|
As of right now, I think Zork is the most suspicious player. Scum have been trying to deny us information, and lurking certainly aids this. Furthermore, to assume that Zork is town when he suggested we no-lynch during this day cycle+ Show Spoiler +On August 02 2012 11:21 Zorkmid wrote:Hey guys, just home from the golf course, 72. I'm going to start off by answering questions I've seen and will try and post some analysis either tonight or tomorrow morning. Gf having laser eye surgery tomorrow, playing in this on the weekend. Show nested quote +On August 02 2012 05:39 goodkarma wrote:Ange's sudden switch on day 2 I feel is suspicious. His original vote was for Zork for "semi-lurking," and after one post he is "convinced" not to vote for him anymore. This feels a bit too sudden to me, and may not be coincidence. Especially when Zork says in that post of one of his earlier suspects, Shady Sands: On July 31 2012 22:02 Zorkmid wrote:
I honestly just forgot about SS, but your accusation has led me to go back through his filter. I've noticed that he has never addressed my accusation about him.
This makes Zork more suspicious in my eyes since I can't see how you just "forget" about those you're suspicious of... It felt Ange let Zork off a bit too easily here to ensure Prox's lynching. I did forget about him, early on in the game I found it hard to differentiate among the players. Not sure what else I can say about it. Show nested quote +From Keir's "will"
To one Mr. Zorkmid I would like to call into question some of your motives:
I am saddened by your lack of participation. I understand that it was your birthday, but you've shown the ability to make arguments. Therefor, I question your vote onto Goldbat without much explantion. Was it just to avoid a no-lynch? Or did you honestly think he was scum?
I am curious as to why the possibility of no-lynching makes you feel less certain about lynching liars and lurkers. Not stating a solid stance just because of the possibility of a no-lynch doesn't make much sense to me.
About Golbat, I did find his play scummy, especially his on again-off again Mordanis suspicions. I didn't vote for him to avoid a no-lynch, I actually have no problem whatsoever with a no-lynch that early in the game. I believe that now we're getting to the point in the game where a no-lynch hurts more than it did earlier in the game, Scum is getting closer to a win. Barring a lucky save, we're going to lose 2 more townies in the next two nights. That said, another mis-lynch is even worse. About why the possibility of no-lynching appealed to me early game, was that it would give us more time to make a better informed lynch, reducing the chance of a mis-lynch of a town lurker on day 2. We all what happened there. However, at this critical juncture in the game, I think it more likely that a lurker would flip red than a lurker earlier in the game.
The slip that Ange is harping on is a little less damning. I admit I didn't notice it the first time, but it is interesting. On the one hand, as scum, your goal is only to defend yourself and not lynch your scumbuddies. For this reason, scum tend to post these "obvious slips" less than town in my experience, because town has much more complicated goals. Townies have to try to analyze what people say to find out who the scum are, try to figure out who is on their side, figure out what information is relevant, etc. Proof-reading for these "obvious slips" is less common for this reason. On the other hand, I did refer to it as an "obvious slip" for a reason. The hypothetical implying that he is not town is a strange way to write, but I don't see it as impossible for a townie to say something like this. It was good to bring it up, and it does make him look more suspicious, but I don't think it is grounds for insta-lynching.
His recent case on GK is literally just a reiteration of what Prom, Keir, SS, have posted about GK. Also, by saying that he is looking into GK because 3 confirmed town, he has an excuse for a bad flip- he was just following in the footsteps of !!Townies!!. It is also an appeal to emotion, to view our slain brethren's cases as holy writ ... because ... !!Town!!. It's another attempt to defend himself by trying to associate himself with certain town characteristics, while not actually contributing to good discussion. Town wants/needs information to flow, scum wants/needs information to grow old and stale. Here Zork contributes a case based on others' reads but doesn't actually contribute new reads, facts, or thoughts. Trying to duck out of suspicion with emotion but not contributing anything new is exactly what scum would want. Also, his FoS on me and then case on GK who is being largely ignored seems like he's setting himself to jump on my bandwagon.
Finally, I think his emotion post + Show Spoiler [link for !!Formatting!!] + is incredibly scummy. The way he had self-control for large parts of the post but lost it for others makes it seem contrived. Like he's trying to walk a thin line between coming off as a frustrated townie and coming off as an illogical jerk. I don't see any townie trying to contrive an emotional post to gain town cred. It doesn't contribute to the scum-hunt, it doesn't help gain information, it is just a defense that appeals to emotion. Scum who are trying to deny information gain incredible help from this, as it detracts from analytical discussion of motives and alters the way townies think about the player.
So for 3 major things that jive with scum play plus a possible scum-slip, and little contribution (besides defending himself)
##Vote: Zorkmid
Last thing: @ Ange, please refrain from connection based play until you know the flip. Your argument about JH falls apart completely if Zork flips green, so right now its entirely WIFOM. Connection based play is one of the best tools for hunting scum, but if you misuse it by trying to connect before you know how someone flipped, it is meaningless.
|
On August 03 2012 03:35 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 03:02 Ange777 wrote:On August 03 2012 01:18 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote:@JingleHell:On August 02 2012 06:41 JingleHell wrote:
Well, either SS is a VERY smart rolecop scum, (plausible, and this would be one sexy play if that was the case), or he's a mason. For now, I think, I'll give BOTD instead of WIFOMing to death, and move on to something I've been interested in for a while now, but refrained from comment on. There is no rolecop scum in this setup. Please check the OP about the setup. Mr Ange777, I note that you at one point wanted me to dive through the thread, and post reads on as many people as I could. On August 02 2012 03:36 Ange777 wrote:On August 02 2012 03:28 JingleHell wrote:On August 02 2012 03:22 Ange777 wrote:
I have been rereading the entire day 2 conversation in light of Promethelax' alignment and will be posting soon. Your filter is unfortunately the biggest null read at the moment so how about you state your other suspicions? Or are you only suspicious of Shady at the moment? Well, ignoring the fact that I still haven't finished reading all of the thread yet, I personally prefer not to branch out too much at a time. I'd rather get answers to one set of suspicions than dilute the thread with 20 different tangential arguments. Accusing me of being a null read is sort of reasonable, of course, but frankly, all I can do now is either try to make a case on every single person, which would provide some content but look fishy, or wait for enough discussion to happen for people to get a read on me. I have absolutely no idea why anybody with a pro-town mentality would want me to spam a huge pile of clutter trying to make sense out of 600-700 posts simultaneously. At best, trying to make reads on everyone still alive based on discussions I wasn't in for would amount to a lot of WIFOM. I get the not having finished reading all of the thread part. And while I understand that it takes a while to get into a game at the start of night 2, I still believe that you can make good reads on the other players because you haven't been here for the discussion. It makes you unbiased. And looking back at the conversation after a mislynch only considering the flip and not your own judgement may be a plus point for you. Unfortunately, shortly after that point, you suddenly were perfectly happy to jump onto the real Sand Shady. On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote:
Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline.
The only motive I can see for this is to set up a fall guy, namely myself, for the death of one Shady Sands, by encouraging me down that track. I was already wondering if this was a possibility before the flip and claim, and now... well, you don't look so hot to me. Can you please explain a rational and plausible townie motive for this? Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch. And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads? Seeing as quite a lot of people seemed quite excited for you to join this game I had hoped you would contribute more. At this moment, I don't see any pro town behaviour at all. This isn't a defense. You aren't showing me a town motive. You're dismissing a question. That's not a quick read. That's called discussing things and looking for potential slips. It's how I work. Don't like it? Too bad. Frankly, it looks like you're trying to push me into playing differently because you don't like what I said, with an implicit threat to try and get me lynched if I don't do what you want. It's shady as all hell. ##Vote Ange777Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior. Funny how all of a sudden you don't like the unbiased outsider when he sees something you said as funny. This case against me is simply bad. I'll start from the beginning: You are asking me for a town motivation for asking about your scum reads? Since when is it scummy to pressure others for their reads especially when that player has not taken any stance at all in the game? I have been completely open with whoever I thought was suspicious and posted cases or questions regarding those players. You just subbed in. We don't know anything about your alignment. Of course it is in the interest of town to get an understanding for whom you believe is suspicious. You saw my explanation: Because you were not involved in previous discussion, you were unbiased and therefore perfectly able to judge what we had posted. Keir agreed with me in this point as well. Then you accuse me of setting you up for a mislynch. You seem to have a brilliant imagination for I can't make up my mind why you would think that. I have stated my suspicions about Shady several times. Giving one's read before the night ends is perfectly normal as I could have died that night and I wanted to make sure that everyone knows whom I believe is suspicious. If I had indeed been trying to set you up in a mislynch because of your suspicions regarding Shady, shouldn't I have taken a step back from my own case against Shady so that I could accuse you? So it seems that your explanation for not giving any further comments on players is that you have a different playstyle. One that includes discussion and potential scumslips. Fine, but then show it to me! Oh no wait ... seems like in your entire post you skipped the discussion about Zorkmid and his scumslip! Instead you build up a huge case against me based on what? Literally nothing. Can the Jingle, who was hyped when joining the game as the savior, really be this bad? No, I don't think so. I believe you saw your scum buddy Zork in trouble and went out to discredit my case and me.
