Part 1 of Tree.hugger's Post Review
+ Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 06:08 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 05:39 XeliN wrote:
I'm not entirely sure on the inactive thing, if there is someone who doesn't post whatsoever they are dead anyway, and it encourages people to spam simply to not be case as inactive. Depends how things work out, if there is someone who at the end of day 1 has only posted one thing that is about as useful as typing "lol mafia!" then I'd agree but it depends on circumstance.
This only really applies for the first day, after that lynching for inactivity if there is not a more obvious choice seems like a universally very good idea, but I'm surprised more people arn't considering the idea of using a RNG to decide our first kill.
And OpZ just lol @ immediately claiming 3 people seemingly randomly as mafia. So much spam in the first couple pages. Get a hold of yourselves people, you're not witty. Also, our inactive lynches always end up being townies, but every time when we look back at the game, there's always a mafia member or two who was inactive at the beginning, or posted and spammed just enough to clear the inactivity bar. I propose we make a list of FIVE players who are inactive, and then RNG them to determine a lynch candidate. That way we either force mafia into the open, or catch that one newbie mafia who doesn't know how to post properly. At the very least that would make the town's move a little harder to gauge. On July 18 2010 12:29 tree.hugger wrote:Gentlemen, this is not majority lynch. A plan for all abstaining will basically allow the mafia to get a free shot off, because they can hide behind all the inactives, and pretend they didn't read the thread due to IRL, and thus did not unvote for ___. Bad idea. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 10:44 DarthThienAn wrote:
[DarthThienAn inserts thoughts on the no-lynch plan]
My goal is to maximize the number of deaths at the end of Day 1. Therefore, we should lynch someone who has voted. You're going to play like Chezinu? So be it. *** Also, I'd like to once again push the plan of creating a list of FIVE or FOUR inactive players, and then using a random number generator to determine the lynch target. There are many ways we can do this, whether by using the amount of games SKT manages to take off of CJ tonight (well, we'd have to assign 0 to somebody) or some other random metric. Hell, someone could even stream it on their livestream. In that vein, I suggest that we use Siniquity's list as our guide. I've selected random players who look interesting to me from the list of people who had not posted at that time. I somewhat think that mafia tend to post once called out on inactivity, as it's a stupid way to go at the beginning, so hyperbola LaxerCannon Citi.zen All of whom have posted uselessly, should be on the list. Obviously Citi.zen is an adept player, and so he could probably play his way off the list, but for the time being, he's raised several flags.
Speaks out against the day 1 no-lynch, a pretty obvious town move. Of course mafia may try this as well to net some town points
+ Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote:
And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon On July 18 2010 13:45 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 13:09 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote:
And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon why is it dumb The reason it was introduced in the first place what completely ridiculous. Nothing smart about any of it. We should lynch people for good reasons, not dumb ones. I'm still looking for more nominations for people to lynch. I think those three are a good start. Time to pick one, yes? How about I PM five people a list of the candidates in order, and then someone in the thread will choose a number from 1-3? On July 18 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 13:57 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 13:45 tree.hugger wrote:On July 18 2010 13:09 Divinek wrote:On July 18 2010 12:30 tree.hugger wrote:
And this bandwagon against Hyperbola is just dumb.
## Vote Laxercannon why is it dumb The reason it was introduced in the first place what completely ridiculous. Nothing smart about any of it. We should lynch people for good reasons, not dumb ones. I'm still looking for more nominations for people to lynch. I think those three are a good start. Time to pick one, yes? How about I PM five people a list of the candidates in order, and then someone in the thread will choose a number from 1-3? but WHY was it ridiculous, WHY was it not smart, WHY were the reasons dumb. You might as well have not posted as there was no substance to what you just said Because there were no reasons. Hell, did you even look to see what Hyperbola did to make himself so suspicious? Because he didn't do anything, and that's what I call playing stupidly. Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 16:02 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
Actually, until those 5 people explain themselves.
