, he tells me that looking into aRyuujin’s posting history is “illegal,” even though nowhere can I find anything that tells me it is. From looking into aRyuujin’s posting history, I inferred he had some time to make posts of higher quality than the “lurk-quality” type posts he’s put out. I’m under the impression that Prox didn’t want me probing into his own. It is my understanding this type of analysis is not against the rules, and until I’m informed it is I’m going to follow up on it. Prox has similar type patterns in one or two places. The time gaps are a little small, but given his experience in this game I am certain that if he wanted to he could have diverted the time from posting in other threads into this one to make some more analytical posts of at the quality we’ve seen today. That is my guess as to why I got this kind of reply from him, and I’m only making this statement based on his reply. Upon a cursory look at the time gaps, they seem small enough I would have thought nothing of them and moved on, except that he brought it up as something I should never pursue again. Honestly this wasn’t enough alone to make me think of him as a prime suspect, but combined with his flimsy case for me (or should I say “a” flimsy case for me) I have put him close to the top of my list. And then there was this, which gave him the first place prize: Show nested quote +On July 30 2012 10:20 Promethelax wrote:On July 30 2012 10:15 Keirathi wrote:On July 30 2012 10:02 Promethelax wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Back, after the night deadline but still back. I feel really bad about the minimal amount of time I've been putting into this game. I would like to say I'm sorry to my fellow towines and you're welcome to all the scum players. Keir: I /in'd this game even with limited time because I really like playing this game. I find joy in it and chose to play for that joy. I had more free time when I /in'd which was about six years before this game actually started as you may remember. I recently switched to night shifts and one of my co-workers in on vacation so I'm working fifty hours weeks mostly between dusk and dawn. I am trying to put real thoughts into my posts and give you something to work with, in all honesty I think the fact that you had me so pegged in XIX should help you here, keep an eye on me look deep into my filter whatever it is you want to do. Just know that town and I hope that my posting will prove that to you. I was tunneling Shady because he is playing scummily. I am, as I write this, looking into other people and making a case or two. I've been going back and forth in my head on the issue of where scum voted, I originally thought that Golbat couldn't have all the scum on him and than I started to think, it is day one so mislynching doesn't reflect too badly on you, bad day one reads are a fact to most players of mafia, TL mafia players don't believe in thinking through day one like any other day. But a no-lynch would be a problem for mafia, they need to kill us quickly so I was wondering about the last vote(s) on Golbat maybe a scum came over to hammer him, although as town I too would switch to ensure a lynch on d1. As such I'll be looking particularly closely at SS and Zork but am not entering their filters with the assumption that they are scum based on their votes. I'd like to take a moment to laugh about this NK, that is 100% percent of my town games where there has been an unexplained lack of a night hit. @(probably)The Medic: you da man. I just want to remind you that the Roleblocker might have blocked scum so you don't have a 100% green guy and RB, the medic might have saved so you don't have a 100% red guy. It isn't worth revealing yourself over this information, keep doing what you are doing and: thanks! On Zork, I've just read through your filter and while I don't get any real scum vibes from you (besides hammering a vigi) I also don't get townie vibes. The most important thing a townie can do is prove themselves town. Make cases, your defense, while probably true that you are/were busy doesn't add anything to town just as the fact that I was working a lot adds nothing. Make some cases backed up with evidence and commit to some reads, if you are town this helps town and if you are scum this helps town since you have to appear town let me say this: if you continue without making a case I will view you as scum. Don't leave yourself so many outs; tell us what you think of somebody and why. On to a case on GoodKarma: We begin with this early assertation that lynching lurkers is not the best idea On July 27 2012 15:12 goodkarma wrote:
snippy snippy
I'm much more interested in seeking out those who have been somewhat active but haven't really said anything useful.
Or have been active about being inactive (e.g. I have to go to the donut store be back in 12 hours k thx bye). Not saying these claims can't be legit, but if the person isn't contributing anything when they're not afk, and using irl activities as a convenient excuse for remaining inactive, that's pretty scummy to me.
snip snip Karma wants us to look for guys who are somewhere in the middle, not lurking but not leading either. Okay, that seems reasonable, I don;t agree with his opinion but it is one that makes some sense as long as he sticks with it. On July 28 2012 08:08 goodkarma wrote:
I still would like to assert my opinion that removing lurkers from the game on day one is the most valuable play for town. Obviously, lurkers are hard to read. Mafia can easily hide as lurkers without any worry of slipping up. Meanwhile, day one, the most vocal people are sure to say some things that don't resonate quite right with the town. It is easy to start a lynch bandwagon on these people, while the lurkers sit back and provide no further information about themselves or their agendas. Lynch the vocal individuals day one, and you'll know just as little about the lurkers come day two.
-SNIP-
TL;DR:
My call to action:
Lurkers will perish
If you will follow my vote
aRyuujin you're first Oh...well. I guess he changed his mind based on...something? He follows this post with an assertion that lynching a green lurker is good for town which doesn't resonate well with me. Having one less townie is bad more townies is good. Having a pants-on-head retarded townie is still better than not having them, townies are the life blood of town our win-con is getting all the scum before they get us. We need townies alive so that MYLO and LYLO are postponed, even if the townies we have suck they are an asset to town. After Golbat flips our man Karma says this On July 30 2012 02:18 goodkarma wrote:
Just a small update:
I've finished reading through all the filters again, and have some new thoughts on who is scum. I have decided to follow the advice posted by alan and postpone discussion of those thoughts until day 2 begins in a few hours here. It seems everyone else is doing the same...
I would, however, like to make a few comments on the Golbat debacle. While Golbat certainly is to blame for not sticking up for himself, so is the town for voting him.
Very obvious, but one of the bigger issues I have with some people's current scum-hunting tactics is they think that scum just have to present in one or two very particular ways. And I will confess I have been guilty of this too...
Things like: Scum are sneaky. They hate to make coherant arguements against players. They love to slip up on statistics that don't really have much bearing on their arguements. They can only sit back and lurk (yeah, I was guilty of this one...).
Everyone plays scum a little differently, making finding them not a science but an art form. Looking back at the Golbat lynching, I couldn't help but notice that while he played badly, he did it consistently. There wasn't one "scumslip," or one particular bandwagon he was willing to ride. He was like, "I want to ride every bandwagon that presents any semblance of a case." I mentioned this too in passing, that he was either a bad town (for bandwagoning without thinking) or a bad mafia (for being so out in the open). But he wasn't afraid to change his mind. Repeatedly. And he did stick his neck out in getting behind cases, being only the second person to do so in something like 3 different spots... Mafia could do all these things, but I find it highly unlikely that they would, especially in a newbie game where I figure first-time Mafia would prefer to play more cautiously to avoid being exposed than to jump into the spotlight like that. In retrospec, and I know it doesn't mean much, but looking at how he was consistent in his terrible play and was completely unafraid to change his mind I don't see how he could have been anything but really bad town.
