EPT@Cake: What are your reads atm and explain them please?
Newbie Student Mafia VIII - Page 18
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
LightningStrike
United States14276 Posts
@Cake: What are your reads atm and explain them please? | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On April 20 2015 13:21 Trfel wrote: Well, I need to go to bed. I'm sleepy. But I really want everyone to read my above post, or at least my two scumreads. I'll quote them again here, so you have no excuse for being too lazy to scroll up two posts. Thoughts or comments are much appreciated. If you don't like either of these lynches, who do you want to lynch instead? random questionnaire stage which replaces RVS in some early games and really throws my play off it's not that i don't think you are scum, it's just that you flattered me earlier On April 20 2015 14:44 ObiWanShinobi wrote: ##vote cakepie No reason not to do this now. If he's not going to post, then there's no reason not to take care of this guy. Also, now is about the time we need to start consolidating on targets and such. Normally I would wait longer to tell people this, but the game is incredibly low activity and there's no reason to keep our votes out of play like this. come on, man, a policy lynch? it would be easy as pie to get cake replaced. On April 20 2015 14:59 cakepie wrote: Oh yeah, fantastic, get pvoted while drafting. =/ I'm here, talk to me. Better things to do than policy lynch with plenty of time remaining. And even if you're determined to go LAL, isn't there someone else who is even less active? im quoting your smallpost because coincidentally upon reading 2 posts before it i didnt want to vote you next in the post right above this one you said "bm called it scumandeering" actually no i find that post null because i feel he wrote it before the game started which just shows hes a player that tries too hard and is really just someone who will derail the town regardless of alignment who wants the spotlight it's not necessarily scumandeering where it is probably null. I don't believe he worked an hour before and an hour after. secondly the scumandeering he was doing is more through 1) being the first poster 2) rushing onto the stage 3) using that big post when he did as opposed to breaking discussion a. he could have used it in his first post, the first post of the game (town) b. the timing of it lends credence to his scum as opposed to the actual post itself... it's more of a slip than scumandeering 3) his scumandeering comes most from him trying to throw his weight around on the town's opinion of who is scum. he is trying to lump me and bourne in together because he mistakenly thinks i'm a weak player when I am Vanilla Town. Jokes on him, I'm not. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
##vote bourne I feel like this clears up a lot about my "supposed partner" being bourne I could easily see Trfel FoSing bourne and trying to get a lynch on me with him and bourne coasting with the disassociation If bourne flips scum I'm pushing Trfel the rest of every single post I make this game | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
not voting my lawyer haha | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
On April 20 2015 01:32 Bill Murray wrote: There is 1 role that should be claiming. Cop. On April 20 2015 10:02 Bill Murray wrote: i thought this was cop/doc i didnt know there was potentially a roleblocker proof | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
LoneMeow
Finland1396 Posts
Vote Count TheBloodyDwarf (0): Trfel (0): cakepie (1): ObiWanShinobi Bill Murray (1): Onegu Bourneq (0): plotspot (1): cakepie Onegu (0): Not voting (10): TheBloodyDwarf, scott31337, LightningStrike, LeiNadk, Trfel, The Shining, Damdred, Bill Murray, Bourneq, plotspot + Show Spoiler [Vote counter log] + VOTE: scott31337 voted TheBloodyDwarf (post) VOTE: Bill Murray voted trfel (Trfel) (post) VOTE: Onegu voted Bill Murray (post) VOTE: scott31337 unvoted TheBloodyDwarf (post) VOTE: Bill Murray unvoted Trfel (post) VOTE: Bill Murray voted onegu (Onegu) (post) VOTE: ObiWanShinobi voted cakepie (post) VOTE: cakepie voted plotspot (post) VOTE: Bill Murray unvoted Onegu (post) VOTE: Bill Murray voted bourne (Bourneq) (post) VOTE: Bill Murray unvoted Bourneq (post) Currently, Bill Murray is set to be lynched. Day 1 ends in at 01:00 GMT (+00:00). Remember, voting is Mandatory. You may NOT abstain. | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
11 hours so, @Trfel why aren't you voting any of your two top suspects really? | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