Now, if you want to have any hope of my vote changing, you'll explain a town motive for your play regarding myself and Shady, rather than trying to turn things back on me, which is scum behavior.
So "turning things back on you" would be scummy. Cute. Because somehow YOU turned things back on to me. And to be clear, right now I am not pushing you for playing in a different way than me! I am pushing your case for playing the most obvious scum play I have ever seen. Dear you: You're either trying to get me to answer for the terrible play of the guy I replaced, or asking me to do things I've already explained why I don't want to do. When I ask you what your motive is for something, you both OMGUS me and try to make it sound like I'm the one dropping an OMGUS. Yes, I find that scummy. Start defending yourself. Attacking me does not qualify as a defense.
Jingle, than tell me please what I am supposed to defend myself against. I have yet to see a question I have not answered. I explained that there is indeed town motivation for asking others for scum reads and I explained that I was in no way trying to set you up for making a case aganist Shady.
Accusing me of blaming you for the play of MrMedic? Again a result of your imagination. I simply told you that unfortunately you are subbing in for someone who was lurking almost all day long and therefore was a null read with all of us. Therefore I had hoped that you would be able to contribute something. I have in no way blamed you for MrMedic's play which was in my opinion not terrible. It was almost non-existent. So I can't even blame you for MrMedic's play because I don't think it is relevant at all.
Accusing me of asking you to do things you've explained why you don't want to do? I assume you are referring to giving a read? Well that might actually be a true statement from you. Of course I am going to ask you for reads. (Please see the above for town motivation for my behaviour.) Without reads scum won't just simply come out of their hiding places and yell lynch me, lynch me.
I accepted your explanation that you had not finished catching up with the thread and that you would be willing to contribute by participating in discussions and by looking for scumslips. But only a couple of hours later (to be precise directly after I had posted my case against Zork) you had miraculously not only finished reading the thread, no you also had a very strong conviction that I am scummy. Based on arguments you yet have to show me.And while you have been tunneling me you have totally ignored my case on Zork based on his scumslip and the following reactions.
Would you please give me a town motivation for ignoring the case on Zork? Oh, and please keep in mind, attacking me doesn't qualify as a defense!
|
Actually, I had a read on Shady, which went away with the claim, and was curious about your motive for something. That's a long way from what you're saying I did. All I want is an explanation.
If you can explain why first you were wanting me to post more than one read, and right after were posting a read on the same guy I'd had a read on, I'll be happy with it. All I said was that I didn't see a town motive.
|
@Mordanis:
On August 03 2012 05:52 Mordanis wrote:
Last thing: @ Ange, please refrain from connection based play until you know the flip. Your argument about JH falls apart completely if Zork flips green, so right now its entirely WIFOM. Connection based play is one of the best tools for hunting scum, but if you misuse it by trying to connect before you know how someone flipped, it is meaningless.
I do realize that connection based play is rather dangerous. That is why I am sticking to my strongest scum read Zork and not trying to lynch Jingle first. But I was not convinced that Jingle is scum based on the fact that he tries to save Zork, it is the way he tries to save Zork. Have you seen his case on me? He accuses me based on nothing. He starts by claiming I was setting him up for trying to mislynch Shady. Everytime I explain myself against one of his imaginary arguments he twists my words and claims that I have not defended myself.
I have never played with Jingle and to be honest I don't have the time and don't feel like going through his previous games but a lot of you guys seem to have played with him earlier and were generally happy to have a good player joining this game. I simply can't imagine some decent town player to make such a bad case on me and twist my words.
|
Want to see what happened last time I made a case using the same technique of looking for a townie motive and not finding one?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=47#940
That's a dead scum. So, clearly, it can work to post some, see what people say, and ask what their motive is. And so far, you've refused to explain, and gone so far as to OMGUS me. Don't like it, convince me, instead of hoping to use an emotion based argument full of WIFOM to draw imaginary lines between me and another person.
A simple post like this, seeming out of place...
On July 21 2012 02:35 drwiggl3s wrote:
Jingle since your leading this I want to ask you a question.
If YourHarry flips scum, what information do you think we will gain from that conclusion?
What if YourHarry flips town. What will be your opinion on Calgar, Hap, et all?
Turned into a dead scum, because I look at more than words. I look at WHY people say what the say. And I still want to hear your explanation.
|
On August 03 2012 06:11 JingleHell wrote:
Actually, I had a read on Shady, which went away with the claim, and was curious about your motive for something. That's a long way from what you're saying I did. All I want is an explanation.
If you can explain why first you were wanting me to post more than one read, and right after were posting a read on the same guy I'd had a read on, I'll be happy with it. All I said was that I didn't see a town motive.
For your question, please see my earlier explanation in the added quotes.
On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote:
Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.
And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?
Oh, I guess you didn't read them? Well, I'll make a too long didn't read for you!
TLDR:
1) I was simply asking you whether you have more reads than just Shady.
2) Shady was one of my top scum reads and therefore the case on him and on Mordanis (which you conveniently seem to have forgotten) was posted before deadline.
The quote is taken from my first response directly after your vote btw.
Still waiting for an answer to this one as well:
On August 03 2012 06:01 Ange777 wrote:
Would you please give me a town motivation for ignoring the case on Zork? Oh, and please keep in mind, attacking me doesn't qualify as a defense!
|
Frankly, in newbie games, the guy who seems like he's been huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium, usually is huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium. Thus, Zork could be scum, just like anyone else, but frankly, he's not my first target.
I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
|
On August 03 2012 06:33 JingleHell wrote:
And so far, you've refused to explain, and gone so far as to OMGUS me. Don't like it, convince me, instead of hoping to use an emotion based argument full of WIFOM to draw imaginary lines between me and another person.
@Jingle:
I have answered your question:
On August 03 2012 06:11 JingleHell wrote:
If you can explain why first you were wanting me to post more than one read, and right after were posting a read on the same guy I'd had a read on, I'll be happy with it. All I said was that I didn't see a town motive.
directly in the first post after you voting for me. I'll quote myself one more time. Please keep the time stamp in mind.
On August 02 2012 16:57 Ange777 wrote:
Are you serious Jingle? This is ridiculous. You clearly stated that you did not want to make any rushed reads as you have not finished reading the thread and then you do exactly what you said you would not do. I had my suspicions about Shady early in day 1 which where never cleared until his now believable mason claim. I was in no way encouraging you instead I was giving my own read before deadline. Assuming that this has a scum motivation is just a huge huge stretch.
And just to be clear, I never once said that you should post reads on as many people as you could. I asked if you had any other scum reads or whether Shady was your only scum read as you only commented on him since you subbed in. Now that you are accusing me of setting up a mislynch I should be able to assume that you have indeed finished reading the thread. So how about you give us your other scum reads?
Get you facts straight! I have not refused to explain. You are refusing to read my answers. And that is the reason why we are still discussing this matter hours later.
|
No, you have yet to explain, you're just being a broken record, because you know that the town is full of sheep and heading quickly toward a scum win. You know that as long as you don't jump up and down waving your arms screaming "Come lynch me", you're safe. So you're pretending to answer me without actually ever explaining yourself.