##unvote
##vote pandain
You get the vote as the third - fourth voter of most bandwagons turns out to be red. Convince me your legit, or stop being retarded and ill move my vote. I think, as Divinek is busy proving, these fine gentlemen were voting for Hyperbola for no reason whatsoever. They're all pretty new players, and I'm not convinced that's a list we're likely to find mafia on. I'd rather work with inactivity. Bedtime now. CJ fighting! On July 19 2010 01:15 tree.hugger wrote:
Alright, so it's a little too late, and nobody seems up on my idea for picking randomly from a list of inactives. Fair enough, we'll do this the old fashioned way.
But it seems to me that we a list of sorts anyway, and we might as well try to start a bandwagon going on one of them. I think citi.zen's approach is somewhat reasonable, although I feel like established players playing quietly is more mafia-like then he suggests, and I'd rather vote Foolishness than Ketomai. I think Darth is also a huge candidate, I have no idea what he's doing, but it doesn't look like he's going to do anything helpful this game. And of course, the other two candidates and the publicly feuding youngjeezy and infundibulum.
So I propose a new list really.
Foolishness
Darth (3)
Ketomai (1)
youngminii (2)
infund (1)
I'm going to switch my vote then, by virtue of personal suspicion to:
## Vote DarthThienAn
I urge everyone to pick from this list from now on.
***
And BM, we can't allow people to abstain, please forbid it after this first day lynch. It's just terribly unhelpful.
On July 19 2010 04:53 tree.hugger wrote:Essentially. Voting lists are one of the best ways to catch mafia. They spread out across them in predictable patterns, and once you catch one mafia, you can gain a ton of information by looking at the voting lists. It's much better than post analysis, which is always touch and go. If you give people an out by establishing an abstain bandwagon, then you're just handcuffing the town. And you may still be convinced that your strategy is the right one, but it's obviously not going to happen, and it's time you dropped the issue, so the town can move on. Wasting space, and distracting people from the task at hand is counter productive for obvious reasons. Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:37 youngminii wrote:
It looks like it's a toss up between hyperbola(5), DTA(3), and myself(4).
Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 03:46 lakrismamma wrote:
I will follow citizen though to create a third alternative.
##Unvote
##vote ketomai That's a fourth alternative. Also, for everyone's reference, this is a vote moved from Subversion. So we have Hyperbola (5) Darth (3) youngminii (4) Ketomai (2) I believe BrownBear, Subversion, and Ketomai have not yet voted. *** At this point, I think people who have not voted for one of these four people (and in particular, the first three) should reconsider their votes, and select one of these players to lynch. Optimally we'll have three lists, and everyone on one of those lists, which should make mafia spotting a little easier. Again, I'd like to push a lynch on Darth. He's smart, and he knows he's not under the cosh yet. Hyperbola and youngminii have tried to defend themselves, but Darth hasn't lifted a finger, which I think it smart. If you're winning, leave well enough alone. But I'd like to punish him for it, and I encourage others to join.
Speaks out against the lynch of Hyperbola
+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2010 14:02 tree.hugger wrote:
I went to my roof, however, with a vuvuzela and a bullhorn. After an impromptu concert to make sure people were paying attention, I picked up the bullhorn and yelled "GODDAMMIT, LEARN TO PLAY". Then I went back to bed, the crickets came out, and night fell. On July 20 2010 03:06 tree.hugger wrote:There is are six mafia in this game. There is probably one mafia in each of these lists, but I'd also lean on citi and young being mafia candidates. Show nested quote +citi.zen (rastaban)
SiNiquity (Hyperbola) [
b]Pandain (BC)
Infundibulum (youngminii) And probably two in this one: Show nested quote + DarthThienAn (d3_crescentia, Pyrrhuloxia, tree.hugger)
ketomai (citi.zen, lakrismamma)
Amber[LighT] (jayme, DarthThienAn),
BloodyC0bbler (~OpZ, Foolishness)
LaXerCannon (Misder, citi.zen) Mafia vote counts are usually spread across the likely candidates, as the mafia don't know who our blue's are as much as we know who they are. So there's not a lot to be gained by them in focusing on one target, at least not yet. Therefore, there's probably some mafia who voted early, (I'd lean towards those being more experienced players, but possibly not.) some mafia who voted late, and some mafia who changed their votes. I tend to suspect people who voted against each other, as personal conflict give the mafia a great excuse to make a silly vote that won't ever be held to them. I think we've seen faux conflict be manufactured that way as well. We'll see what more the hits tonight give us, but keep this day 1 voting template in mind. On July 20 2010 11:17 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 09:38 Divinek wrote:
And hyperbolas post wasnt seemingly bad, they were terrible. As a brave Ace once said if you die early in a mafia game you're playing bad.