Speaking of scumteams I thought 1) we had 9 players and there were 2 scum 2) it was Cop/Doc/Goon/Goon 3) I am actually relatively confirmed village idiot at this point But you all can go ahead and lynch me I'm not even going to doublevote on someone to get the vote off of me On April 20 2015 01:03 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: Hey veterans here. What is your experience about inactive players that come to thread with post stating their reason for inactivity and haven't posted at all. How many times they have been scums? I mean just inactivity on day1 gives them like "free" day. Less posts, less scumhunting on them. I don't see this guy as being scum. The last part of his post is more of a "theory posed as a question" There is a guy on this website named Foolishness, who, in the prime of his mafia playing, wasn't the best mafia player. He was great as town, but as mafia, he would emulate his blue play, possibly subconsciously, and coast through D1 to D2 before he would start posting. As VT however the guy would be posting this huge ass posts detailing the possibility of entire scumteams On April 20 2015 07:14 TheBloodyDwarf wrote: Wow, I have been banned several times on this website but damn, now there is name that I should look forward to when playing mafia. Such a legend. + Show Spoiler + /jk Do I need to even need to stay this? I still don't think this guy should be lynched, even when he's making fun of me. I feel like he is just a bored VT. ##vote: Scott31337 IIoA, AtA, AtS, voting obvious bored townie Scott has been giving any bit of off topic information, or even on topic information, without actually doing analysis. I will highlight this now: On April 19 2015 13:00 scott31337 wrote: Thanks - now I'm Scott31333337. *facepalm* Trfel's post looks like something he wrote up the day before and is not alignment indicative. When I first read this, I thought Bourneq was asking for tone reads on himself, which I did not understand since he only had one post. Reading your point of view, I do not know what tone reads he would give off - and then added the TLDR post - meh. What do you think of the LS/Damdred exchange? I know LS can be intimidated - and avoiding questions intentionally is viewed as scummy. Even in his most scumhunting sounding post, he chooses to word it as "is viewed as scummy" as opposed to "is scummy". His previous scumhunting analysis is a whopping "meh"... literally. He literally says that. What can we get out of someone saying "meh" ? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. On April 19 2015 14:27 scott31337 wrote: I really don't have much at the moment - Damdred slight town - you as well - I believe Shining is still upset about the case I made about him four months ago in LX. Everyone else null ATM his one town post, the above, even feels forced. he throws out a couple leans as bones to the town, and then goes on to finish it with the almighty "Everyone is null" Yeah it's early in the game but this is different. This is him trying to coast through while having activity for the sake of activity without committing to any analysis whatsoever. On April 19 2015 14:37 scott31337 wrote: I'll let one of the others answer the "tone read" question better then I can - but from the rules/first post, Do not talk about coaching in the game. just FYI More IIoA. Bringing up a topic and not even answering it. He defers. On April 19 2015 14:44 scott31337 wrote: Obi and Damdred have been asking questions and offering their ideas and they feel honest to me so far. From your message I assumed you have played IRL mafia before, correct? There is the TL Mafia Database that has information on others mafia games played on this site - if you want to look into peoples previous games. When directly questioned comes up with a bullshit excuse based upon "he feels obi and damdred are town" He then goes onto the worst of his IIoA and becomes a human library trying to throw a link out to get suspicion off himself. He is feigning helpfulness as scum and this post also highlights my next talking point, his AtA. AtA = appealing to authority. He is sucking up to what he views as the better players haha he is also trying to butt in anytime the moderator is brought up On April 20 2015 08:47 scott31337 wrote: What do you think of LightningStrike? And a reads list would be nice as well. in his most recent post with a forced question about someone he has had no discussion about or analysis of (asked towards cakepie about LightningStrike) this is there because CakePie has actually been shrugging off his scum aura and shining forth in the spotlight more. He has actually become a very