Don't expect me to humor your OMGUS until you actually explain your motive.
|
@Jingle:
On August 03 2012 06:47 JingleHell wrote:
I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
Do I really need to explain to you how that filter button works?
|
@Jingle:
If you need a motive, please take a look at the case I made on Shady in night2. For your convenience, I'll just quote them for you:
On August 02 2012 04:13 Ange777 wrote:Okay, so one player I am unhappy with at the moment is Shady and his last minute cases before the deadline. First he starts with a case against Obvious: Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 05:56 Shady Sands wrote:The first point of suspicion on Obvious, is, as previously stated, his post seven minutes after Golbat's lynching. Obvious comes in and says this: On July 29 2012 06:07 Obvious.660 wrote:
What the fuck. Then he goes and makes a post that seeks to examine every single person that votes for Golbat, coming to the somewhat obvious conclusion that Mordanis, myself, and Keirathi were the key players in the Golbat lynch. Then he makes an ad hoc wedding excuse, which gets called out. His response to that is actually pretty long: Seriously, if you want me to describe in minute detail every hour of my day from here out, I'm more than willing to share with you those details. I'm unemployed, I tend to sleep 12 hours at a time, my cousin is getting married in six weeks and this weekend was her bridal shower and bachelorette party which I was helping with (once again, Shady Sands at it again with the confusion that I was at a wedding. That's not what I said). I'm trying to emphasize here that there is no mystery to why I haven't been posting much up to this point, but my reasons are being dismissed as scummy excuses. I also already told you to expect my posting to pick up by Monday, which is now arriving soon (my time, EST). You can call me a liar and policy lynch if you want if my posting isn't up to your standards if it will make you feel better, but you'll find you're just distracting yourself from finding actual scum. 6) Claims I was at a wedding when I clearly said wedding stuff.
>>>>Note I didn't say: "I'm going to a wedding guys I'm gonna be trashed and fucking useless for like two days, so don't expect to see me!" I just said I had stuff going on during the day (stuff that doesn't happen while I sleep, unfortunately) that was wedding related. Why assume it was a full wedding, a way better excuse that would let me get away without posting even longer. I'm not trying to get out of contributing, I just have shit to do. I certainly could have come back and used that as an excuse for not posting by delaying my contributions even further if I wanted to, as it was open to me with his assumption.
This is really wierd. He goes and talks about this wedding stuff twice in a row without any intervening posts about the wedding; instead he seems to be hell-bent on proving that his absences are not indicative of anti-town play. Then he claims that lynching him for this would be a policy lynch, which is not the point: The point is that when players have suspicious timing noted by others, and then claim IRL commitments after they've been accused of suspicious timings, then it makes people look like they're trying to cover up for something. Think back to the whole concept behind setting up to a D2 mislynch. This links to the next point on Promethelax too-- my strong suspicion is that both are working together to paint themselves as pro-town, and busy coordinating posts between each other while claiming IRL commitments. His case has two points: 1) The timing of Obvious' WTF post 2) Overemphasis of RL commitments Not exactly a convincing case in my opinion. When reading the posts after the flip night 1 I was astonished as well that Obvious had posted directly afterwards when he had claimed to be away. But Obvious explained that he had just caught up with the thread at that time. Which I am wiling to give him the benefit of doubt for just as well as for the over and over explanation that he had been to a wedding. Shady repeatedly stated that he found the wedding thing extremely suspicious so I can understand why Obvious would feel the need to explain himself again and again. I do not believe that we should build up scum cases based only on things like the timing of posts or the RL excuses the players have made IF their posting has improved a lot after having been called out for lurking. He had stated that he would be more active starting Monday and looking at Obvious' filter I can only say that he kept his promise. The filter may not be the best regarding active scum hunting but I am getting a slight town vibe from it. Now my biggest question, why does the timing of Obvious link him to Promethelax? Shady, you have been repeatedly called out for making dangerous links based on very little and in my opinion this is another one.
On August 02 2012 05:29 Ange777 wrote:Back to the case from Shady on Promethelax: Show nested quote +The case on PromethelaxNow to the meat here: On D1, Promethelax posted the following things: -snip-
There are two points to note here:
1) He says say no to fluff, but only after posting the fluffiest posts in the entire thread--beer, my novella, joking about lynching Obvious, etc.
2) He always has a tendency to try and get other people to do research for him/buddy up to people first, before posting cases on specific people. This is something that is very strange--why would a townie feel the need to try and make friends/build alliances with other townies before cases are even active? Note that this isn't done out of self-preservation either--no one was FoSing Prome on D1, yet he decided to do this quite actively. Regarding 1): You are just repeating Mordanis' argument. And do you know how many fluff posts you have? Show nested quote +Then on D2, Prome goes and forms his "trusted townie" idea. I wish I had more time prior to the lynch to dissect this, but this is just an extension of point 2 above. Mordanis pretty much covered all the relevant points here: On July 31 2012 19:10 Mordanis wrote: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. . The reasoning seems to be that Zork isn't an expert yet. I don't see why not knowing the setup in the first hour and a half is scummy. This case makes my own seem sophisticated. His second case is reasonably sound, but when Darth says that my case about Angie is ironic, it pales in comparison to his own. Having only posted the one case, ask for others' opinions, and posted fluff + Show Spoiler [No, Really] +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. , some people (DP + Ange) post others whom they perceive to be relatively inactive. Neither DarthPunk nor Ange mention him though. Then he makes his second case on Golbat + Show Spoiler +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. , which contains the nugget: "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." I'd like to know how you, Promethelax, can try to moderate for inane/useless posts when you've been at least as bad as anyone else. 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. . Now I am familiar with how some things in this game just don't function the way you'd expect them to, but why town would need a leader is beyond me. People who disrupt scum-hunting should be noticed, but I don't know why having a judiciary saying "Thou shalt not do X" helps, especially when scum tend to try to gain that position quite often. And why town only needs one analyst is also beyond me, as it seems that the more the merrier. I think scum would be the ones wanting people following one of 2 people at all times, not town. 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 :/ So basically there you have it--why I am voting Prome, and why I am FoSing Obvious. There are a couple of dead links above that I will be filling with anchor tags as the night goes on. Again, ##Vote Promethelax. Sorry about the lateness of this post, but as I stated earlier a major IRL commitment came up (brother's DUI) that required me to spend all night at the police station and all morning at the lawyers. Did you even read Mordanis' case? It was full of doubts whether or not Promethelax could be scum or not. So if you say that you completely agree with Mordanis' case, you also state that you were unsure whether he would flip red or not but were willing to vote him?
|
On August 03 2012 06:54 Ange777 wrote:@Jingle: Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 06:47 JingleHell wrote:
I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
Do I really need to explain to you how that filter button works?
An ad hom attack to continue to ignore the difference between an uninformative answer and an explained motive.
So many sheep it's probably going to fly.
Should I just go ahead and congratulate you on the scum win now, or shall I wait?
This will be my last response to your effort to clutter the thread. Explain your motive or I waste no more time on you. My vote stays put.
|
Dear lurkers!
I'll be going to bed now as it is midnight in Germany and I am tired of this pointless discussion with Jingle. I'll be happy to answer any further questions tomorrow but please do me a favor: Read my filter first! Thanks.
|
V-V-V-V-VOTE COUNT:
Ange777 ( 1 ): JingleHell,
goodkarma ( 1 ): Zorkmid,
Mordanis ( 1 ): Shady Sands,
Zorkmid ( 2 ): Ange777, Mordanis,
Presently, no one is set to be lynched! 23 hours remain in Day 3 !
alan133, aRyuujin, DarthPunk, goodkarma, Obvious.660, have yet to vote!
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
|
On August 02 2012 09:08 goodkarma wrote:
@Obvious:
As Keir mentioned to you earlier, contributing nothing but your defense is not very pro-town. That is why I'm happy to see at least a little bit of discussion of your suspect (aRyuujin). I know you've also in the past occassionally made a few points against people you felt were scum, but I'd like to see some truly in-depth cases from you (more than a few bullet points). Allowing town to see your scum case arguements is honestly more important for you right now than only playing defense whenever someone throws an accusation your way if you are to establish your innocence.
My FOS has resulted in not helping town at all. Sorry that it hasn't resulted in anything useful, I wanted more to go on for aRyuujin and it's already been almost a day with no actual reaction. I'm just going to have to let it go for now and worry about which candidate is best for today's lynch, and try to exonerate them if I don't feel their motivations are scum-aligned.
In the case of Day 1, not trying to convince others that Golbat was a bad vote for his newbie playstyle which I felt matched my own in my last game where I was in a similar position didn't help town. In the case of Day 2, I didn't push my vote for Shady Sands enough compared to people's interpretations of Promethelax' scummy-looking behavior. Clearly this is bad in hindsight, as it would have also resulted in a mislynch of Shady Sands. So, as people have pointed out, I need to remedy this of my history is going to make this an easy scum victory should I survive to MYLO/LYLO.
Ange777 and JingleHell are still going back and forth (as I write this) and for all that I can tell they're just tunneling the shit out of each other. I'll let them have their argument and look at it later.
Goodkarma, has once again brought up the shit I thought we laid to rest and is distracting the town (namely me) with this bullshit once again. Therefore, ##VOTE GoodKarma, and yes, it's OMGUS, emphasis on you suck.
|
On August 03 2012 06:47 JingleHell wrote:
Frankly, in newbie games, the guy who seems like he's been huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium, usually is huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium. Thus, Zork could be scum, just like anyone else, but frankly, he's not my first target.