Well then how do you explain poor Radfield? Now THIS is suspicious, I actually didn't catch that the vote was so close... Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 08:07 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 20 2010 07:44 Foolishness wrote:
So if I'm understanding this, youngminii was ahead in the votes, then BrownBear and bumatlarge voted for Hyperbola, which pushed Hyperbola ahead in the voting (and he stayed ahead until day end). So it's possible there was a push to save youngminii from being lynched.
Of course please correct me if I'm mistaken. The people above me who are doing the vote tally are very very very unorganized with their posts. Then, misder and zeks switch their votes to Laxercannon and abstain, respectively. So the count is now 5-5.
Finally, subversion comes in and drops his vote on Hyperbola. 6-5. This is the post: Show nested quote +On July 19 2010 09:16 Subversion wrote:
##Vote: Hyperbola
Not really convinced by him, and there's not really any other clear choice for me right now. Now, that's not a reason, and furthermore, that's a lie. There's at least one other choice that's close, and several others getting votes. This vote is highly influential, but nobody really caught onto it at the time. But if youngminii is mafia, then that's a direct implication of subversion as well. Curious-er and curious-er. On July 20 2010 13:41 tree.hugger wrote:That's wonderful, Bill. I mean, that's terrible about Foolishness, but that's wonderful about you. Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 13:15 Bill Murray wrote:
the 48 hours will go from 13 kst, midnight EST, and last 48 hours until the first minute of the 22nd on the east coast. i have to go be with my gf fiancé now! she is gonna kill me for taking this long :p Edited the fix. Forgive me. On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2010 13:44 Subversion wrote:
Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes. Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. I have never, ever seen a townie say something like this. So narcissistic you had to complement yourself? GG. On July 20 2010 14:03 tree.hugger wrote:
##Vote: Subversion On July 21 2010 04:25 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2010 02:35 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 20 2010 15:44 Protactinium wrote:Probably not today, unless we can find two clearly delineated targets. Ah, scrolling backward. With the whole Vet idea, let's not forget this: On July 20 2010 13:44 Subversion wrote:Hey man, congratulations, that's really exciting news  Wish you all the best On point, I was also in agreement about the weirdness of Foolishness's post, but now he's dead. Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes.Not sure about the block of votes for Hyperbola, seems if it was a scum-instigated thing they could have easily spread it out more? Might have just been a bunch of townies jumping on the bandwagon. Although, I would guess there's a good chance there's one or two mafia in there, who saw an opportunity to jump on a townie vote. And don't forget he made the winning (or losing...) vote. Good catch, subversion not only makes a weird line Seems at the moment, mafia aren't making too many mistakes.but also the bit about the hyperbola vote. Consider he is implying the chances of one - two reds in there, and cast the deciding vote to get hyper lynched. Add in then his "praise" of the mafia, seems he's either really good at slipups or really good at appearing scummy as town. I'd like to point this out yet again. Subversion has more pointing at him this game than anyone else, and it'd not even close. BrownBear isn't playing well, but he's not playing like mafia. Doesn't mean he isn't, but he hasn't said anything close to a tell so far. Meanwhile, Subversion not only cast a highly suspect last-minute vote on a player who really had nothing against him, but he also slipped in the gem quoted above, which, as far as I can tell, has never been said by an innocent townie in the entire history of time. Does he have to roleclaim to get us all to lynch him? Stop pulling a Hyperbola on BrownBear and go lynch the mafia. On July 22 2010 09:00 tree.hugger wrote:
This is the stupidest thing, pretty much ever.
Is there evidence against chaoser? Nobody can really explain what it is. Is there evidence against DTA? Hardly. Is there evidence against Subversion? Yes, there is.
1) Subversion voted at the last minute to lynch someone who's bandwagon was pathetic from the start, and really had nothing behind it. But the real significance of that vote, was that it saved someone else (youngminii). We didn't know about it at the time, because BM's count was off, but the mafia (assuming for a moment that youngminii is red) would clearly have a much more accurate count. They might've assumed that BM's vote count would be a cover, but at any rate they needed to make sure to save their own member.