I encourage everyone, as they're making their new cases, to not have their "scum check-list." Try to show some empathy and really assess if a town could make the posts your suspect has made.
Anyway, my 2 cents. I'll catch up here in a few hours, once day 2 has begun. Someone who feels this strongly must have defended their read in the thread and actively worked to make sure such an obvious townie wasn't lynched. On July 29 2012 03:25 goodkarma wrote:I am going to change my vote, but first I'd like to explain a few things. Now is the time to get behind a lynch candidate, and that is the intention of this post. -SNIPPY- Since I'm still not 100% convinced that anyone is scum right now, I'm going to look at the worst case scenario. The person we lynch flips town. This makes the candidate for lynching much easier to choose. Golbat has flip-flopped on candidates several times. He seems content to try to form bandwaggons around candidates with what I consider to be a lack of satisfactory analysis of his own. This seems to be a general sentiment of several others voting for him, so I'll leave their well formulated analysis (which I mostly agree with) to stand in right now for why I'm behind this lynch. The one thing I want to add to the "Lynch Golbat" case is that even if he flips town, bandwaggoning is only going to hurt the town. Townies need to look through the arguements and think for themselves if we're going to have a shot at winning this. His multiple efforts to form bandwaggons around candidates along with his weak analysis indicates he's either a bad mafia or bad townie. If he's scum we're that much closer to winning. And if he's town: lynching a bad townie day one is still bad, but it should at least add clarity to town discussion, which is a good thing. Just very briefly, why not shady sands?: I feel that shady sands is still suspicious, mainly due to his misrepresented stats on day one lynches which he has tried to address. But he has provided some meaningful discussion for the town, and hasn't jumped on every bandwaggon he sees... I hope that everyone can get behind a candidate before the deadline. We're dangerously close to a no-lynch, and Golbat has done enough scummy things to deserve a vote. ##unvote aRyuujin##Vote GolbatPS: + Show Spoiler +I've kind of rushed this post due to deadline. If you find anything unclear please let me know... oh, I see, all those things which you totally knew were townie traits were scum traits when you swapped on to him but you weren't really sure he would flip mafia. This seems like scum trying to distance themselves from a mislynch and buy townie cred for having the 'right' read before the flip. That is what I have for now. I hope you all will look at my case on SS from yesterday as I still feel that he is scummy, with this new look at Karma though I think that he may be even scummier. Right now I am torn between these two for my vote; I know its still early but I want to lynch scum our Power Role (or scum incompetence) has bought us an extra day, I plan on not letting it go to waste. Thank you. A well-reasoned and convincing argument like I know you are capable of. I've definitely had some suspicions of Karma, and this makes me more wary of him going forward. On July 30 2012 10:07 Zorkmid wrote:
Sorry, you're right.
Apologies for the tone of last post. DON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN! No, I'm kidding. I understand this game can be extremely frustrating when you feel like your back is against the wall. Just work on proving your innocence through your future actions. Look bud, I want to be able to trust you. You are the player in this game that I respect the most. Give me some cases to work with that I know YOU are capable of. You are good at being town, prove to me that you are town so that we can have a town circle ( town line, lol) and some town beers or wahtever it is that townies do. I'm new at this not being red (or retardedly worse than everyone else) thing. Who are your biggest scum reads right now and why. Can you say “town” enough times? It’s clear here that you feel your first large-content post has gained you trust and “townie-points” with others here. You make a power play here when you introduce the idea of the “town line.” It is certainly good for us clear each other from suspicion, and have those we can trust. But he’s just basically gone from in the background to into the forefront in a very short period of time. What motivated the change of pace? I understand this is the weekend and he has been very busy and tired during the week. Okay. But from this post it looks to me like he is trying to wedge himself into a position as a “town leader” while there’s still time for him this weekend.
First, why I don’t feel anyone trying to establish themselves as a “town leader” is a good thing. It encourages town to follow a few prevailing cases like sheep. That puts the town into the position of hoping that their leaders aren’t mafia. If they are then mafia wins. Prox has already made such a play as mafia in the past, and I see no reason he couldn’t be trying to do the same thing here. What town really needs to have a shot at this is a very vocal populace producing a variety of different opinions and arguments based off their own observations and best reads. Pushing for a town leadership this openly and abruptly simply isn’t pro-town.
Even if he were of the belief that an established town leadership is a good thing, how is it he would think as a townie that it is a good idea for him to step forward as a leader when with his “limited time” he can’t put in the time needed to present arguments (except maybe on weekends)? It just doesn’t make sense to me. Something doesn’t add up here.
I have spent way too long typing this up. I look forward to hearing Prox’s response. His sudden change of behavior, along with some of the things he’s had to say, leaves him as my top suspect. I might come back to check up on this thread yet tonight, but I’m not typing any more involved posts like this today… sorry. That being said, you can look forward to more involved posts like this as we progress through this game .
I know it is obscenely long don't worry. It is easy to simplify. There are three points.
1 the use of 'a' instead of 'my'
2 I told him not to do something that is actually against the rules
3 my overuse of the word town
and
4 OMGUSOMGUSOMGUS
seriously that is the entirety of his case against me. The only point which might be valid is the third but it was a joke (one I now regret obviously) since saying I was pro-town without being pro-town was how Kier had caught me in XIX. I honestly thought the use of town beers and a town line instead of town circle made it really obvious it was a joke. I should have known there were secret Romanians on TL Mafia.
So karma: out of those three points one is pants-on-head, one is semantics and one is me being dumb enough to joke around. Where is this case you don't think I can respond to. You have talked about my posting habits as a possible fourth point but I can't do anything about that. I'm here while I am home and awake and that will continue until town wins or I am lynched/nk'd
He follows all of this up with a decent case against the same lurker he wanted to lynch d1. Cases against semi-lurkers are the easiest to make as mafia and tunneling one player gives you an easy out when you are wrong about anything else. This play continues to read as scum to me and, therefore,
## Vote: Karma
|
On July 31 2012 18:07 DarthPunk wrote:
Promethelax - Have you read through my suspicions of you? do you have any response?
I am going to the movies to see the new batman movie, i'll return in a few hours.
I will go read it now and respond. Batman movie is awesome the end is dumb.
|
I wrote down two suspicious names in notepad about 24 hours ago, one of which was Zorkmid.