I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
This seems to have been posted at Ange, but I feel it needs to be addressed. Since you feel that posting things from other games is relevant, here is something from my first game: + Show Spoiler +On May 01 2012 16:00 Mordanis wrote:Yes, sir, mister Golden, sir First things first, I just realized that nreekay = Enrique... Yeah... Anyways Nreekay has only really posted three things which can be evaluated, and of course I can analyze his vote. I'll begin with his first analytical post. + Show Spoiler [first post] ++ Show Spoiler +On April 28 2012 04:12 nreekay324 wrote:Hello again all, Lots to go through, I’ll try to make it neat; Why I voted for whysomuch so early + Show Spoiler +It was an impulse post. When I saw that yomi voted for him, it triggered me. I played with yomi in a previous game, and I had to endure the aftermath of an overly aggressive play he made (more on this later). My reason was obviously unsubstantiated, + Show Spoiler +(i just really dislike twilight) No-Lynch Stance + Show Spoiler + I’ve alluded to before, and I’d like to state explicitly that I think no-lynch is a generally bad policy, with little exception. Other people have (whysomuch, lazermonkey) have made some points about this. It is very unlikely that by the deadline that town won’t have high-scum read targets to vote for. Sure, a mis-lynch would suck, but it’s not like we’re voting randomly. If there really aren’t clear scum choices, than we should no-lynch. This leads me to the next point, which is why I really think no-lynch is important. Generating discussion + Show Spoiler + More discusion = more info = better for town. If the town’s general consensus flirts too much with no-lynch, then it will encourage lurking. On April 27 2012 22:48 The_Zen_Man wrote:
If we vote for a nolynch there will still be people, like yourself, that would oppose that and vote for a person instead. We can use that information to decide everyone standings. The time before deadline will also give us information, as we can observe how people act then. The quality / quantity of information can vary drastically with a town that has a lot of votes and cases and from a town that has some votes, a few cases, and some no-lynches. It goes beyond who voted for who, it’s who voted for who and why they did so. People have to build cases to vote for people, and cases = more discussion. “Meta-game”? (yomi) + Show Spoiler + People have mentioned meta-game elements, specifically yomi’s quick-post. Specifically, Golden + Show Spoiler +On April 27 2012 13:33 O.Golden_ne wrote:
I've seen yomi's play before and i understand he likes to be aggressive, and i like his aggression.. i just hope it isn't misplaced aggression and i want him to explain to me why he has picked WhySoMuch other than for his pro-first-day-lynch attitude and his contrary views on the percentages of lynching. i think you have to pick your battles and maybe lynching people with opposing views might not be the key, opposing views lead to discussion, which leads to correct eviction.
On April 27 2012 16:27 O.Golden_ne wrote:
Perhaps the small shred of logic yomi has shown in his lurking argument makes him less suspicious than Nreekay?
Pure SC2 + Show Spoiler +On April 27 2012 23:58 Pure-SC2 wrote:
@AcesAnoka - Yomi has a bit of a reputation from his last 2 newbie games and he tends to play the same way regardless of if he is scum or town. He's essentially trying to stir up discussion by posting "off the wall" (yomi feel free to correct me here if you'd explain it differently). Last game it got him lynched day 1 and he was town, so while it's good to pressure him like you are, bare in mind that this is essentially how he plays. Both Golden and Pure SC2 cite yomi’s previous game, in which he played blantantly aggressively and voted early off of little (no) evidence. I know this, because I was in the same game yomi was in. His play severely impacted that game, and it was still on my mind in the beginning of this game. What I find interesting however, is that both Golden and PureSC2 are making the beginnings of yomi’s town case FOR him, with the previous game serving as “meta-game evidence”. This is suspicious to me. They are beginning yomi’s defense case for him, why not let him make it? Further, if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. However, I can’t make a claim against yomi because he really hasn’t said much. So, ##FOS: Golden, PureSC2. thezenman + Show Spoiler + Your filter consists of 1)lynch vs no lynch opinions, 2) defensive questioning, 3) a brief overview summary opinions on people. This shows me that although you been posting, you lack substance in your post. Your opinions on people are rather general, or they are merely in dull agreement with others. ##FOS @lurkers; post!!!!! get into town discussion @everyone else; keep posting!! there has been lots of discussion going on, and lots of things analyzing needs to be done. don't be afraid to keep it coming. @yomi; waiting on some concrete analysis ##FOS Golden, Pure SC2, thezenman for now, ## unvote This post occured fairly early in the game. He admits that he jumped on the bandwagon to vote for WhySoMuch because Yomi voted for WSM earlier. In literally the next sentence, Nreekay states that Yomi's overagressiveness is detrimental. Perhaps he was under the same misunderstanding as I was, and thought the day was already a good portion consumed. Whatever the reason, it seems more illogical than scummy to me. On to his second point (he should have used then instead of than, but anyways...), some suspicion has been cast on his saying that the no-lynch is important, despite being pro-lynch. To me it seems much more logical to assume that he was referring to his next point, which is that if we had decided to not lynch the first day, there wouldn't have been much discussion. I don't think anyone would think a first day where there is zero discussion and no lynch favors the town. After that, he simply casts some suspicion on 3 players (golden, pure, and Zen). I think this was actually really good, as it lead to discussion, and helped to establish Golden and Pure as pretty solid non-scum reads. In total, I think that parts of this post were ill-explained or just plain illogical, but I don't see any scumminess. + Show Spoiler +On April 28 2012 13:57 nreekay324 wrote:@yomi Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:35 yomi wrote:On April 28 2012 04:12 nreekay324 wrote:
if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. are you saying my vote on whysomuch made you suspicious that I was mafia? and if not, what ARE you saying? If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. you mean if they didn't start it? im confused When I posted last night, I was thinking that Golden&PureSC2 were suspicious; They were brushing off suspicion towards you by acknowledging that this was your “playstyle “. But the reason I didn’t flat out say I was suspicious of you, yomi, was because I was waiting on your analysis/reads. Last game, you laid out some good stuff I would have went off of more (if i didn’t get shot). But I’m still waiting for that this game. Maybe you’re holding off until there’s more info, but the pace of this game is so much faster that there’s lots of stuff to go through already. So my point is, I think part of me had acknowledged your aggressive play of random voting, and had already seen you innocent. But I’ve been waiting for you to make a case, or add some analysis, or something.I realize now that my suspicion on golden&puresc2 are highly based on my suspicion of you, yomi. Its definitely possible they’re townies afraid of mis-lynching. (Golden stated he’s for d1 lynch, puresc2 finds no-lynch circumstantially acceptable) It seems puresc2, inparticular, is pretty against mis-lynches. If you don’t add anything, then you have the easiest job right now as mafia, because you’re pretty much getting a free pass atm. ##FOS yomi /remove suspicion from golden and puresc2 until I get a better read on yomi @thezenman I think what I said earlier still stands. But I think also, you have to realize that if you’re town, you should be playing to contribute to the discussion through analysis, interpretation, and taking stances based on these. First, to this ; Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:13 The_Zen_Man wrote:
Now, concerning your vote, i think the rest of the players would like to have a better explanation than the one you just gave. Bandwagoning on someone seems very suspicious on me, and it seems like scum-play. And as soon as people start finding you suspicious, like yomi, and votes for you, instead of explaining yourself properly you start a case against them. You seem to prefer when someone else is getting voted for no reason at all, but when you are voted for with a good reason you start a case against them.