2) Subversion's post, in which he commented on how well the mafia were doing was (a) not true, and (b) something that I don't think I've ever heard anyone innocent ever say in a game of mafia. That's something I can see a new mafia member thinking a townie would say, but that's not something a townie would actually say.
Furthermore, lynching Subversion just makes plain sense from a town perspective. A whole host of people have put their reputations on the line to save Subversion. Nobody has said anything in chaoser's defense. Nobody has said anything in DTA's defense. They've been left to defend themselves, and, apparently to some people that looks guilty.
What does that mean? Aside from being absurdly suspicious, if we lynch Subversion, then we gain a ton of information. If Subversion flips red, then we catch youngminii right off the bat. citi.zen has been defending Subversion nearly every post he gets, albeit a little more subtlety. Almost everyone in the game is on record saying something about Subversion, which means that if we lynch him, we get to figure out who was right, and who was wrong and proceed from there.
None of the other lynch candidates are even close to as valuable as Subversion. If we lose another day lynching people who aren't mafia, then we're going to be in trouble. On July 22 2010 09:41 tree.hugger wrote:Well, I'll pick this up again on Friday, presuming I'm not dead, so I can vote again for Subversion after whoever the hell it is we're lynching today flips green. gg. citi.zen, you win this round. One final note: Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 09:12 youngminii wrote:On July 22 2010 09:00 tree.hugger wrote:]
If Subversion flips red, then we catch youngminii right off the bat. I lol'd. You doubt that you're joined at the hip with Subversion? On July 22 2010 13:25 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 13:21 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
I regret nothing. Why the fuck did he fake blue? Because he didn't. Either Pyrr is a clever mafia, or a really really bad townie. I'm leaning towards the latter, and seeing as how we don't seem to want to kill the obvious mafia, can we take this one out next? Show nested quote +On July 22 2010 13:23 youngminii wrote:
So on the bright side, how credible am I as a townie ey? You're not at all. And you never have been.
Pushes hard for a lynch of subversion, doesn't change his vote even after subversion soft claims.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 23 2010 05:19 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 03:08 Amber[LighT] wrote:On July 23 2010 03:04 BrownBear wrote:On July 23 2010 02:42 Amber[LighT] wrote:
I'm praying that the DT's made use of this lynch so we can pick out alignment. This should be apparent, but NOBODY SHOULD TELL MEDICS OR DTs WHAT TO DO IN THE THREAD. OR EVEN HINT AT IT. The suicide bomber is still out there. That's why I'm glad we haven't. It's better for the DT's to (hopefully) be on top of their own jobs without us spewing "oh do this." If they feel that what they're doing is better than what's being suggested in the thread then that's fine. The game is relying on their diligence at this point and I've stated what I would expect from the DT's throughout much of the game. This goes for the other blues as well. Unless the town comes to some kind of judgement about who to check, then we really don't need to worry too deeply about him. As we all know, just because I say something doesn't mean we're going to do it. For example, it's important that the town talks about citi.zen and BC. Both are veterans, both are smart, both are good at this game. Also, both have been utterly useless so far, popping in once in a while to tell the town that it's doing it all wrong, without ever adding something concrete. It's that kind of ambiguous grey area of activity and inactivity that the mafia love to hide in. Of course, Subversion or youngminii would be great checks as well, seeing as how they're both the same color, and it'd be useful to find out what that is. And surely none of these people would object to them being checked, because they have nothing to fear, right? On July 23 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 10:54 Pandain wrote:On July 23 2010 10:51 chaoser wrote:
So right now the consensus to move to tricode/zeks/amber/misder? Sigh...wtf did we do on day 2 then... Yup, that's the problem. We fuddled up day2. Theres a chance that one of the 3 remaining lynch suspects from day two are ACTUALLY mafia, but as of now it's too hard to tell which one. I for one feel it would be much better to focus on the quiet ones in this game, in order to at least get them to talk. Unless anyone disagrees with me, I think that should be our plan. If by "we" you mean "I, Pandain" then yeah, that's right. And I stand by that reasoning, and pretty much everything I've posted in the thread so far. Nothing I've seen from any of my suspects or Foolishness' makes me think any differently of them. On July 23 2010 13:15 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 13:13 youngminii wrote:
I dare you to form a bandwagon on me. When I don't flip red you'd better be prepared to get nailed on by town the next day. Yes I'm talking to you chaoser and infundilxluxvbkjum. It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. On July 23 2010 13:16 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 13:16 BrownBear wrote:On July 23 2010 13:15 tree.hugger wrote:On July 23 2010 13:13 youngminii wrote:
I dare you to form a bandwagon on me. When I don't flip red you'd better be prepared to get nailed on by town the next day. Yes I'm talking to you chaoser and infundilxluxvbkjum. It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. Lawl :D This never gets old. No, it's old. On July 24 2010 04:24 tree.hugger wrote:
It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed.