Ange777 just brought this up, and I'm inclined to agree with it:
On July 31 2012 04:47 Zorkmid wrote:
I don't have any strong scum reads at this point at all, and the whole Golbat thing leaves me gun shy to start pushing up on another active poster. Unless I reach some epiphany soon, or am convinced by someones case, my next vote will likely fall upon a lurker.
@Zorkmid, make the best case you can and post it. It's okay to be wrong, that's part of the game. Remember, you only know two things, your role and that Golbat was vig (and any subsequent flips on death). The rest is speculation and analysis, which is what each of us is trying to do. Weigh your case against the ones of others and make your choice. Get yourself out of the active lurker category and show us you're a part of the town.
Ironically enough, the other name was Ange777. And they're scrutinizing eachother. Might be something to look at here. At least for now, neither is more suspicious to me than Shady Sands. Very soon, I'm probably going to state my vote. The feeling I have is that Zorkmid would be a better candidate (of the two) based on not bringing anything new to the table.
Can't remember why I was looking at Ange777. Might have been because Ange777 was shutting down policy talk while talking up inactivity.
@Ange777: What do you make of alan133? Seems like two distinct writing styles are emergent in his last few posts.
|
On July 31 2012 18:41 Obvious.660 wrote:
Can't remember why I was looking at Ange777. Might have been because Ange777 was shutting down policy talk while talking up inactivity.
@Ange777: What do you make of alan133? Seems like two distinct writing styles are emergent in his last few posts.
Where have I been talking up inactivity?
I'll have to go through alan's filter again before I can answer.
|
@DarthPunk
My day two play is how I play the game when I have enough time. I'm glad you found my day one helpful and I'll try to replicate the strength of the cases I built but you'll note that d1 I had my SS case and since that point I have made others which are at least as strong (in my eyes stronger).
I honestly don't feel that I am jumping up and down saying “oooh me I'm green! I'm green!” I am explaining the reasons for my play and my actions. As I said there are three goals that I have as a townie.
We as town do win through living and having more obvious townies is a huge asset that is why Mason is an incredibly strong role.
I'm going to stop harping on about my work and real life, when I'm here I am here and will be posting in a way that helps town you will have to decide for yourself if there is a scum agenda or a town one in my posts.
As long as you promise to read over everything I say with no confirmation bias I welcome your FoS. Keep an eye on me and my actions should prove my alignment to you.
I have an explanation for the buddying thing that you are unhappy with that I will reveal before the end of the night cycle. It has a good motivation and I promise town that I will explain it before the end of n2.
|
On July 31 2012 18:29 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 18:26 Obvious.660 wrote:On July 29 2012 04:35 DarthPunk wrote:
With that being said at the moment we are headed towards a no lynch which I am certainly not in favour of. I am willing to alter my vote to ensure this does not happen. Hopefully this gets resolved shortly as I would love to get some sleep. The correction would read: On July 30 2012 18:57 Obvious.660 wrote:
DarthPunk also explained that he would be willing to change his vote from Mordanis to Golbat to avoid a mislynchNO LYNCH 'mislynch' replaced by 'no lynch', do you still take issue with the intent here? Yes. please read above post.
Let me see if I'm following you.
You want me to clarify that you would have voted for anyone,
not just specifically Golbat, but anyone,
if it was coming close to crunch time with no clear successful lynch in sight,
in order to obtain a lynch (also known as avoiding a no-lynch),
no matter who it was?
Is that it?
If this doesn't answer it, I'm just going to have to ask someone else: Anyone who is not DarthPunk please tell me what he's talking about?
You seem really worried about being associated with the Golbat case, btw.
|
On July 31 2012 18:45 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 18:41 Obvious.660 wrote:
Can't remember why I was looking at Ange777. Might have been because Ange777 was shutting down policy talk while talking up inactivity.
@Ange777: What do you make of alan133? Seems like two distinct writing styles are emergent in his last few posts.
Where have I been talking up inactivity? I'll have to go through alan's filter again before I can answer.
You mentioned me, aRyuu, and Medic in the post. It was probably just a point of information, but it was (as it was so well put in the thread) bum fuck o'clock in the morning. Just gave myself something to look at today. You're pretty much a near-null read to me right now, FWIW. Post link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=15622333
|
+ Show Spoiler +Just to be clear, talking up means to promote something right? Or did you mean that I myself was inactive?
|
Oh, I'm sorry. It's a colloqualism I use to mean "bring it up". Apologies.
|
I'm really confused by Promethelax's play. He just admonished me for fluff posts. His entire first page of his filter is fluff. He comments on my opening case being really bad, regardless of my alignment. Look at his first FOS: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 18:55 Promethelax wrote:I'd like to bring some attention to Zorkmid: He starts with policy talk, as we all did. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote:
Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Follows it up with an immediate about face when he learns about the no-lynch option Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:46 Zorkmid wrote:
Well in that case, I don't feel as strongly about lynching all liars and inactives. He leaves hoping for more from others Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 06:48 Zorkmid wrote:
I'll have to think about that for a little while, hopefully while I'm gone we'll hear more from the others! and after that comes back with a question and than dissapears Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 08:15 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 08:12 Shady Sands wrote:
From a logic standpoint, it makes sense to always have a lynch target each day, because voting patterns, voting times, and the order in which players vote are some of the most important clues that the town can use.
For example, if the target turns out to be green or blue, then we can backtrack and start seeing who started the bandwagoning and go from there. If the target turns out to be red, we can see who did the last minute voting or tried to swing the balance away from them, and add those to the list.
But if we simply go for a no-lynch, there's no pressure on the scum to actually put their money where their mouth is, so to speak. This makes perfect sense to me, so how we determine who to target initially? That was over ten hours ago, I don't get it. Where did you go Zork? I don't like his play so far and, thus, a FoS is declared. On July 27 2012 07:18 Promethelax wrote:
Okay Ghost, will do. On July 27 2012 07:26 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:19 aRyuujin wrote:On July 27 2012 07:04 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:58 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:53 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:48 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 06:45 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:43 Zorkmid wrote:
I'm not saying that the "best town play" isn't to lynch scum, I'm just saying that in the absence of that inactivity and liars are the next logical targets.