I would agree with you if you had come out and said my reasoning for voting for whysomuch was shitty. But it was early on, I was impulsive, and that’s all I can really say about it. If you think that I deserve a vote for this, there’s that. But I didn’t make case against them just because they made one against me. There were plenty of people who had/have their suspicions against me. But I made a case against them because I thought I thought I thought I saw a connection between them. (As above, it was related to yomi). I absolutely do not think that people should get voted for no reason, if this were near the deadline it would have been ridiculous. When you say this; Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:13 The_Zen_Man wrote:
nreekay324: As to my lack of contributing, it is mainly beacuse i've had to defend myself so much. That is why i posted my last post, so i could contribute a little. Also, i don't think you can complain on other peoples lack of contribution, as your only contributing post is the one above.
it just sounds like; hey, i’ve got to defend myself. you’re not contributing either, why don’t you contribute? You need to contribute more than I do. I want to make the point that your posts should have more concrete analysis. As you mentioned earlier, when you throw suspicion back to people who are pointing their fingers at you, you only look more suspicious. Your post of opinions on people was mainly just like/dislike of those people. I get that you’re being pressured, but take the time to develop more analysis that contributes to overall town discussion. If you’re only defending yourself the whole time, it adds very little. Again, I can't help but approve of the way that Nreekay was driving us forward. Yomi had been suspicious, voting for one person without evidence and then not posting any reasoning or evidence for what he did. Look at that in a vacuum, and it makes a lot of sense. It is just a mite hypocritical for Nreekay, simply because he also voted with basically no evidence. But he then told us why he voted the way he did. I find this odd (and again, illogical), but not consistent with the mindset of mafia. After this part though, he goes on a diatribe against Zen, and I honestly have no idea what it was meant to prove. I simply cannot wade through that portion, and if someone else were to comment on it I'd love to hear something about it. I just have no fucking clue what that was supposed to do, who it was supposed to convince, anything. Summary: Again, his play here seems more illogical than suspicious. Perhaps we have completely different mindsets... I really should have waited until morning for this. Anyways, here's his 3rd post that has real content in it. + Show Spoiler +On May 01 2012 01:52 nreekay324 wrote:Greetings again, D2, here we go; Veriat flipping red. + Show Spoiler +This is awesome for us, because not only did we already get one mafia, he was a roleblocker. I don’t know how many roles mafia get, but that was definitely a plus. Info from votes to who voted for him, there was; Veriat: (7): yomi, The_Zen_Man, WhySoMuch, Pure-SC2, Splinter[eP], Mordanis, O.Golden_ne. Important details include that veriat got the minimum 7/7 votes, and that the swing vote was a vote change golden made from aces to veriat. It seems unreasonable that golden was swing vote to knock veriat off just to gain town cred, as it’s not statistically favorable for mafia on a D1 lynch. For now, you have my town read Golden + Show Spoiler + I can’t see mafia offing one of their own for street cred on a minimum vote, but it’s notable it’s a possibility Looking at Veriat’s filter there’s not much to go off of. He has scum reads on thezenman, me, and jailbreaker. However, he makes no case against them, or (for zenman) a really weak case. In itself, there's so little posted it's hard to make anything of it. yomi flipping green. + Show Spoiler +Personally, I had him pegged as mafia, and I have re-evaluations to do. It’s confusing as to why the mafia chose yomi, he was a lurker, albeit with either good luck or gosu senses on veriat. However, it does give us something interesting, as one person did vote for him... Jailbreaker + Show Spoiler +1) Only vote on yomi, and yomi was shot night cycle. 2) Posts don’t seem to have a lot of content, there’s a lot of summary and weak accusations/ questioning. 3) This quote in particular; On April 29 2012 04:09 Jailbreaker wrote:
nonononononono water you guys doin? you planet all wrong.
Can't you see that other players are trying to rush people into a decision so fast??
Just because we dun have a majority vote, doesn't mean we should rush.
Even though I voted for Yomi so fast in the game, i didn't rush. Just like what golden says, stay clam and dont panic.
I know its fail logic right here, no apollo-gies here on my part.
This was a decent amount of time before the lynch-veriat train really started rolling, jailbreaker tries to advocate against it. He doesn’t provide any case in favor of Veriat however, and just side-steps the issue. 4) And then this, On April 30 2012 16:13 Jailbreaker wrote:
Since I voted to horribly wrong, I'm going to delay my vote until it is closer to the deadline.
It’s like jailbreaker wants to let other people make cases for him, so that he can choose the safest one to vote for and thus remain safe. 4) Was on Veriat’s “scum” list. I”ll defer to whysomuch for this; + Show Spoiler +On April 29 2012 09:12 WhySoMuch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 18:26 Veriat wrote:
Ok here are my thoughts on who are the scum:
The_Zen_Man
nreekay324
Jailbreaker
The_Zen_Man You're stance on the "lynch no lynch" discussion has left me a little puzzled, and your overall playstyle seem fishy to me, so you're getting my vote.
nreekay324 All your posts just seem off and scummy. Many of them seem rushed or flawed, and you basically just jumped the bandwagon with your early vote on Why_So_Much. On a side note i did find Why_So_Much's playstyle kind of off, but i don't think he's scum, because then why would you vote for him?
Jailbreaker You've my number 3 due to consistent flaws in your previous posts.
However JailBreaker, this is exactly how a newer mafia would do it, he just throws his name out there with some lame, non existent reasoning. I am moving Jailbreaker to the mafia side for this alone. @Pure SC2- + Show Spoiler +On April 30 2012 06:46 Pure-SC2 wrote:
nreekay324 - His filter reads suspicious to me. I see a vote for WhySoMuch, followed by an unbolded unvote. He then leaves it at that. He makes no comment against the most suspicious person in the game so far, who was proven to be mafia. So he votes for WhySoMuch, and has FoS against Golden, Me, Yomi and The_Zen_Man (incidently all of which voted for Veriat). Very suspicious.
I should clarify, I hadn’t intended to neither leave it at whysomuch nor unvoted, but I was unable to return to the deadline. (I’ll look at whysomuch again later in this post). Apparently my unvote wasn’t registered so I didn’t get targeted by nova(looks like aces didnt get modkilled either, so I would have been okay anyway?) When I did find time to check up, it was in the night cycle and it seemed fruitless to post anything then. In regards to what you said, I’ll point out that in one of my posts I state that my FoS ; you and golden were related to yomi, as in if yomi was mafia then I would pursue you two. As he isn’t, the point is moot. Also, if you looked carefully, I made those FoS before yomi even voted for veriat. To this; On April 30 2012 17:58 Pure-SC2 wrote:
Why was yomi killed?
Mafia hit people for a reason. What was the reason behind yomi getting whacked? Well in the course of day 1, other than getting annoyed by WhySoMuch, he had genuine suspicions of two people, Veriat and nreekay324.
We know one of them was scum, and nreekay324 is my strongest scum read (refer to my night post just before the deadline). If you were the two remaining mafia, and you had seem yomi lead the lynch on one of your scum buddies, and he had found you suspicious, wouldn't that make him a good target?
Interesting points related to the hit on yomi:
- After the first day post, nreekay324 states "looks like my suspicions about yomi may have been wrong though..." - this is interesting in that if nreekay324 knows yomi is about to die and flip town it's a good way to clear himself from his earlier stated suspicions of yomi.
- People who found yomi suspicious: Jailbreaker, AcesAnoka, nreekay324
I said that because yomi voted for veriat in the very beginning. I thought it was unlikely yomi would have voted veriat in the beginning, because why choose a scum buddy when there were other lurkers to vote? Yomi was highly suspicious, and deserved this suspicion. He was lurking, HARD, and throwing out ##votes for other people to analyze. He could have easily been switching between townies, trying to confuse the town conversation. I’ve been thinking of why they would shoot yomi (I have an idea, as described later), but I don’t know what to say about it “clearing” me. I can deny it, saying that it’d be foolish because it doesn’t clear me, it really incriminates me (I have nothing original now that yomi is green), but then we’ll start throwing WIFOM around and we’ll get nowhere. If you think it’s enough to vote for me, well there’s that. @Golden- + Show Spoiler +Your first half analysis of whysomuch was rolling towards #FOSwhysomuch, but you conclude that he’s more likely an overly aggressive towny in your opinion. Is this because he voted for you/ is suspicious of you? It seems you’re trying to discredit him and his earlier posts, and as such his suspicions of you. I have my own opinions, but I was wondering if this was the point you were making.
In regards to my case against yomi, I don’t know what you mean by squirmy. But I would find it agreeable to say that when yomi flipped green, my case got shit on. There’s another post later, where I state that you and puresc2’s suspicions were really based on my suspicions of yomi being mafia, and since he wasn’t I no longer have suspicions against you two in regards to that. Re-evaluations @puresc2, golden -no more suspicions whysomuch + Show Spoiler +This jumps out at me. Why bring this up, right after the mafia lynch? This may be what golden was referring to as “the champion” of veriat’s lynch. + Show Spoiler +On April 29 2012 08:15 WhySoMuch wrote:
Well this game just became a lot more simple.
The_Zen_Man
Splinter
Pure_SC
Mordanis
Myself
Look the best for their voting yesterday
Also, he made a case against veriat and helped push his lynch. But quick-scum/town lists based on one or two ideas is messy. It’s more beneficial to take time looking at specifics and make cases (unless you’re mentioning something in a sort of passing way that you don’t want to forget), and then organize that info into lists of scum/town. It’s very confusing play,maybe just scummy town play. thezenman + Show Spoiler +I’m removing my suspicions from him now, for the case he made against Veriat. Its decent enough, and I don’t see any reason he would have, as mafia, to make such an extended case against Veriat, which contributed to the bandwagon to get veriat lynched.