I would caution people to wait until the first 24 hours are up before roleclaiming to BC and Tricode, simply because I'm not sure if everyone in the game has posted, and we should make absolutely sure that no counter-claim has come up.
The last part of this analysis that needs to come is that we need to figure out if we can discern any other reason for the kills, other than random sniping for blues. Both players were somewhat un-influential, which strikes me as odd choices for the night kill.
DT's should get their information out there if they haven't done so already. Find a way, take a risk, see where that leads you.
Mostly filler posts but then moves on to doubting BC/tricode. The confusing thing is that after stating that, he recommends waiting 24 hours before claiming to them. He had just pointed out how it wasn't possible to confirm them, but now instead of saying don't claim he wants people to just wait.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 04:49 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? Actually, you're absolutely right. Tricode is confirmed as town. But BC still is the same. At this point, I advocate a mass roleclaim to Tricode. He can then tell the town how many of each blue role claimed, and build a circle. On July 24 2010 04:56 tree.hugger wrote:
Let me clarify this.
It's an interesting case, in claiming who he hit, Tricode could've conceivably claimed one of the dead guys, or he could've claimed BC. If he had claimed a dead guy, then BC is confirmed. This is what the mafia would want if this was a ploy. However, by claiming BC, then he essentially exonerates himself, by choosing the less-optimal option.
Clear? On July 24 2010 05:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 04:59 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? If Tricode claimed to hit Jayme or Roffles, then we'd first have to verify Tricode before BC could be verified. If Tricode really is Mafia, then claiming to hit BC is smart because we gain nothing by lynch-verifying him under the pretense that he's not Mafia. In short, claiming to not hit BC but rather Roffles or Jayme gives us an incentive to lynch him, because we gain something from his death (BC's innocence). The absense of a counter-claim establishes: A: There was a vigi hit and It was performed by Tricode OR B: Tricode and BC are on the same team. Because there has not been a counter-claim, and because Tricode chose the sub-optimal hit target, (if he had been mafia) then we can assume that Option A is correct. On July 24 2010 06:31 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:24 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 05:00 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:49 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? Actually, you're absolutely right. Tricode is confirmed as town. But BC still is the same. At this point, I advocate a mass roleclaim to Tricode. He can then tell the town how many of each blue role claimed, and build a circle. DO NOT MASS ROLECLAIM TO TRICODE Just in case someone missed it at the bottom of page 86. Tree.Hugger's logic is flawed, the flaws have been identified, stop pushing for it until he has been 100% cleared (which, at this point, he has not). DO NOT MASS ROLECLAIM TO TRICODE. Since you last posted that, I responded to your points. In the absence of a counter-claim, Tricode is confirmed town. Now I'm fine with a waiting period for a counter-claim, say, until midnight tonight, but if there isn't one by that time, then Tricode's vigi claim can only be true. That's because the only other option (Tricode and BC on the same team) is rejected because Tricode chose to say that he aimed for BC, which makes him innocent, rather than aiming for Jayme or Roffles, which would make BC look innocent, and which, we can assume, would've been what the mafia would've done. What about this don't you understand? On July 24 2010 06:48 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:44 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 05:10 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 04:59 SiNiquity wrote:On July 24 2010 04:40 chaoser wrote:It's a huge issue that Tricode's target was BC, and NOT Jayme or Roffles. If his target had been one of the latter two, then, in the absence of a counter-claim, we could safely assume that the mafia had targeted BC. However, because Tricode's target was BC, that makes it still possible that BC is red. This is something we can't