Warning: Nub question::::We HAVE to lynch someone each day, right? No, we do not. We can no-lynch by making sure that no single candidate has a majority on them. Correct. We can engineer a no-lynch, but everyone HAS to vote. If we are able to ##Vote No-Lynch is up to the hosts discretion, but in a previous game with ghost as the host, we weren't able to, so to no-lynch we had to spread our votes out. I've only seen that as a possibility in a plurality lynch while we are playing a majority lynch. Different mechanics. So Keir: any thoughts yet? Shall we lynch Obvious for being obviously scum? and keep the pattern going, shall we attack Zork for being unable to answer my vague questions or try to lynch one of the two of us for being too active? All of the above. Lynch EVERYTHING! Nah, I just hope more people show up so we can get the ball rolling. Well while we're waiting let's breadcrumb secrets to each other. Victory, I'm sure, will be ours if we strive for it. Ghost must be being really nice to us because I already have a town read on all the players in this game, he must want us all to live happily ever after and not have to kill each other. Okay, so that isn't actually true but I hope a host does that eventually just to be a dick. its quite clear that he is breadcrumbing that his role is that of a dick You win for my favourite response ever. If you are ever in my neck of the woods hit me up and I'll buy you a drink just for that. On July 27 2012 07:37 Promethelax wrote:Unrelated to the discussion so far after reading Shady Sands' Op here http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=355847 I expect awesome posts from him/her. Slim Shady: you've got some awesome to live up to. Since we haven't been productive so far I would like us to turn our attention to pressure: I for one am concerned that MrMedic may not be a medic and is lying about his role in his name. Okay, what I'm actually concerned about is that all he posted is that he is here. I want more. On July 27 2012 07:38 Promethelax wrote:
EBWOP: I'm also concerned that his post was edited. Watch yourself my man or Ghost will smite you with his mighty powers. On July 27 2012 08:27 Promethelax wrote:
My girlfriend got home so I don't have time to read one last time before going to work. I'll see you in 10-12 hours. Good luck town. On July 27 2012 21:49 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 20:04 Ange777 wrote:Obvious
MrMedic
aRyuujin
ZorkAll have posted next to nothing of content. On to Shady: His filter is a lot of policy talking and then the case against Mordanis. I am unsure about him. On July 27 2012 13:29 Shady Sands wrote:
Mordanis' response pretty much sealed the deal for me. I think it is clear that Mordanis is a red. Let's parse through his response.
When you look at all that, and the weak logic against Keir, then what you see is the following pattern:
Mordanis first claims that Keir is the likeliest candidate for lynching because he a likely candidate to be red. Then he backs off and claims that Keir could go red or green. Then he argues that we should lynch controversial candidates first. The point is, lynching controversial candidates would be fine, if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. This totally smacks of a Red finding out his original tactic for generating a bandwagon has failed, acknowledging that he is the only one arguing for a lynch, and then stating that because he is the only one arguing for a lynch, the person is "controversial" and should be lynched.
The thing is, if Mordanis was convinced of the controversy of Keir's play than Mordanis' play is not scummy. I don't like Shady's case. I have to head out now. I'll try give a better read on Shady when I come back. Alright, I'll look into their filters and see if anything is popping there. What I found, and still find weird about shady is this: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 08:38 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 07:43 Mordanis wrote:Rather than sitting in a circle and deciding whom to lynch based on who sing "Kum ba yah, My Lord" the most off key (what kind of villainous scum would do such a thing?), I think its time to begin the scumhunt. Anyways, I apologize in advance if this seems somewhat rushed. I want to get the hunt going as early as possible, and I feel we've wasted the first hour and a half. So without further ado, here comes (hopefully) the first case of the game: Mordanis's's case on KeirathiK (for some reason your name is really hard for me to type) began this game by virtually claiming Town RB. + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 05:41 Keirathi wrote:
First things first:
If we have a town roleblocker, I think its best not to use your role early. You generally have as much chance of hurting a teamate as you do a scum. I'm not saying to NEVER use it, but think carefully and only use it if you are reasonably sure that you are blocking a scum.
Some policy discussion:
Lynch All Liars - I'm of the opinion that there are very, very few cases where lying as a townie is beneficial to town. With that said, there ARE cases where it is a realistic option, so I think blanket policy lynching is a fairly bad thing. Case-by-case basis.
Lynch All Lurkers - As much as lurking hurts town, I feel like at least in newbie games, lurking is almost guaranteed. I encourage everyone to try as hard as they can to avoid lurking sot hat we won't have to discuss this later. Lurking as a townie hurts town. Please don't do it. Again, case-by-case basis.
Are all roleblocks notified, or only people with power roles?
I've seen games where it works both ways, so best to clarify early.
. Now this may have been a case of extreme newbiness, which would be understandable, but Mr. K has played in at least 2 other games, so I believe he knew how this post would be interpreted. This brings up 3 possibilities: 1: Mr. K is VT, and he is trying to "take one for the team". He knows that the scum will see this post and read him blue, and he'll die tonight instead of a real blue. If this were to happen, he'd have helped town. If he gets lynched today, it'll be bad for town, but it will be deal-with-able. 2: Mr. K is actually townie RB. Perhaps he is trying to make his "claim" so obvious the scum will think option 1 is happening. Trying to hide out in the open. If he is killed during the night, we're in pretty bad shape. But if this option is the case and he's lynched today, we're in even worse shape, because he won't have used his power even once. That said, he implied that he wouldn't want to use it N1 anyway, so the options are virtually the same. 3: Mr. K is scum, and is trying to use this as means to get himself out of trouble. If he ever gets some heat brought to him, he just says "Dude, I basically claimed town RB, I don't think its a good idea to lynch me" The claim also puts pressure on any real blues to claim, and when everyone claims, a claim isn't worth anything. Basically, this post seems mildly non-protown, and it gives him a way to defend himself. Destabilizing town and giving yourself an extra cycle seems very scummy to me. If we lynch him today, we're off to a great start. And if this option is the case, scum aren't killing him tonight. Of these three, option 2 seems by far the least probable. So that being said, I think that right now Keirathi is the best candidate for lynching. Still, its pretty early so I don't think it would be wise in any way to commit right now. Last thing: I have to go to work now, and I'll be back in probably 5 hours (rakin in the cash makin pizza), just FYI. I'm not sure how Keir telling RB not to use their powers equals Keir roleclaiming as RB. Of course Day 1 roleclaiming is suspicious but this post doesn't fit the bill. But if a clear consensus emerges that he's suspicious, I'd volunteer myself to watch his posting behavior. That said, I do think Day 1 scumhunting could work--but only after everyone (or nearly everyone) has posted. I'm going to go down the list of posters now and do a quick tally. Ange777 - No posts yet Keirathi - Six posts Promethelax - More than 10 posts alan133 - 1 "GLHF" post Mordanis - Three posts Obvious.660 - 2 posts MrMedic - 1 post, edited aRyuujin - 2 posts, both haiku DarthPunk - No posts yet goodkarma - No posts yet Golbat - No posts yet Shady Sands - 2 posts so far Zorkmid - 5 posts Players in order of activity: Promethelax Keirathi Zorkmid Mordanis Obvious.660 aRyuujin Shady Sands alan133 MrMedic -- Lurkers -- Ange777 Darthpunk goodkarma Golbat Once the remaining few lurkers have posted, then we can start scumhunting. The next task is to read through past mafia games and find those with successful Day 1 scumhunts--and see what common lessons can be drawn from them. I'm going to compile a list of those right now. Where he puts a lot of bull shit into the thread and nothing real. He literally used post counts to increase the size of his filter. the other thing in here I want to focus on is his lets wait attitude. for example: from the above post and others He also says that Show nested quote +Day 1 scumhunting actually has a lower success rate than a random day 1 lynch. If the lynches had been truly random, then maybe 20-30% of the games should have had day 1 lynches turn up red, but none of them did. both of these things push town away from hunting for scum, attempting to prevent scum hunting is a huge scum trait. On top of this he misrepresents the facts in newbie 21 (I think) Hopeless1der was lynched d1 as scum so scum hunting has shown to be effective recently. He also replys to my advice by saying Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 09:11 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 06:41 Promethelax wrote:On July 27 2012 06:29 Zorkmid wrote:On July 27 2012 05:52 Promethelax wrote:
Hello all and welcome to Newbie 22! I'm excited to finally be in this game.