Acesanoka + Show Spoiler +A number of arguments have been made, and not much to add to them because he hasn’t been posting much. He, like other lurkers, should be pressured D2. What got the successful D1 lynch was from pressuring lurkers (yomi called out veriat for this very reason). We need to keep this up.
@Blue role players + Show Spoiler +It’d be detrimental to name players, so to “all blue roles”. As I was reviewing yomi’s filter, something popped out to me; On April 29 2012 08:14 yomi wrote:
Night time is generally not a great time to post. Let the blue players do what they want and don't give mafia any hints on who they should kill. This is only a thought, but the mafia may have been hoping for a lucky blue snipe. It makes sense, because yomi was semi-lurking (blue roles tend to play more cautiously to protect the blue role). It’s not concrete, but it’s a possibility. We’re already ahead of the mafia, so we don’t need blues to do anything reckless (i.e. claim) ##FOS: Jailbreaker I'll do my best to check this/ stay active more. I understand we need to push the lead we have on the mafia. This actually confuses the hell out of me. It makes sense. In a garbled, warped way, perhaps, but he manages to communicate ideas. This is a major step up for him. Some of the things he brings up I disagree with, but this post doesn't have the batshit crazyness his first two posts had. There are only two things I find suspicious with this post. First, why did he vote for Aces? Yeah, there were some decent arguments for lynching him, but there were some pretty major shake-ups with Veriat turning out to be mafia. The other suspicious thing to me is his little comment about the blue role players. Why would he be able to name names? Why would it be detrimental to to do so? This is the prime example of the illogical world that Nreekay has been posting from. Final read from this: This paragraph exudes illogic and dumb-townie. Almost too much so. It feels, somehow, contrived
Okay, so to sum up my feelings on Nreekay, I'd have to say that right now I'm getting much more of an incompetent/illogical town read than a straight scum read. As I just wrote however, it does feel somewhat contrived, and so whether its simply a function of a less-than-superior mastery of the language/rhetoric, or whether he's trying to hide something, is beyond me to say. More than anything, his posting makes my head hurt. Prime example: several times he's told everyone to stop lurking, but he has published little content. WTF? Does he not realize that other people have posted much, much more than him?
All said and done, I weakly support a lynch for him in the future if he doesn't change. He isn't adding anything to the discussion, but only distracting from it with senseless posts. The difference I see between him and Jailbreaker is that Jailbreaker seems much more active in his attempts to throw us off (if he indeed is). Where Nreekay seems to be simply bad at communicating (and lilely mafia in general), Jailbreaker seemed to be actively trying to steer us away from voting for Veriat. I'm getting a fairly weak town read for Nreekay, but I don't mind a lynch because I'd say there's probably a 30-35% probability he's mafia (just made that up completely off the top of my head), but either way he isn't helping. So for the final judgement:
Unless Jailbreaker manages to completely exculpate himself, I'd favor a lynch for Jailbreaker. I would however vote for either one.
|
On August 03 2012 08:24 Mordanis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2012 06:47 JingleHell wrote:
Frankly, in newbie games, the guy who seems like he's been huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium, usually is huffing a mixture of model glue, jet fuel, and plutonium. Thus, Zork could be scum, just like anyone else, but frankly, he's not my first target.
I don't consider you telling me you already suspected Shady to be explaining your motive. You wanted me to be after multiple people, but you were happy to just pile evidence on the guy I was already looking at.
Saying you already had your eye on him is telling me an action. Not telling me what, from a townie perspective, could motivate that action (hence "motive").
This seems to have been posted at Ange, but I feel it needs to be addressed. Since you feel that posting things from other games is relevant, here is something from my first game: + Show Spoiler +On May 01 2012 16:00 Mordanis wrote:Yes, sir, mister Golden, sir First things first, I just realized that nreekay = Enrique... Yeah... Anyways Nreekay has only really posted three things which can be evaluated, and of course I can analyze his vote. I'll begin with his first analytical post. + Show Spoiler [first post] ++ Show Spoiler +On April 28 2012 04:12 nreekay324 wrote:Hello again all, Lots to go through, I’ll try to make it neat; Why I voted for whysomuch so early + Show Spoiler +It was an impulse post. When I saw that yomi voted for him, it triggered me. I played with yomi in a previous game, and I had to endure the aftermath of an overly aggressive play he made (more on this later). My reason was obviously unsubstantiated, + Show Spoiler +(i just really dislike twilight) No-Lynch Stance + Show Spoiler + I’ve alluded to before, and I’d like to state explicitly that I think no-lynch is a generally bad policy, with little exception. Other people have (whysomuch, lazermonkey) have made some points about this. It is very unlikely that by the deadline that town won’t have high-scum read targets to vote for. Sure, a mis-lynch would suck, but it’s not like we’re voting randomly. If there really aren’t clear scum choices, than we should no-lynch. This leads me to the next point, which is why I really think no-lynch is important. Generating discussion + Show Spoiler + More discusion = more info = better for town. If the town’s general consensus flirts too much with no-lynch, then it will encourage lurking. On April 27 2012 22:48 The_Zen_Man wrote:
If we vote for a nolynch there will still be people, like yourself, that would oppose that and vote for a person instead. We can use that information to decide everyone standings. The time before deadline will also give us information, as we can observe how people act then. The quality / quantity of information can vary drastically with a town that has a lot of votes and cases and from a town that has some votes, a few cases, and some no-lynches. It goes beyond who voted for who, it’s who voted for who and why they did so. People have to build cases to vote for people, and cases = more discussion. “Meta-game”? (yomi) + Show Spoiler + People have mentioned meta-game elements, specifically yomi’s quick-post. Specifically, Golden + Show Spoiler +On April 27 2012 13:33 O.Golden_ne wrote:
I've seen yomi's play before and i understand he likes to be aggressive, and i like his aggression.. i just hope it isn't misplaced aggression and i want him to explain to me why he has picked WhySoMuch other than for his pro-first-day-lynch attitude and his contrary views on the percentages of lynching. i think you have to pick your battles and maybe lynching people with opposing views might not be the key, opposing views lead to discussion, which leads to correct eviction.
On April 27 2012 16:27 O.Golden_ne wrote:
Perhaps the small shred of logic yomi has shown in his lurking argument makes him less suspicious than Nreekay?