really even test out by lynching Tricode (thus why that's a terrible idea), because if he flips red, then yes, so is BC, but if he flips Vigilante, then BC remains unconfirmed. I just realized, if they both really were mafia, wouldn't Tricode WANT to claim he hit Jayme or Roffles? That leads us to the assumption that BC got hit by mafia-->he is to be trusted. In this way, they can both lie and get away with it and gain an advantage? If Tricode claimed to hit Jayme or Roffles, then we'd first have to verify Tricode before BC could be verified. If Tricode really is Mafia, then claiming to hit BC is smart because we gain nothing by lynch-verifying him under the pretense that he's not Mafia. In short, claiming to not hit BC but rather Roffles or Jayme gives us an incentive to lynch him, because we gain something from his death (BC's innocence). The absense of a counter-claim establishes: A: There was a vigi hit and It was performed by Tricode OR B: Tricode and BC are on the same team. Because there has not been a counter-claim, and because Tricode chose the sub-optimal hit target, (if he had been mafia) then we can assume that Option A is correct. The flaw in your logic is that choosing to claim the "sub-optimal hit target" (i.e. BloodyC0bbler) ==> Tricode is innocent. As I explained above, claiming BloodyC0bbler is not sub-optimal for Mafia. I will demonstrate my argument again. Suppose Tricode had instead chosen to claim Jayme or Roffles, the "optimal hit target." If Tricode is telling the truth, then the Mafia attempted to hit BloodyC0bbler, but was instead protected (medic / veteran life). If Tricode is lying (i.e. is Mafia), then Tricode did not put out an extra hit, and barring anyone else coming forward, BC is also lying. Therefore, Tricode's death will either condemn BC or exonerate him. Thus the town has an incentive to lynch Tricode, as there are concrete, indisputable implications which will result from it! Compared to claiming BloodyC0bbler, where lynching Tricode only yields definitive information about BC in the case that he was lying, there is now a disincentive to lynch Tricode (the possibility that he's telling the truth, thereby revealing, "well yep he was telling the truth, but BC is still unknown.") I'm not concerned about lynching Tricode, I want to establish his innocence. And once again, in the absence of a counter-claim, Tricode MUST be innocent, unless both him and BC are lying. And again, I think it's self evident that the mafia would rather have made BC look like a confirmed townie, than Tricode. On July 24 2010 06:51 tree.hugger wrote:
And, I see what you're saying, you're arguing that the incentive for the mafia to discourage a test-lynch on Tricode is enough for them to make it look more like Tricode is innocent. I can see that argument, but I believe that the mafia (at this point) would be confident enough so that the town would not waste a lynch on a test which would, in the unlikely event of it being successful, only yield one other mafia. We're somewhat past the point for tests.
I think also, the mafia would be pretty sure they could bandwagon one of our other standbys if Tricode got in trouble. I think the mafia would prefer to let a player like BC fight for himself (were they on the same team) and I think they'd probably win that fight. On July 24 2010 08:21 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 06:59 SiNiquity wrote:To be honest I do agree with your hunch of Tricode being innocent I also think that d3 is innocent as well. But sadly neither are conclusive, and we should be wary of roleclaiming based on hunches. No, I think we understand each other actually. I think that's a risk we should be taking, however, I'd like to hear what Tricode has to say about this. He's not the kind of player that inspires confidence in his play.
Clarifies more of what was said above. He moves from pushing for role claim to BC and tricode, to just tricode and finally that it is a risky play but worth it to claim to tricode.
|
Part 2
+ Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 10:31 tree.hugger wrote:
Hahahaha, BC where was that Day 1?
Also, I think we should lynch youngjeezy. He's like Subversion, (and tied to him) but more annoying. I think, seeing how he's rendered an opinion on practically everyone in the town by now, he's a lynch that'll keep on giving. I've thought he's mafia from the beginning, basically, and he's continued to get pretty much everything wrong since then.