helpful member of town. The reason Scott is doing this is scum motivated. He wants a list of reads from Cakepie to see whether or not he should be killing him tonight. If Scott himself is lower on that list, bam, the cake is a lie. There are other explanations here including his not understanding the meta of the thread, coaching, actual analysis etc but I feel like, given his earlier posting, he is using this as AtA and judging where cake stands on the issue for negative reasons. On April 20 2015 07:29 scott31337 wrote: What a night! Let me catch up in the thread - TBD picked it up a little bit, but he's still on a tight leash for now. ## Unvote What the hell is this BM? This is a terrible idea and you know it. BM roles scum like 80% of the time anyway, RNG gods love him. That's an excellent read - although I have before - the whole banlist is worth a read too.  Are you feeling okay - or? Sorry to hear that. Looks like others went over BM's terrible idea already... And here he appeals to statistics. He has the worst reaction of anyone to my trying to get some plan rolling. Town can't afford to have this sort of plan but people who are town are going to largely mull it over. Upon reading this I'm sure you all are thinking to yourself "well he's right" but in mafia it doesnt matter whether or not you are right it matters what you can get your friendly town to do with you. When someone is saying "BM rolls scum 80%" of the time to subconsciously fuck with you guys and get me lynched that's utter bullshit. Someone thats AtS along with AtA and IIoA needs to go Lastly he was voting for TheBloodyDwarf who I completely disagree with him on. In fact I feel like he was trying to go for one of the most obvious vanilla town that is a village idiot and possibly a good mislynch For all of those reasons I'm voting the 3rd filter I looked at, Scott. ##vote scott331331313 | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
This is typical scum behavior, just look at how he talks about me and LS. No conclusions, no conclusions about anything in his filter just oh maybe this or maybe that just bad plan by bm which has been said a lot. Hes trying to fit in without standing out to much. We lynch him ##Vote Cake | ||
|
Bill Murray
United States9292 Posts
| ||
|
Trfel
7015 Posts
But I did notice that he called Foolishness a great player for town, while mentioning that he makes really long posts. And earlier, Bill Murray scumread me because I made a long post, and long posts are bad for town. Hm. Anyway, to answer The Shining and Damdred (various questions): When I said I was "happy" with Bourneq, I meant that I had no desire to lynch him. In that very post, you can see that I listed players in terms of "don't lynch" or "could lynch", not town or scum, because I prefer to go lynch by lynch and not town versus scum when I have the time to do so. When I got back from my concert, I read the filter of everyone in the game (except myself, of course), and then I noticed Bourneq's inconsistency in his read on me. I asked about Bourneq not because I wanted to probe out the thread sentiment, but because I wanted to get people's thoughts on Bourneq before I posted, thus getting more information. I had already written out my portion on Bourneq at that time, but I waited to post until I finished going over and typing about every player. I didn't wait for more people to share thoughts about Bourneq because I needed to get something out there to get the thread moving, and I'm confident in the read, so I want people to see it. I wasn't trying to make an unflipped association read between Bourneq and Bill Murray, I'm sorry that it came off that way (the association between the two is not very significant, I think). I was meaning to convey confidence in my reads on both of them. As to my seeming non-stance between them? I wanted to leave it open to people's responses more. At the time, I slightly preferred lynching Bourneq. Now, I prefer lynching Bourneq to Bill Murray by quite a bit. I'm sorry that the way I went about scumreading Bourneq was a bit round-about. But if you just look at the arguments I gave, and look at Bourneq's response, it's extremely likely that Bourneq is mafia here. After the post that Bourneq mentioned, supposedly trying to draw out Bill Murray, Bill Murray made another post where he explained his read, and then later (upon request) Bourneq made yet another post explaining why my play was scummy, including saying that he was getting a scummy vibe from me. Bourneq's explanation means that he really wouldn't have to say this here. I really want to lynch Bourneq here, but I'll take another look at the posts since I went to sleep first. | ||