Pure SC2 + Show Spoiler +On April 27 2012 23:58 Pure-SC2 wrote:
@AcesAnoka - Yomi has a bit of a reputation from his last 2 newbie games and he tends to play the same way regardless of if he is scum or town. He's essentially trying to stir up discussion by posting "off the wall" (yomi feel free to correct me here if you'd explain it differently). Last game it got him lynched day 1 and he was town, so while it's good to pressure him like you are, bare in mind that this is essentially how he plays. Both Golden and Pure SC2 cite yomi’s previous game, in which he played blantantly aggressively and voted early off of little (no) evidence. I know this, because I was in the same game yomi was in. His play severely impacted that game, and it was still on my mind in the beginning of this game. What I find interesting however, is that both Golden and PureSC2 are making the beginnings of yomi’s town case FOR him, with the previous game serving as “meta-game evidence”. This is suspicious to me. They are beginning yomi’s defense case for him, why not let him make it? Further, if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. However, I can’t make a claim against yomi because he really hasn’t said much. So, ##FOS: Golden, PureSC2. thezenman + Show Spoiler + Your filter consists of 1)lynch vs no lynch opinions, 2) defensive questioning, 3) a brief overview summary opinions on people. This shows me that although you been posting, you lack substance in your post. Your opinions on people are rather general, or they are merely in dull agreement with others. ##FOS @lurkers; post!!!!! get into town discussion @everyone else; keep posting!! there has been lots of discussion going on, and lots of things analyzing needs to be done. don't be afraid to keep it coming. @yomi; waiting on some concrete analysis ##FOS Golden, Pure SC2, thezenman for now, ## unvote This post occured fairly early in the game. He admits that he jumped on the bandwagon to vote for WhySoMuch because Yomi voted for WSM earlier. In literally the next sentence, Nreekay states that Yomi's overagressiveness is detrimental. Perhaps he was under the same misunderstanding as I was, and thought the day was already a good portion consumed. Whatever the reason, it seems more illogical than scummy to me. On to his second point (he should have used then instead of than, but anyways...), some suspicion has been cast on his saying that the no-lynch is important, despite being pro-lynch. To me it seems much more logical to assume that he was referring to his next point, which is that if we had decided to not lynch the first day, there wouldn't have been much discussion. I don't think anyone would think a first day where there is zero discussion and no lynch favors the town. After that, he simply casts some suspicion on 3 players (golden, pure, and Zen). I think this was actually really good, as it lead to discussion, and helped to establish Golden and Pure as pretty solid non-scum reads. In total, I think that parts of this post were ill-explained or just plain illogical, but I don't see any scumminess. + Show Spoiler +On April 28 2012 13:57 nreekay324 wrote:@yomi Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:35 yomi wrote:On April 28 2012 04:12 nreekay324 wrote:
if yomi decided to use this “meta-game evidence to make a case for himself eventually, I would be highly suspicious of yomi, because it could be a perfect mafia play. are you saying my vote on whysomuch made you suspicious that I was mafia? and if not, what ARE you saying? If other “townies” began the defense for yomi, it’d go down a lot better. you mean if they didn't start it? im confused When I posted last night, I was thinking that Golden&PureSC2 were suspicious; They were brushing off suspicion towards you by acknowledging that this was your “playstyle “. But the reason I didn’t flat out say I was suspicious of you, yomi, was because I was waiting on your analysis/reads. Last game, you laid out some good stuff I would have went off of more (if i didn’t get shot). But I’m still waiting for that this game. Maybe you’re holding off until there’s more info, but the pace of this game is so much faster that there’s lots of stuff to go through already. So my point is, I think part of me had acknowledged your aggressive play of random voting, and had already seen you innocent. But I’ve been waiting for you to make a case, or add some analysis, or something.I realize now that my suspicion on golden&puresc2 are highly based on my suspicion of you, yomi. Its definitely possible they’re townies afraid of mis-lynching. (Golden stated he’s for d1 lynch, puresc2 finds no-lynch circumstantially acceptable) It seems puresc2, inparticular, is pretty against mis-lynches. If you don’t add anything, then you have the easiest job right now as mafia, because you’re pretty much getting a free pass atm. ##FOS yomi /remove suspicion from golden and puresc2 until I get a better read on yomi @thezenman I think what I said earlier still stands. But I think also, you have to realize that if you’re town, you should be playing to contribute to the discussion through analysis, interpretation, and taking stances based on these. First, to this ; Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:13 The_Zen_Man wrote:
Now, concerning your vote, i think the rest of the players would like to have a better explanation than the one you just gave. Bandwagoning on someone seems very suspicious on me, and it seems like scum-play. And as soon as people start finding you suspicious, like yomi, and votes for you, instead of explaining yourself properly you start a case against them. You seem to prefer when someone else is getting voted for no reason at all, but when you are voted for with a good reason you start a case against them.
I would agree with you if you had come out and said my reasoning for voting for whysomuch was shitty. But it was early on, I was impulsive, and that’s all I can really say about it. If you think that I deserve a vote for this, there’s that. But I didn’t make case against them just because they made one against me. There were plenty of people who had/have their suspicions against me. But I made a case against them because I thought I thought I thought I saw a connection between them. (As above, it was related to yomi). I absolutely do not think that people should get voted for no reason, if this were near the deadline it would have been ridiculous. When you say this; Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 05:13 The_Zen_Man wrote:
nreekay324: As to my lack of contributing, it is mainly beacuse i've had to defend myself so much. That is why i posted my last post, so i could contribute a little. Also, i don't think you can complain on other peoples lack of contribution, as your only contributing post is the one above.
it just sounds like; hey, i’ve got to defend myself. you’re not contributing either, why don’t you contribute? You need to contribute more than I do. I want to make the point that your posts should have more concrete analysis. As you mentioned earlier, when you throw suspicion back to people who are pointing their fingers at you, you only look more suspicious. Your post of opinions on people was mainly just like/dislike of those people. I get that you’re being pressured, but take the time to develop more analysis that contributes to overall town discussion. If you’re only defending yourself the whole time, it adds very little. Again, I can't help but approve of the way that Nreekay was driving us forward. Yomi had been suspicious, voting for one person without evidence and then not posting any reasoning or evidence for what he did. Look at that in a vacuum, and it makes a lot of sense. It is just a mite hypocritical for Nreekay, simply because he also voted with basically no evidence. But he then told us why he voted the way he did. I find this odd (and again, illogical), but not consistent with the mindset of mafia. After this part though, he goes on a diatribe against Zen, and I honestly have no idea what it was meant to prove. I simply cannot wade through that portion, and if someone else were to comment on it I'd love to hear something about it. I just have no fucking clue what that was supposed to do, who it was supposed to convince, anything. Summary: Again, his play here seems more illogical than suspicious. Perhaps we have completely different mindsets... I really should have waited until morning for this. Anyways, here's his 3rd post that has real content in it. + Show Spoiler +On May 01 2012 01:52 nreekay324 wrote:Greetings again, D2, here we go; Veriat flipping red. + Show Spoiler +This is awesome for us, because not only did we already get one mafia, he was a roleblocker. I don’t know how many roles mafia get, but that was definitely a plus. Info from votes to who voted for him, there was; Veriat: (7): yomi, The_Zen_Man, WhySoMuch, Pure-SC2, Splinter[eP], Mordanis, O.Golden_ne. Important details include that veriat got the minimum 7/7 votes, and that the swing vote was a vote change golden made from aces to veriat. It seems unreasonable that golden was swing vote to knock veriat off just to gain town cred, as it’s not statistically favorable for mafia on a D1 lynch. For now, you have my town read Golden + Show Spoiler + I can’t see mafia offing one of their own for street cred on a minimum vote, but it’s notable it’s a possibility Looking at Veriat’s filter there’s not much to go off of. He has scum reads on thezenman, me, and jailbreaker. However, he makes no case against them, or (for zenman) a really weak case. In itself, there's so little posted it's hard to make anything of it. yomi flipping green. + Show Spoiler +Personally, I had him pegged as mafia, and I have re-evaluations to do. It’s confusing as to why the mafia chose yomi, he was a lurker, albeit with either good luck or gosu senses on veriat. However, it does give us something interesting, as one person did vote for him... Jailbreaker + Show Spoiler +1) Only vote on yomi, and yomi was shot night cycle. 2) Posts don’t seem to have a lot of content, there’s a lot of summary and weak accusations/ questioning. 3) This quote in particular; On April 29 2012 04:09 Jailbreaker wrote:
nonononononono water you guys doin? you planet all wrong.
Can't you see that other players are trying to rush people into a decision so fast??
Just because we dun have a majority vote, doesn't mean we should rush.
Even though I voted for Yomi so fast in the game, i didn't rush. Just like what golden says, stay clam and dont panic.
I know its fail logic right here, no apollo-gies here on my part.
This was a decent amount of time before the lynch-veriat train really started rolling, jailbreaker tries to advocate against it. He doesn’t provide any case in favor of Veriat however, and just side-steps the issue. 4) And then this, On April 30 2012 16:13 Jailbreaker wrote:
Since I voted to horribly wrong, I'm going to delay my vote until it is closer to the deadline.
It’s like jailbreaker wants to let other people make cases for him, so that he can choose the safest one to vote for and thus remain safe. 4) Was on Veriat’s “scum” list. I”ll defer to whysomuch for this; + Show Spoiler +On April 29 2012 09:12 WhySoMuch wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2012 18:26 Veriat wrote:
Ok here are my thoughts on who are the scum:
The_Zen_Man
nreekay324
Jailbreaker
The_Zen_Man You're stance on the "lynch no lynch" discussion has left me a little puzzled, and your overall playstyle seem fishy to me, so you're getting my vote.
nreekay324 All your posts just seem off and scummy. Many of them seem rushed or flawed, and you basically just jumped the bandwagon with your early vote on Why_So_Much. On a side note i did find Why_So_Much's playstyle kind of off, but i don't think he's scum, because then why would you vote for him?
Jailbreaker You've my number 3 due to consistent flaws in your previous posts.
However JailBreaker, this is exactly how a newer mafia would do it, he just throws his name out there with some lame, non existent reasoning. I am moving Jailbreaker to the mafia side for this alone. @Pure SC2- + Show Spoiler +On April 30 2012 06:46 Pure-SC2 wrote:
nreekay324 - His filter reads suspicious to me. I see a vote for WhySoMuch, followed by an unbolded unvote. He then leaves it at that. He makes no comment against the most suspicious person in the game so far, who was proven to be mafia. So he votes for WhySoMuch, and has FoS against Golden, Me, Yomi and The_Zen_Man (incidently all of which voted for Veriat). Very suspicious.
