EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXIII - Page 45
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
| ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
Orangeremi (2): Aquanim, cDgCorazon OmniEulogy (1): Orangeremi threesr (1): OmniEulogy shz (1): Chromatically Not voting (5): Kickstart, threesr, shz, Sylencia, FatChunk, Currently, Orangeremi is set to be lynched! ~12 hours remaining in day 1. Please PM any of your friendly neighborhood hosts if your vote is counted incorrectly. Remember that you have to vote. Full version: + Show Spoiler + Orangeremi (2): OmniEulogy (1): threesr (1): OmniEulogy shz (1): Chromatically, FatChunk (0): Kickstart (0): Not voting (5): Kickstart, threesr, shz, Sylencia, FatChunk | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
| ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
On December 23 2012 10:47 Aquanim wrote: I think I disagree with you on preferences here. I too like both Orange and Shz as lynches, but Orange's behaviour around the day one lynch is pretty ridiculous. His first post after the Spag case is: He then proceeds to vote no-lynch after saying some other random stuff. When he comes back in the morning, he votes FatChunk. With absolutely no reason. So, did he switch from Spag because he found Spag's defence convincing? Nope. As for his read on Kick: This was in reference to Orange's read on Kick before his posts day 2. Kick only posted once during the night, and I don't see how a #2 scum read turns into a null with that one post. Basically, the only reason I can see for voting FatChunk is to avoid being on the Spag wagon, and the only reason for that is to avoid responsibility for lynching Spag. As for why he voted FC rather than Kick, FC was the more generally acceptable target at that time I think. In fact: ##Unvote ##Vote: Orangeremi Orangeremi, explain yourself. Now. @FatChunk: Still want to see more from you. I suppose I should clarify. I've had very few scum reads this game. I've had plenty of suspicions. When referring to 'scum reads' I'm just mentioning the players I'm suspicious of. I honestly couldn't say that I wasn't convinced any players were scum D1. My explanation for voting FC over Spag is I was convinced Spag was town after reading his long final post before being lynched. At that point I felt it was a toss-up between FC and Kickstart in my mind and I just voted to avoid voting no-lynch (since people seemed to not want me to). I would take all the players I've mentioned with a grain of salt, especially since I haven't made a case for any of them. However, none of my suspicions from then compare with how convinced I am with my D2 vote. After viewing Chrom's evidence towards Omni and then reviewing it myself, there's no way he's town. | ||
|
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On December 23 2012 21:16 Orangeremi wrote: My explanation for voting FC over Spag is I was convinced Spag was town after reading his long final post before being lynched. At that point I felt it was a toss-up between FC and Kickstart in my mind and I just voted to avoid voting no-lynch (since people seemed to not want me to). I would take all the players I've mentioned with a grain of salt, especially since I haven't made a case for any of them. I guess I can buy that. Your content level is still a problem for me, but Lord knows you're not the worst offender on that count. Could you give your own summary of why you think Omni's scum? I know Chromatic's covered a fair bit of the ground already, but I'd like to hear it in your own words. ##Unvote Gonna have to think about where my vote goes next. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6590 Posts
 | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6590 Posts
##FoS: FatChunk Please give concrete examples of myself and Chrom working together in a way that implies what you are saying. N1 he made the biggest cast on me and D2 he has given me the most trouble. I'm interested to see what you come up with. @Chrom I am much less convinced in voting on Shz after his defense of us because if he was scum it would be easy to push a lynch on me. I also said before that I had a neutral opinion of Shz and that has more or less stayed true. His recent contributions have been well thought out and although it isn't really scum hunting I believe it's still good that he is trying to explain who he thinks is town and why. I believe I should also add @Shz I still have a town read on Chroma. My FoS was defensive and meant as a way for him to stop misunderstanding my posts and read them again. Actually based on Shz's case for me, and I know I'm town, it wouldn't make any sense for scum to defend me and put himself at risk through association right now so I'm leaning towards him being town. my top reads are FC, and Orange for pushing this rediculous case that Chrom and I are a scumteam. I know I'm Town and still have a pretty good read on town Chrom so I can only view it