I have, much to my delight, rolled town for the first time in a normal mini. I hope to be able to prove to you that I am as innocent as most of you and much more innocent than our scum friends lead by Marv who, shockingly, rolled scum for the millionth time.
On policy: I don't like policy lynches. I feel that town can do better than that and we should lynch scum not liars or lurkers. It is always possible to build cases and to try to lynch scum instead of basing our attacks on a black and white policy.
Keir is right about the town RB though, you should hold your power until d2 at least since blocking a blue role can throw us off immensely. Do not RB until you are sure that someone is scum! If you have a perfect read d1 go ahead but I doubt you do.
Also Keir: I promise to spell your name right this time.
aRyuujin: since you are here would you be kind enough to bless us with one of your Haiku to start some discussion, no need to be silent just because you feel there is nothing to talk about. About the bolded part, I think that early on in a game, there really isn't that much to go on in order to choose who to vote for. I also think that which an inactive player isn't necessarily scum, they aren't very helpful to town. Same goes for liars. That's my two cents. Day 1 is like any other day, we don't have all the information we want to have but we should use what information we do have to lynch a guy who looks scummy. Not a guy who looks like bad town. Marv said it best in the QT for I can't believe its not themed mini mafia: "best town play is to lynch scum" post 101 if you are curious. It was in reply to something dumb I said. While I'm not saying we will hit scum without fail we should try to. We can eliminate shitty players later with Vigi shots or scum will shoot them. A lurky scum team will have no ability to control where we look, if me and my boys had lurked in XIX we would have been crushed in LYLO but because 2/3 of us were active we managed a perfect victory despite Keirathi replacing in and figuring out all three of us at just the wrong time. aR: you make me happy with your Haiku Obvious: your limerick is excellent as well There are a couple points here that are bad advice: 1) Scum will not shoot bad town players. It just makes no sense 2) Do not, I repeat, do not, waste vigi shots on bad town players. Indeed, vigi shots are the single most critical resource the town has. scum will blue snipe, they will kill players who won't vote for the right mislynch or who are tunneling scum. There are a million reasons for scum to shoot a bad town player so his first point is wrong and his second point again pushes us away from scum hunting since he insists that vigi shots are our most powerful tool. No they aren't. We are the most powerful town asset and scum hunting is the most powerful town tool. His next post tells us to wait for more people to post until we make cases and the one after that is a case... Show nested quote +I'd say he's our best option for a day 1 lynch at this point, but to be extra sure, we should wait until Ange777 has had a chance to post as well, and Mordanis gets back from making pizzas and has had a chance to defend himself.
Even if he flips green (which is likely, let's not get our hopes up here), his lynch will tell us a lot about who we should go after next, since people seem to have had strong reactions to both his proposal to go after Keir, his own lynching, and his arguments against policy lynching. Sands tells us that we should still hold off even though this guy is the best lynch target. He also tells us that he will likely flip green based on (I assume) the statistics which seems, to me, to be a way to distance himself from a Mord town flip. What originally felt scummy to me in Sands' filter was this post where he says: Show nested quote +The reason I think it's likely he'll flip green right now is because we haven't been able to see his response to these accusations. If he responds in the way in which I think he will (or chooses not to respond at all) then I think he's a clear red. Re-read that. Do yourself a favour and beat your face against a hard surface. He think that Mord will flip green unless he replys in the way that he (Sands) expects him to in which case he is red...alrighty than. I also hate this post: Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 21:22 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 20:33 Shady Sands wrote:On July 27 2012 15:36 Mordanis wrote:... *Sigh* I'll begin by saying this: If the people jumping on my bandwagon 1/6th of the way through the first day are town, they are really doing a good job of muddling up the conversation. Look through the thread so far, and see that the only discussion before I posted my case was policy, and that very lenient. There was a lot of "Oop, don't want to attract attention, guess I'll say that we shouldn't policy lynch any lurkers". I admit that I rushed my two main posts, and they may have been suboptimal, but compare that to the entire rest of the populace. We've managed 2 cases so far, and I was one of them. The other is a direct response to mine. I really don't understand why the people who are tunnelling me are doing so: attacking the only person who has posted anything of substance (that isn't within the same bandwagon as you) seems anti-discussion. So while I certainly made a mistake in talking too much about Keir and potential blue roles, the biggest reason that I seem to be "in danger" is that I've been willing to say what I believe. Regardless, I see the bandwagon as being very interesting. There are 3 people who have had an overwhelming share in the activity against me. DarthPunk: He seems to have a hard time with my line of thought. I apologize, my last game ended with me and another player (Release <3) in a duel that had a lot secrecy and enigmatic reasoning. I came to this game expecting the same. If you take people at the face value of their words (In which case, I'm town so don't lynch me :D), then you tend to miss a lot of good reads. The way to catch scum is not to find the first invalid argument, but rather to find the players who are playing in an anti-town way. This includes delaying to reduce the amount of analysis, making the atmosphere bad for town, and muddling with plans. By posting my case on the first thing that I saw, I went in the direction of an atmosphere that welcomes content posting, started the scumhunt before it would have started had I not posted, and laid a fairly straightforward path for the town without explicitly discussing policy. We lynch the player with the scummiest play. So while my read may not have been perfect, my post should have helped town. On the other hand, creating a mass bandwagon on the one person who has posted anything of substance (besides the counter substance) seems to accomplish the goals of scum. Still, he seems more to have an issue following my logic than to be following a plan, as well as being the first to place suspicion on me. I give him a solid "mEh" on the scum-scale Shady: The most brazen of my accusers. Doesn't seem to be following the fine points of the game very closely. Still doesn't appear to get that the day cycle is 48 hours and not 12. Has a great time posting out perceived errors in my logic and then votes for me on said perceptions, without seeming to notice that one of his main points + Show Spoiler +if it were not for the fact that Mordanis is the only one stirring up controversy about Keir. makes no sense. Why would scum draw attention to himself on a case this early? Why especially would the scum stick to his guns rather than move on to greener pastures? Seems like really dumb play for scum, although perhaps he thinks I am that dumb. I am pretty sure I'm more intelligent than a garbage can though... Anyways, despite my annoyance with him, his play seems more uniformed than scummy. So to you Shady I say: Read through the OP again, and preferably some of the guides. Your play so far has been far from inspiring. And compared to this group, that's saying something. Golbat: The entire time so far he seems to have been itching to get on my bandwagon. His first post with more than 1 line says: + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 09:15 Golbat wrote:
Howdy guys! This will be my first game of mafia ever that wasn't an sc2 UMS, and those I could never quite get the hang of (mostly due to nobody else having a clue what was going on either). Hopefully, I'll be able to make more sense of the game in a format like this.