But I guess I'm open to lynching citi.zen as well, as he's been spectacularly unhelpful, and has been sitting firmly in that grey area between activity and inactivity that usually harbors at least half of the mafia. On July 24 2010 11:32 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 10:46 citi.zen wrote:On July 24 2010 10:31 tree.hugger wrote:
Hahahaha, BC where was that Day 1?
Also, I think we should lynch youngjeezy. He's like Subversion, (and tied to him) but more annoying. I think, seeing how he's rendered an opinion on practically everyone in the town by now, he's a lynch that'll keep on giving. I've thought he's mafia from the beginning, basically, and he's continued to get pretty much everything wrong since then.
But I guess I'm open to lynching citi.zen as well, as he's been spectacularly unhelpful, and has been sitting firmly in that grey area between activity and inactivity that usually harbors at least half of the mafia. Pop quiz: out of BC's list of himself, me or pyrr, who has been "hugging that green area" closest? Wait what? The green area? What green area? What are you talking about. And if we're talking about the "grey" area that I mentioned then it's you. The person I said it was. Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 10:43 Subversion wrote:
I strongly, strongly believe that youngminii is not scum.
I really think we need to stop looking at the same people we have been since day 1/2, and start looking at new people with fresh eyes. The case against me was pretty ridiculous imo, based on 1 comment and an F'd vote count. youngminii is only in the spotlight because he was somehow, linked to me. How this happened I STILL do not know.
We're still beating the same dead dogs. We need to target a different "group", I strongly feel that the youngminii/dta/me/chaoser thing that has been going since forever is the wrong group of people. We've only lynched two of those people, and the two that only silly people read as town, how can we say the rest are innocent? On July 24 2010 11:41 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote:
##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. And what is the point of abstaining? Abstaining doesn't do squat. Why post at all? Why not just not post and not vote? If everyone abstained all the time, then we wouldn't get anything done. Are people ever 100% sure that other people are mafia? Of course not! But you still have to vote anyway. You've abstained two straight days. If the mafia has influenced any of our votes (oh wait, they've all been close, the mafia has literally been at liberty to pick the people they want dead) then you are pretty much the most responsible person. Are you going to vote this time? And what the hell do you mean that you're going to wait to see what people say? You said, back on page 82 that: Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote:
When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
You hate reading the thread. But furthermore, you, through your actions of last night, have essentially become one of the town's most valuable resources. If you took any kind of initiative, you could help the town organize. Set an example and start posting constructively. Use your position as the game's most confirmed player to get people together, and forming a better circle. Don't just abstain and sit back. We've had two people survive hits, and one outted Day Vigi, and there's not even the hint that the town has an effective circle together. We're literally playing against one of the worst mafia openings in recent memory, and we're not getting anywhere, thanks primarily to you. (and Pandain, but he can't help it) Get your act together, and play, or be subbed out for someone who will.
continues to push for subversion. Trys to get Tricode to step up to his role as a town leader
+ Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 12:23 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:00 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 11:41 tree.hugger wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote:
##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. And what is the point of abstaining? Abstaining doesn't do squat. Why post at all? Why not just not post and not vote? If everyone abstained all the time, then we wouldn't get anything done. Are people ever 100% sure that other people are mafia? Of course not! But you still have to vote anyway. You've abstained two straight days. If the mafia has influenced any of our votes (oh wait, they've all been close, the mafia has literally been at liberty to pick the people they want dead) then you are pretty much the most responsible person. Are you going to vote this time? And what the hell do you mean that you're going to wait to see what people say? You said, back on page 82 that: On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote:
When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
You hate reading the thread. But furthermore, you, through your actions of last night, have essentially become one of the town's most valuable resources. If you took any kind of initiative, you could help the town organize. Set an example and start posting constructively. Use your position as the game's most confirmed player to get people together, and forming a better circle. Don't just abstain and sit back. We've had two people survive hits, and one outted Day Vigi, and there's not even the hint that the town has an effective circle together. We're literally playing against one of the worst mafia openings in recent memory, and we're not getting anywhere, thanks primarily to you. (and Pandain, but he can't help it) Get your act together, and play, or be subbed out for someone who will. I just love how you point fingers without any evidence and try and get on everyone's good side (PMing people, sucking up to BC). You don't even respond to my analysis and just say "spammer bad scum that's always wrong". Great play. Woah woah woah. That post wasn't even towards you? What's your problem anyway with thinking that everyone is talking about you 24/7? Your analysis? You're trying to bandwagon chaoser, now right? Old hat, even if chaoser is mafia, which I doubt, seeing as how his bandwagon was made of the same flimsy stuff that Hyperbola's was made out of. We have bigger fish to fry, and I long ago gave up on your ability to post constructively. I figured that ignoring you was enough, but the way you purposely misspell infundibulum's name is just petty, and doesn't belong in this game, and I recommend you take a long meditative retreat in Dharamshala when this is over, it'd teach you to be a nicer person, and stop thinking about yourself all the time. I PM people because this game allows them, and they're a great way for discussing things privately with people. Nothing untoward about that. And where did I 'suck up to BC'? Please. I called him out a few pages ago for posting nothing of value, and not being of help to the town. I welcome the change in his play. As do I welcome this change: Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:05 citi.zen wrote:
Ok, let's blow this taco stand.