as an attempt to bandwagon Mocsta's idea and try to get another town lynch D2 while they go under the radar by saying it was Mocsta's last case against me. And then Threesr is just absolutely useless so I wouldn't mind getting rid of him but I admit I don't really like the idea of possibly wasting D2's vote on him. Let's keep in mind Orange said On December 22 2012 14:01 Orangeremi wrote: @cake I'm interested in his theory regarding you+OE+Chrom scum team, but I don't know how much credibility it has. and then without saying he has changed his mind on anything After viewing Chrom's evidence towards Omni and then reviewing it myself, there's no way he's town. I would take all the players I've mentioned with a grain of salt, especially since I haven't made a case for any of them. He's taking the word of somebody he believes to be scum and using their case on somebody he believes to be their scum mate? I call BS. ##FoS: Orangeremi ##Unvote | ||
|
Orangeremi
United States94 Posts
| ||
|
Chromatically
United States1700 Posts
On December 23 2012 14:18 shz wrote: You, sir did not understand my post at all. Maybe it was strangely worded so Ill try again: If Omni were scum, he could have just voted for you instead of going for Spaghetti, because at that time you were bout to get lynched. Except if you were scum too, than he had to rescue you from your demise. But if you were scum, and he were scum, we would not made his case againt you in the first place. This is why I don't think there is a reasom to believe Omni is scum. If Omni was scum, he could have switched off to avoid suspicion at being on the major wagon, or maybe he switched off because he doesn't care who is lynched. I talked about this in my case, perhaps you should read it again. I do not understand how we are considering lynching lurkers (threesr/Orange) over the very scummy players in this game. Read the cases I've posted (Omni, shz) and ask yourself for the town and scum motivation. The scum motivation is rampant. Read the case on Orange and ask yourself for motivation. There is no scum motivation. Why would we lynch lurkers over scum? | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
I've mainly held off because I've also considered Omni who has been on my watchlist from last night when I made my post, but I haven't been 100% convinced about voting him yet. | ||
|
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 22 2012 10:24 cakepie wrote: I would look for one or two scum among {OmniEulogy, Aquanim, Chromatically} in that order of decreasing suspicion. Here we go on the top two of those: ----- Aquanim Casting the very first vote on Corazon was stated as pressure vote, and it was effective at generating activity -- except that it devolved into havoc for a bit with threesr shitting up the thread. The corazon "scumslip" did not help either. While this was happening he did not ask Corazon any questions himself, which is a little strange to me. Perhaps the volume of resulting posts was good enough for him? Beyond that, it is his initiating and pushing forward the Spag lynch that might be the greatest cause of suspicion for anyone -- but Mocsta also thought it was a good case. I too have no right to fault Aquanim for his case, which I found to agree with many of my observations and suspicions. After that, he has remained inviting and open to scrutiny about the D1 mislynch when answering questions about it. He has continued to pressure the most inactive players and most recently has been advancing his suspicions on OrangeRemi. This, continuing from his D1 performance, leans toward town behavior. What is interesting to note is that he started two of the three wagons that actually got anywhere on D1. (the other being on threesr, who pretty much made himself an inviting target). Overall, I find it much easier to explain his behavior by a townie hypothesis than by a scum hypothesis. Leading a wagon is far too conspicuous and risky, and to do it twice in one day phase has got to be absolutely nuts or balls of steel. I shall record my thoughts on the scum hypothesis here for information and scrutiny: + Show Spoiler + If Aquanim were scum trying to influence/direct town, the scumteam would be making an exceptionally daring and risky play -- although the way town has played (and I do not exclude myself from blame here) actually makes it viable to run this risk, it was difficult to know this in advance. Continuing the scum hyphothesis, with Aquanim aiming to lead the town lynches, the remaining scum would have to run interference and cause confusion and/or lend support to the target wagons. Out of all the possibilities for that, I think it is most likely that threesr is the scumbuddy designated to draw attention, run interference where necessary, and lurk where not needed. He can then be safely bussed D3+ if needed. One other scum I would expect to lie low, but remain careful not to be the most unhelpful/unproductive -- most likely a scum