As far as the game goes, Mordanis' post about Keir's post where he was "virtually claiming town RB" seems to be a pretty scummy thing to do. It didn't seem to me to be a secret claim of any sort, just a rules clarification. Even if it was a super-secret claim that he could use later, I wouldn't believe him if that was the only evidence he had.
From what I've read elsewhere, that type of posting is classic scum behavior. Look like you're helping the town and trying to hunt scum, when in reality you're just blowing a townie's mistakes clear out of proportion to sow confusion and doubt.
Not everyone has posted, so I don't yet want to commit to a vote, but I've got my eye on you Mordanis. First he makes an excuse for potential scumslips (First time in a non UMS, take it easy on me), and then proceeds to quietly second the position of DarthPunk. He seems to be trying to avoid attention while being able to make excuses later on, with the added bonus of being able to hop onto a bandwagon on me without much thought from other players. His second post + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 11:31 Golbat wrote:
I think that lynching a lurker day one is only a good idea if we have no reads on people who might be scum. As far as that goes for me, I already have an idea of who might be scum, so I won't get behind lynching a lurker today.
Also, there's not so many people playing that we can afford to kill people off just because they aren't contributing enough. I mean, if you don't post at least once per day, you get modkilled anyways, so it's not lurkers we should watch out for, it's multiple contentless posts (i'm looking at you MrMedic).
is more of the same: he is trying to come off as pro-town without having to commit to anything as of yet. Particularly of importance is the phrase "I already have an idea of who might be scum". Almost brilliant, as it gives him the ability to jump on any bandwagon that forms. He could just say "Yep, just as I thought" and hop right on. Sure, it works better if the bandwagon was me, but if it ended on anyone else no one could say that he had flip-flopped. Finally, he posts this + Show Spoiler +On July 27 2012 13:36 Golbat wrote:
I mean honestly, it's gone on long enough.
##Vote Mordanis
If you're red, try to be less obvious next time.
If you're green, try to be less scummy next time.
I certainly hope you're not a blue. Awesome, he jumps on the bandwagon in 2nd/3rd position, early enough that he seems to be "leading", but late enough that he can avoid later suspicion by saying "Shady was in front of me!". He even tries to end the discussion by agreeing that the case on me is open and shut. Vague Pro-town comments + early excuse + bandwagon-ing + anti-discussion = quadruple scummy. So for right now at least: ##Vote: Golbat+ Show Spoiler [nonsense about Keir] +I'm really getting bored with the stuff about this. Read my second post about his "claim" + Show Spoiler [spoilered for you convenience] +On July 27 2012 12:44 Mordanis wrote:Soo apparently everyone has decided that scumhunting is a bad idea D1? The point of this game is to analyze things. Context does matter, but some of the things that have been suggested so far are sort of ridiculous. If someone went to bed right before the game began and had to go straight to work, and maybe forgets they could easily go almost a full 24 hours before posting. It doesn't make them scum, it just makes them busy. On the other hand, if you delay posting content until other people post content, then the scum hunt is never going to get going. I admit, my case again Keir was somewhat rushed, but if we don't start posting analysis, we lose any information that could have been gained, and basically start fresh D2, just down 1 or 2 townies (rando-lynch vs. no-lynch). Another thing: Mislynching D1 is sort of to be expected. Unless the scum choose to bus one of their own, the scum have allies and are therefore less likely to be lynched. You have to use the information that is gained from discussion to figure out who is scum most of the time. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +The most useless kind of lynch is a last minute switch that is really easy and safe to hop on the bandwagon for. If there's a highly polarized lynch, the dead information + voting lists can provide a lot, even if the people accused are all innocent (then you can see who's manipulating just out of site).
In other words, if we have a constructive D1 but mislynch, town is in much better position than if a random lynch happens to hit scum. Anyways, apparently people want me to respond to the FOS put on me. Darth seems to have misunderstood me. The 3 situations I posed were the 3 possible roles that Keir could be. I ran through what the outcome would be for each hypothetical. I would think it was obvious that I didn't believe that Keir was simultaneously red, green, and blue, but ... Aside from what appear to be a misunderstanding, there doesn't seem to be anything else. The reason that I think that Keir isn't blue is because blues tend to be somewhat lurky but do contribute to the scumhunt.Keir has been fairly active, though no scum-hunting (yet!), but brought attention to himself by trying to seem like a blue. From Ver's Town Guide: Show nested quote +To keep this simple and save time, let's look at some heuristics to find potential targets, then go through their post history to get the best ones. Here are some common heuristics I use of blue indicators:
-Tries to contribute but doesn't stick their neck out
-Shows fear/wants to instinctively hide
-Drastically lower post quantity compared to games when they are green but still tries to contribute.
-Focuses most of their posts on blue roles or ignores them entirely.