|
Trfel
7015 Posts
Lynching inactives is just not good. Especially when we actually have some things to go on. Plotspot will need to come back by the end of the day to vote. Just wait for him, don't lynch him. Be suspicious of him? Yes. Wagon him before he does anything? Of course not. And I don't want to lynch cakepie either. He reloaded the thread while reading, to see how things were going? I do that basically every game. He took a really long time to get started in the game? Somewhat suspicious, but not enough to lynch him over. He spent some ridiculous amount of time supposedly reading the thread? Still not enough to lynch him for. The most important thing, by far, is what he comes up with when he actually enters the thread. I like his analysis. He says that he will avoid repeating things others have said as much as possible, and he offers a different perspective on some parts of the thread. He clearly shows critical thinking about the game. His perspective on LightningStrike and me is definitely new. But, his vote on plotspot is more suspicious, though he does say that he doesn't think that Day 1 is very accurate, so I suppose I can live with it for now. I still think that Bourneq's explanation of his play isn't very plausible. This makes me more confident about lynching him, because he gave an explanation which I don't accept. If it was only the first quote about being willing to lynch me, I could accept it. But when he accomplished his goal (Bill Murray giving his reasoning) and after that, still provided more reasons for suspecting me (apparently without believing it or wanting to lynch me), that I don't understand. On April 20 2015 19:59 Bourneq wrote: This post looks more suspicious as well. Why would town think of this 12 minutes after the post and come back to clarify it? Maybe I'm going too far here, but I'm thinking that he saw that The Shining was suspicious of me and then clarified this.Little side note to my last post. Just because I did not want to vote trfel does not mean I've towned him yet. Bourneq is the best lynch here. Lynch scum. ##vote Bourneq | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
What analysis the one where he doesn't actually analysis anything or come to any real conclussions doesn't push any scum read or any town agenda and just plynches? You are chainsaw defending people now. Back into the scum pile for you | ||
|
Trfel
7015 Posts
On April 20 2015 23:53 Damdred wrote: I am not defending cakepie. I am showing why I don't think that he is a good lynch today, compared to Bill Murray, and especially compared to Bourneq.He reloaded the thread and took like 12 hours to actually post anything of any substance and still didn't come to any conclussions and then wasted his vote on a plylnch he never even talked about NOR PUSHED. What analysis the one where he doesn't actually analysis anything or come to any real conclussions doesn't push any scum read or any town agenda and just plynches? You are chainsaw defending people now. Back into the scum pile for you On April 20 2015 17:06 cakepie wrote: Given this post, I think that his vote makes sense. And it's not a wasted vote. It's a policy lynch, which I think is bad, but you shouldn't scumread him for this when you've been advocating the same thing yourself this game.Well, I’m not going to post a huge ordered list or give townreads and help scum prioritize out who to kill off. And it should not be surprising at this stage of D1 to be looking at a lot of null± among moderately active players. I’ve given my strongest read and voiced a couple of my suspicions, and though the latter are a bit more swingy and hard to place for now, with their activity, we’ll have more to work with as we go. Unfortunately, with my fairly limited experience, D1 still feels like a crapshoot, barring some really obvious slip or discrepancy from someone. I think BM fits the bill best here. (see what I did there?) I've talked to some good players about proper town play. The best time to defend people is when you have an alternative lynch which you think is much better. I have presented reasons to lynch Bourneq, and he is quite likely to be scum. This is the most confidence I have in a Day 1 scum lynch in quite some time. | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
HE HAS NO CONCLUSSIONS ABOUT ANYTHING GOING ON IN THE THREAD, HES JUST DOING THINGS TO LOOK LIKE HES DOING THINGS. | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
Also you really need to look at what a wasted vote with no push is, because what he did is the definition of it. | ||
| ||