I should clarify, I hadn’t intended to neither leave it at whysomuch nor unvoted, but I was unable to return to the deadline. (I’ll look at whysomuch again later in this post). Apparently my unvote wasn’t registered so I didn’t get targeted by nova(looks like aces didnt get modkilled either, so I would have been okay anyway?) When I did find time to check up, it was in the night cycle and it seemed fruitless to post anything then. In regards to what you said, I’ll point out that in one of my posts I state that my FoS ; you and golden were related to yomi, as in if yomi was mafia then I would pursue you two. As he isn’t, the point is moot. Also, if you looked carefully, I made those FoS before yomi even voted for veriat. To this; On April 30 2012 17:58 Pure-SC2 wrote:
Why was yomi killed?
Mafia hit people for a reason. What was the reason behind yomi getting whacked? Well in the course of day 1, other than getting annoyed by WhySoMuch, he had genuine suspicions of two people, Veriat and nreekay324.
We know one of them was scum, and nreekay324 is my strongest scum read (refer to my night post just before the deadline). If you were the two remaining mafia, and you had seem yomi lead the lynch on one of your scum buddies, and he had found you suspicious, wouldn't that make him a good target?
Interesting points related to the hit on yomi:
- After the first day post, nreekay324 states "looks like my suspicions about yomi may have been wrong though..." - this is interesting in that if nreekay324 knows yomi is about to die and flip town it's a good way to clear himself from his earlier stated suspicions of yomi.
- People who found yomi suspicious: Jailbreaker, AcesAnoka, nreekay324
I said that because yomi voted for veriat in the very beginning. I thought it was unlikely yomi would have voted veriat in the beginning, because why choose a scum buddy when there were other lurkers to vote? Yomi was highly suspicious, and deserved this suspicion. He was lurking, HARD, and throwing out ##votes for other people to analyze. He could have easily been switching between townies, trying to confuse the town conversation. I’ve been thinking of why they would shoot yomi (I have an idea, as described later), but I don’t know what to say about it “clearing” me. I can deny it, saying that it’d be foolish because it doesn’t clear me, it really incriminates me (I have nothing original now that yomi is green), but then we’ll start throwing WIFOM around and we’ll get nowhere. If you think it’s enough to vote for me, well there’s that. @Golden- + Show Spoiler +Your first half analysis of whysomuch was rolling towards #FOSwhysomuch, but you conclude that he’s more likely an overly aggressive towny in your opinion. Is this because he voted for you/ is suspicious of you? It seems you’re trying to discredit him and his earlier posts, and as such his suspicions of you. I have my own opinions, but I was wondering if this was the point you were making.
In regards to my case against yomi, I don’t know what you mean by squirmy. But I would find it agreeable to say that when yomi flipped green, my case got shit on. There’s another post later, where I state that you and puresc2’s suspicions were really based on my suspicions of yomi being mafia, and since he wasn’t I no longer have suspicions against you two in regards to that. Re-evaluations @puresc2, golden -no more suspicions whysomuch + Show Spoiler +This jumps out at me. Why bring this up, right after the mafia lynch? This may be what golden was referring to as “the champion” of veriat’s lynch. + Show Spoiler +On April 29 2012 08:15 WhySoMuch wrote:
Well this game just became a lot more simple.
The_Zen_Man
Splinter
Pure_SC
Mordanis
Myself
Look the best for their voting yesterday
Also, he made a case against veriat and helped push his lynch. But quick-scum/town lists based on one or two ideas is messy. It’s more beneficial to take time looking at specifics and make cases (unless you’re mentioning something in a sort of passing way that you don’t want to forget), and then organize that info into lists of scum/town. It’s very confusing play,maybe just scummy town play. thezenman + Show Spoiler +I’m removing my suspicions from him now, for the case he made against Veriat. Its decent enough, and I don’t see any reason he would have, as mafia, to make such an extended case against Veriat, which contributed to the bandwagon to get veriat lynched.
Acesanoka + Show Spoiler +A number of arguments have been made, and not much to add to them because he hasn’t been posting much. He, like other lurkers, should be pressured D2. What got the successful D1 lynch was from pressuring lurkers (yomi called out veriat for this very reason). We need to keep this up.
@Blue role players + Show Spoiler +It’d be detrimental to name players, so to “all blue roles”. As I was reviewing yomi’s filter, something popped out to me; On April 29 2012 08:14 yomi wrote:
Night time is generally not a great time to post. Let the blue players do what they want and don't give mafia any hints on who they should kill. This is only a thought, but the mafia may have been hoping for a lucky blue snipe. It makes sense, because yomi was semi-lurking (blue roles tend to play more cautiously to protect the blue role). It’s not concrete, but it’s a possibility. We’re already ahead of the mafia, so we don’t need blues to do anything reckless (i.e. claim) ##FOS: Jailbreaker I'll do my best to check this/ stay active more. I understand we need to push the lead we have on the mafia. This actually confuses the hell out of me. It makes sense. In a garbled, warped way, perhaps, but he manages to communicate ideas. This is a major step up for him. Some of the things he brings up I disagree with, but this post doesn't have the batshit crazyness his first two posts had. There are only two things I find suspicious with this post. First, why did he vote for Aces? Yeah, there were some decent arguments for lynching him, but there were some pretty major shake-ups with Veriat turning out to be mafia. The other suspicious thing to me is his little comment about the blue role players. Why would he be able to name names? Why would it be detrimental to to do so? This is the prime example of the illogical world that Nreekay has been posting from. Final read from this: This paragraph exudes illogic and dumb-townie. Almost too much so. It feels, somehow, contrived
Okay, so to sum up my feelings on Nreekay, I'd have to say that right now I'm getting much more of an incompetent/illogical town read than a straight scum read. As I just wrote however, it does feel somewhat contrived, and so whether its simply a function of a less-than-superior mastery of the language/rhetoric, or whether he's trying to hide something, is beyond me to say. More than anything, his posting makes my head hurt. Prime example: several times he's told everyone to stop lurking, but he has published little content. WTF? Does he not realize that other people have posted much, much more than him?
All said and done, I weakly support a lynch for him in the future if he doesn't change. He isn't adding anything to the discussion, but only distracting from it with senseless posts. The difference I see between him and Jailbreaker is that Jailbreaker seems much more active in his attempts to throw us off (if he indeed is). Where Nreekay seems to be simply bad at communicating (and lilely mafia in general), Jailbreaker seemed to be actively trying to steer us away from voting for Veriat. I'm getting a fairly weak town read for Nreekay, but I don't mind a lynch because I'd say there's probably a 30-35% probability he's mafia (just made that up completely off the top of my head), but either way he isn't helping. So for the final judgement:
Unless Jailbreaker manages to completely exculpate himself, I'd favor a lynch for Jailbreaker. I would however vote for either one.
. I felt that his (nreekay's) play had an underlying feeling of being contrived, but I went the dumb-townie route. Turns out he (nreekay) was scum, and this read may have lost an unwinnable game had I chosen to listen to another player instead of the one I did (SexDoll; I based my vigi shot on his cases). So in my experience, when someone is going too far to make themselves seem like they've been huffing bleach mixed with sewage, they're trying to avoid suspicion by using the newbie game excuse.
Different experiences, I suppose. But in a game where you're inherently at the information disadvantage, looking at motive is critical, IMO. Thus, that's how I target. Dumb play is frequently just dumb play.
|
I agree that motives are critical, but when I see someone's motive as purposely making everyone else believe they're illogical and emotional, I feel that's more strongly correlated with scum play than the other cases that have been submitted. I'm pretty sure it was contrived because of the random controlled/ non-controlled elements of his "Shut the fuck up" post. The illogical/emotional defense is great for scum, but it doesn't help town at all except to keep one player alive. A contrived effort to establish a defense that only harms town and helps scum I find to be very scummy.
|
On August 03 2012 08:35 Mordanis wrote:
I agree that motives are critical, but when I see someone's motive as purposely making everyone else believe they're illogical and emotional, I feel that's more strongly correlated with scum play than the other cases that have been submitted. I'm pretty sure it was contrived because of the random controlled/ non-controlled elements of his "Shut the fuck up" post. The illogical/emotional defense is great for scum, but it doesn't help town at all except to keep one player alive. A contrived effort to establish a defense that only harms town and helps scum I find to be very scummy.
I'm still just worried about the Angus beef, who wanted me to read on everyone, but reinforced the only read I'd posted right after. Call me crazy, but every time I've tried to think of a townie motive for that, I've sounded to myself like I was the one smoking crack cooked in the ruins of Chernobyl.
Given how things have gone so far, we're going to need to get the entire town united on somebody, which, I expect, includes most of the sheep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