-To figure out which role specifically, they will focus unnatural amounts of attention on that role, know the rules for that role thoroughly, or ignore it entirely while mentioning other blue roles. Figuring out the specific is difficult to ascertain and not always applicable, but these heuristics will hold up more often than not. Look at the post I indicated in my case, it fits those last two heuristics to a tee, but the other two are off(policy is sort of a gray-zone, sort of pro-town and sort of "safe play" but everyone does it + Show Spoiler +). That's why I feel Keir isn't blue, because he seems to be trying to seem blue but some of his actions are the opposite. And there was the public question: when I was vigi, I asked several questions about my role, but to try to hide my role I never posted them publically, I PMd them. His play screams to me a somewhat experienced player trying to fake blue. I hate doing this, but I feel there are some points that people should not miss. TLDR:Scumhunt should begin the moment content is posted, and Keir is almost certainly green or red. , and find for me one place where I explicitly say that we should lynch Keir. All I said was that he isn't blue. Which leaves the two possibilities of him being scum or VT, which everyone seemed to interpret as pushing for a lynch. I over committed to defending what I still believe to be a good read for being 2 pages in, but I didn't try to start a bandwagon on him. If you really want to make a big deal out of a mistake and end the discussion before the day cycle is 1/4 of the way done, by all means just vote for me and agree that its obvious. If you don't feel that way, do your own analysis and point fingers. Town doesn't win by singing Kum Ba Yah, My Lord. I think this is pretty important to parse through, because it makes me want to refrain from lynching Mordanis until day 2 or 3. I'm going to state that I share Mordanis' and Keir's concerns that Golbat may be scum. This is especially true if Mordanis flips green or blue--then Golbat is very clearly red, and vice versa. That being said, however, I'm still pretty suspicious of Mordanis' desire to start scumhunting an hour and a half into the game, when only half of the players had even posted. This was exacerbated by the fact that his case against Keir was extremely poor, almost intentionally so--as if Mordanis wanted more heat than light to be shed on the situation. One of the main things I'd like to point out here is that scum do not necessarily have to play quietly. It's easier for the scum to play that way, but playing loudly is also a valid scum tactic for sowing discord and division within the town--which is what I thought Mord's post was trying to do. Now that the Keir case is closed, however, and Mord+Keir have both identified Golbat's behavior as pretty odd in and of itself, then I think it would be worthwhile to take a look at Golbat. (I'm still a suspicious of Mord, but mainly because his behavior has created so much uncertainty as to what he really could be--and Golbat can clear up a lot of that.) Besides being the first one to "formally" vote for Mordanis, Golbat was also the first one to accuse Mord of faulty analysis. Granted, Golbat's claims were valid--but his more recent posts have made me pretty suspicious. First, let's ignore the list for a bit--we'll circle back to it, but one general thing to note about Golbat's posting: he seems to spend more time trying to make himself look like a townie than trying to figure out who is scum. This is the kicker that shifted my focus from Mord to him. Look at this train of posts below: + Show Spoiler [Golbat's posts since the "…] +On July 27 2012 16:21 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:14 Keirathi wrote:On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Keir He hasn't even called out his accuser as being scummy at all.
On July 27 2012 16:07 Golbat wrote:
Mord I really like the OMGUS! vote though, <3.
So you call Mord out for OMGUS'ing you, but want me to OMGUS him? That's not what I said. I said that you didn't call him out at all, not that you didn't vote for him. I wouldn't expect you to vote for someone just because they voted for you. But saying "hey bro, cool your jets" at least would have been something. Until page 12 I'm pretty sure you didn't even respond to his accusations, but I might have missed a post. What Mord did was go "Oh so you're gonna vote for me? WELL I'M GONNA VOTE FOR YOU, TAKE THAT! Completely different. And then this post: On July 27 2012 16:49 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 16:26 Keirathi wrote:
@Goldbat: I responded to both of his posts regarding me with pretty strong dismissals for being a bad case. My apologies. I completely forgot about those two posts. Maybe i'm being too hasty with my accusing Mord of being scum from one bad read early in the game. It just seems really fishy that he stuck with it for so long. For the time being mord, I'm not convinced you're not scum, but i'm being convinced less and less that you are the more I think about it. So for the time being, ##unvoteI just really want to win my first game, and I want to do it while playing well, which is what got me excited to get a slam-dunk mafia kill on day one. I know for a fact that i'm not scum, and that's all I really know at this point. Right now, besides Mord, I think that our best bet is to see who isn't contributing anything to the discusssion and then get rid of them. I admit that all of my reads so far could be wrong 100%. However, i don't think posting my day1 reads about all of the people is the same thing as making a town list, because I didn't even give an opinion on half of the people. I could also do without your "oh look at how good I am, you guys are bad" attitude. This is a newbie game, and calling people bad accomplishes nothing except potentially driving people away. P.S. I know I said "i'm not one to throw votes around yadda yadda yadda, but + Show Spoiler +That was me trying to be all internet tough . I'll try to tone down my accusatory-ness, but that's just me being new to the game. And this: On July 27 2012 18:51 Golbat wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 18:42 alan133 wrote:
I have read and re-read the filters but couldn't find anything other than Mordanis' "meh" case on Kei and subsequent cases against Mordanis for that.
I was kinda thrown off when Golbat decides to unvote Mordanis because he started off having high confidence that he is scum. His "I am a newbie post" also contributes to my suspicions on him. I quickly dismissed them because I still have my FOS on Mordanis and he did a case on Golbat too.
Now that Ange777 has mentioned it, I would like to ask Golbat, what makes you think that Mordanis is not scum anymore? To me, his only "townie points" is that he is the first player who built a case, but that's about it. Is there some "obvious" reason that I missed? Every time I re-read Mordanis's posts I am more convinced that he is scum. The reason I backed off of Mord is because I felt like I may have been pushing too strongly against him based on his first bad read. I didn't want to appear to be scum myself, so I backed off for the moment. I still have a sneaking suspicion about him that he may be mafia, but I didn't want to lynch myself by pushing too hard on a bad read. I feel like i've been talking in circles around mord, "He's scum, no he's town, no he might be scum, no he's probably town", so I feel like I need to take a definite stance on the matter, and that is ##FoS MordanisIt's not the flat-out vote that it was before, but I still don't trust you. I've heard several times to trust my reads, and so this is my position. We'll see what happens between now and lynch time. + Show Spoiler +but for real now, I need to step away from the thread for a few hours And this: On July 27 2012 18:44 Golbat wrote:
I can understand why you would read my actions so far in the game as scum, but they're honestly just the actions of a bad player who thought he had a dead on scum read and was most likely very, very wrong. From now on i'll be more careful with who I vote for, because while I DID indeed redact my vote, I really really dislike when that happens on the whole. I got a little carried away and luckily it happened this early on and not in a situation where I might have cause a loss for town.
Basically, I'm NOT scum, and anything scummy I have said or done so far can be explained by my inexperience.