with a power role -- sadly we have several candidates that fit the bill here. Regardless, I currently consider Aquanim to be null+, having completed the obligatory scrutiny required as a consequence of his leading the Spag wagon. ----- OmniEulogy Managed to fly under the radar for the better part of D1, but then drew the suspicion of both Spaghetticus and Mocsta. Crucially, he wagoned onto both Corazon and Spaghetticus, and made really ridiculous statements with his VT claim, and "100% scum" read on Corazon. His vote on Corazon was motivated primarily by the "scumslip", with little additional support On December 20 2012 09:29 OmniEulogy wrote: He slipped up so badly I can't believe it was a mistake. He actually claimed mafia after an already terrible start while being defensive and being overly cautious of most of his posts. I think Theesr's constant back and forth with him made him slip up. [snip] I believe at the moment our best bet is to lynch Corazon at the end of D1, see who jumps on the bandwagon and if he flips scum we'll be able to look at who tried to defend him, who eventually gave in, and who was set on lynching him right away. What rubs me the wrong way here is that with still almost a whole day to go, he is perfectly happy to settle down to a bandwagon on Corazon, on the basis of a supposed slip, for the sake of information gain, looking at who might jump to Corazon's defense. His vote takes it up to three, and makes it easy for threesr (re-vote), shz and sylencia to follow on the wagon, which I do not consider a positive outcome. Besides this he was participative, although his discussion revolved around uncontroversial targets and did not reveal much, except when he FoS'ed OrangeRemi for an "unjustified claim" against Sylencia + Show Spoiler + On December 20 2012 18:22 OmniEulogy wrote: You have good points Spaghetticus but it doesn't really change my mind. People did come to his defense and tried to counter by voting for Threesr. Corazon started off the game saying he hoped D1 would be quiet and peaceful and no real information should come out during it which also seems a little scummy as everybody else started off hoping for some good conversation and to build up leads. Not wait for N1/D2 where we lose somebody and have no information about why they die. The fact that he's new CAN explain these things but I refuse to believe he is dumb. I think he thought it out and tried to come across as reasonable. I've already said I want to start going after the lurkers with our remaining time D1 and if we find something that removes Corazon from suspicion so be it. My vote is not locked yet it is just on the person I find most likely to be scum. I don't think he's past the point of no return either. I believe the vote count is 5 for Corazon and 3 for Threesr at the moment. and as I said Threesr would be my #2 if it weren't for the fact that it wouldn't make any sense for both him and Corazon to be scum. I'd like Corazon to tell us his top scum reads, and why they seem to be. I'd also like to note to Spaghetticus and everybody else that if you are looking for more people who came to Corazon's defense, Orangeremi tried to make a case of why Corazon wasn't scum and went back to lurking. I'd like to actually hear why Orangeremi refused to give us an idea of who his top scum reads were and why he didn't actually say why Corazon wasn't acting scummy. The fact that he then put out the same three names for his top scum reads that everybody else had and then went into hiding again is also suspicious. In Orangeremi's own words "Instead of looking for scum players, they would be making unjustified claims hoping others hop wagon in an attempt to get an innocent player lynched." and then "Otherwise, I have a slight suspicion of Sylencia that is based solely on a hunch and little to no evidence." based on that... ##FOS Orangeremi The next big thing from him is his vote onto Spaghetticus, which is mainly supported by the fact that Spaghetticus attempted to defend Corazon, who he considers "100% scum", and for a what he considered a poor defense against the case. The one way I can try to justify this as town is if he were tunneling so incredibly hard and by extension tunnels Spaghetticus as well simply by association (and perhaps even OrangeRemi as well, who tried to find an explanation for Corazon not being scum). This would, of course, be a terrible way to play as town -- why not lynch the 100% scum read then, especially if you are going for simple and straightfoward play? More importantly, it runs counter to his express intent from earlier: to lynch Corazon and then assess the information gained from that. On December 21 2012 00:15 OmniEulogy wrote: I'm going to play safe in my first game as VT in mafia. As has already been pointed out, this VT claim is utterly ridiculous, and is atrocious ahead of N1 as it helps scum focus their PK onto blue roles. It is premature, since there is hardly a threat of him