After reading Prom's post (especially the bit regarding self-imposed posting limits), I feel like it's time for me to take a break, especially after spewing so much bullshit and bad play all over the thread. See you in about 6-12 hours. As soon as people start pressuring him, Golbat says that he's not scum in 4 different ways. He emphasizes his newbieness, he says he's just eager to win, then he self-consciously makes a post to make himself not seem like a flip-flopper. Then, when he finally realizes he's digging himself into a hole, he decides to pull the Ostrich maneuver and stick his head into said hole for 6-12 hours. Undoubtedly, if he is red, he is now sending a clear signal to his buddies to bail him out and hopefully shift the discussion to someone else by the time he is out of said hole. Next post will be about Golbat's "list post". EBWOP: Just realized I forgot to slot in why Mord's post makes me want to hold off to Day2/3--Mord highlights "drawing attention to himself" and a willingness to stand up for his beliefs as keystones of his in-game habits. The thing with this playstyle is that playing as a "noisy scum" is very hard to keep up over 2 or 3 in-game days, because in a game as small as this, the analysis will very quickly start to shift in the right direction and noisy attempts to derail become more and more risky as the posts pile on--inevitably a fairly major scumslip will be made. By committing publicly to this sort of strategy, we can judge Mord the following way: if Mord continues to play loud and does not get quiet over the next few days, then Mord will either burn out quickly and scumslip or prove that he is not scum. If Mord quiets down after Day 1, then his above post basically consigns him to becoming an easy lynch-- especially if Golbat flips blue/green. the bolded part at the end is essentially saying that we should lynch Golbat and if he is green lynch Mord. That seems to be setting us up for two mislynches and, if Sands ever flips red these two are pretty much confirmed town. So based on Sands' play I think that he is scum. He has earned my FoS and as of this moment he would be my vote if nothing changed between now and lynch. I'll be keeping my eye on him because, as he said, Show nested quote +By committing publicly to this sort of strategy, we can judge Mord the following way: if Mord continues to play loud and does not get quiet over the next few days, then Mord will either burn out quickly and scumslip or prove that he is not scum. If Mord quiets down after Day 1, then his above post basically consigns him to becoming an easy lynch just replace Mord with Sands and you see the truth of the statement. He has to keep going and, as Keir well knows, loud scum are easy to find.
The other thing that confuses me is the petulance with which Promethelax is trying to become the "town mayor". Here are a few examples: + Show Spoiler +On July 31 2012 17:33 Promethelax wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2012 17:29 Mordanis wrote:On July 31 2012 17:16 DarthPunk wrote:On July 31 2012 17:14 Mordanis wrote:
Just for clarity, is there definitely 3 scum or is the number ambiguous? Same for other roles, i.e. could there be multiple vigis or medics etc.? This has been answered previously http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=C9++ we are loosely based on this setup. so multiple blue roles and no confirmed number of reds or blues. C9++ also allows for SK, which is why I wanted to make sure this is indeed the case. How loose is loosely? If you have set up questions ask the host otherwise you are just wasting thread space and padding your filter while adding nothing to the thread. On July 30 2012 18:14 Promethelax wrote:
Sorry I'm on my way to bed and I figured I would quickly reply to Karma before falling asleep. I am sure I'll miss some points but the basic one of why is my play so different now than it was is that I work Tuesday-Saturday. I play better on my days off.
As to the town leader thing: I just spent like ten minutes looking for the quote but couldn't find it. I think it was Marv who said (and I'm paraphrasing) "town needs two things, a good annalist and a good leader; they don't have to be the same person they just both have to exist" I'm not saying I should be a town leader or a town analyst, I am saying that town is following my analysis and that I am taking things said by players whom I greatly respect and trying to forge my town play around that. If the two things that town needs are a good leader and someone with good analysis I will try to provide both.
I think you and I don't see eye to eye on what a town leader is. I'm not saying we should elect a mayor, I'm saying having someone who is clearly pro-town trying to create a pro-town environment is a necessity for town. By town leader I mean someone who is creating an environment where town flourishes even if the person creating that environment has their head up their ass on every single one of their reads.
Essentially, from what I've read about XIX Promethelax kind of mauled town by getting into the "town circle", and controlling the game from there. I don't think a smart person could try the same strategy against people its already been used on and expect to win again. For that reason, Promethelax's inconsistent/illogical/ seems to be a mild indicator of scumminess. Also, being relatively inactive during one day reduces the amount of stuff any player needs to defend himself later.
Edit before having to double post (EBHTDP)
I am still confused by large parts of his play. For instance the part about lynching semi-lurkers seems sort of like what he's doing. GK hasn't posted nearly as many times as Prom himself, myself, Keir, Ange, Obvious, or Shady. 6 players of 12 left have 3 or more pages in their filter, the other 6 have 2. GK has spent a lot of his time defending himself, so if you take that away he's pretty lurky. But the caffeine is wearing off now, see y'all in the morning. Still, I like the content he generated with that post on GK, so I'll be watching Prom closely. I seriously need to pass out now though :/
|
That post you quoted was a direct answer to Promethelax. He had made the case against Zork and asked me who else I thought was inactive at that time.
On July 27 2012 19:22 Ange777 wrote:
@Promethelax:
While I agree with your suspicions on Zorkmid there are several players who need to step up their game. Posting fluff is not helping town at all!
On July 27 2012 19:28 Promethelax wrote:
Which others players do you feel need to be looked at besides Zork? He clearly isn't the only guy who seems a little red, I just felt that he was flying too far under the radar.
Timing might have been unfortunate for you but you were pretty much inactive at that time. So I don't see anything wrong with my statement.
On July 31 2012 18:45 Promethelax wrote:
I have an explanation for the buddying thing that you are unhappy with that I will reveal before the end of the night cycle. It has a good motivation and I promise town that I will explain it before the end of n2.
as opposed to this
On July 30 2012 18:16 Promethelax wrote:
Oh, and based on the unwillingness to share this other mystery suspect with the thread I am going to ##Vote: Karma hiding your suspects doesn't help town and gives you as scum a huge asset in that you can come out with a case at any time and say "I've been suspicious of X for a long time. See this post here, I totally meant this guy you all see as scummy so I'm not jumping on this bandwagon, I've been on it forever"
I will not unvote you until you reveal your mystery scum read.
So you are not willing to share information that might help you to prove your town status and therefore help town to rule out one possible scum candidate? (Fake) claiming?
|
On July 31 2012 19:13 Ange777 wrote:That post you quoted was a direct answer to Promethelax. He had made the case against Zork and asked me who else I thought was inactive at that time. Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 19:22 Ange777 wrote:
@Promethelax:
While I agree with your suspicions on Zorkmid there are several players who need to step up their game. Posting fluff is not helping town at all! Show nested quote +On July 27 2012 19:28 Promethelax wrote:
Which others players do you feel need to be looked at besides Zork? He clearly isn't the only guy who seems a little red, I just felt that he was flying too far under the radar. Timing might have been unfortunate for you but you were pretty much inactive at that time. So I don't see anything wrong with my statement. Yes, I see no actual problem with this now (being a little clearer of mind), just explaining how you ended up on the list yesterday when I was very tired. Thanks for clearing that up with me. I was definitely not very active until Monday and can see how my play definitely came off as a lurker.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