being lynched. He has tried to explain it as "pre-emptive" to protect himself -- but at what cost in terms of risk to our blues? This is a selfish play without any motive to help the town. As for playing safe, I cannot see his Spaghetticus vote and VT claim as "safe" plays, if he were indeed a VT. The safe vote, considering his position on different players at the time, would have been to stick to his vote on Corazon. The VT claim is a "safe" play only for self preservation, and not in the interest of town. In N1 Omni chummies up to Mocsta and Chromatically, agreeing with both of them that he has a strong town read on the other person for the same reasons. Mocsta certainly did not agree that the evidence pointed to a strong town read on Chromatically. Apart from these, Mocsta raises a few other points on Omni that he considers suspicious in his pre-dawn post, but I feel that he may be reading too much into things on some of these suspicions -- the same way that he is wrong about casting me as his third suspect. On D2 Omni starts by fending off questioning from Chromatically about his VT claim, and then... chooses to pursue threesr -- who has conveniently not even been playing. Now that that has proven futile he chooses to FoS FatChunk and OrangeRemi in OMGUS fashion. ----- Assessing the state of the game:
In my D1 voting pattern analysis, I tried to trace how scum may have planned to distribute their voting and thread posting activity. In our current state, feeling the loss of Spaghetticus and Mocsta, I consider that the greatest threat to us is scum that is amongst the few remaining highly active players. The lurkier scum have too much room to hide for now, and it is difficult to nail them townies who had been lurking before step it up some more; threesr has been absent and is on track to be modkilled at this rate, and in any case his absence for now means he is not in the thread causing havoc. I have too many "just-below-null" reads at the moment to tease apart (will post some thoughts after this). But OmniEulogy is my biggest scumread at the moment, and a scum Omni continuing to masquerade as town in D3 and onwards is far too dangerous for me to contemplate. ##Vote: OmniEulogy Any other lynch today for me is more than two-thirds likely to be a mislynch, and scum will kill at least one more useful townie tonight, putting us at 6-3 with 3~5 lurkers -- a terrible spot. Of course, if I am wrong about Omni, then we will be pretty much in the same place as well. But this is the best shot I've got at the moment, and I've got to take it. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
On December 23 2012 21:16 Orangeremi wrote: I suppose I should clarify. I've had very few scum reads this game. I've had plenty of suspicions. When referring to 'scum reads' I'm just mentioning the players I'm suspicious of. I honestly couldn't say that I wasn't convinced any players were scum D1. My explanation for voting FC over Spag is I was convinced Spag was town after reading his long final post before being lynched. At that point I felt it was a toss-up between FC and Kickstart in my mind and I just voted to avoid voting no-lynch (since people seemed to not want me to). I would take all the players I've mentioned with a grain of salt, especially since I haven't made a case for any of them. However, none of my suspicions from then compare with how convinced I am with my D2 vote. After viewing Chrom's evidence towards Omni and then reviewing it myself, there's no way he's town. This satisfies me as well. I feel like it explains the things you were accused of. Good job defending yourself, just keep up the scum hunting. ##unvote | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
Right now, I am going to vote for a no-lynch, as my mind is not made up on who we should lynch. We have about 5.5 hours left in the day, so anything could happen. ##Vote:No-lynch If anyone has a problem with this, let me know. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
##Vote:No-lynch | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
|
cakepie
985 Posts
On December 24 2012 01:26 cDgCorazon wrote: Right now, I am going to vote for a no-lynch, as my mind is not made up on who we should lynch. We have about 5.5 hours left in the day, so anything could happen. ##Vote:No-lynch If anyone has a problem with this, let me know. I hope you intend to change that at some point. With the current spread of votes across different candidates, and time running short, I am concerned that this would make it too easy for a lynch to go through with as few as 3-4 votes, with scum comfortably scattered to thwart analysis. | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
##Vote: shz | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
In all honesty, I have a lot of suspicion of Omni, but I feel like any more cases against him would just be overkill, but I don't want to bandwagon either. | ||
|
Sylencia
Australia1057 Posts
| ||
| ||