I am a mad hatter. I am part of a dt circle. I would love to help the two dt's connect. Here's how we can do it:
1. Wait to see if there is a counter claim against me and Tricode, since together we should account for the 2 town Kp roles. If there isn't, we are both confirmed. If there is, we have a red player.
2. The other dt asks a confirmed person they checked to contact me. If more than one person comes forward I will ask the dt to claim. This way, if the mafia decide to fake claim we have two reds, not just one.
3. The two DTs, remaining publicly anonymous, are in contact. We give ourselves a chance to win. If there is no counter-claim, say, in 24 hours, (that's the day with 12 hours remaining) I think the other DT should go ahead and do this. That said, if there is another vet or mad hatter, you'd better pick someone you trust and roleclaim to them, or else we're all screwed. On July 24 2010 12:33 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 12:27 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 24 2010 11:04 Bill Murray wrote:
d3, you voted for two people in the same post when there is a single lynch today, pick one, or i will pick one for you.
siniquity, see the above post where you may not vote for double lynch without voting abstain. oh so for some reason I thought double lynch had passed for today and not for tomorrow ##vote: abstain If there are 13 votes for abstaining, then we accidentally end the day, correct? Please don't vote at all, or throw your placeholder vote on someone who is not going to carry the day in the end. For example, I'll add to the double lynch. ##Vote Xelin (Haha, where has he been?) ## Vote Double Lynch On July 24 2010 14:28 tree.hugger wrote:
BC, if there is no counter-claim, then why would there be any objections to this going forward? At this point, if there is a remaining town KP role, they obviously must have figured out that they need to claim immediately, and they need to roleclaim, or find someone they trust to roleclaim for them.
I know we need to give this time to make sure everyone knows, but if there is no counter-claim, then there's really no other way to look at it, yes? On July 24 2010 16:04 tree.hugger wrote:
We're past the point of guessing on inactives. Mafia have been posting, they always do, and we should be able to find them based on evidence, not lack of evidence.
Not that I don't think southrawrea could easily be mafia, but I want to lynch someone who is active and who has people attached to him. Otherwise, we're back to Day three two again.
And citi.zen, I presume your detective has not discovered the mafia, otherwise you'd tell us, yes? On July 24 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 16:06 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +And to be truthful, I don;t really believe that BrownBear is townie just from the way he's posting. For the first day he pretty much posts nothing and bandwagons with no real reason. When people point him out of it (that he voted before reading) he goes oh well, it doesn't matter now when it CLEARLY did, the vote ended 6-5. Then, after a whole DAY of people pointing fingers at him he decides to come in and post about vets claiming and basically giving horrible advice. I'm inclined to say he's mafia who fucked up the first day and now he's trying to play dumb townie. Also, his whole ramble about claiming is pushing us off the topic of Subversion's suspicious vote as well as his little statement about how mafia isn't really making mistakes.
I'm not 100% clear on my vote yet but I'm watching BrownBear for now. And I also think we should vote double lynch. It's going to be 52 hours till the next lynch give or take, you guys don't think we'll have more than enough information then? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote
##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. It's okay tree.hugger, you don't have to read this. You're clearly too good at this game to deal with my incessant postings. What did I even say about you? My post was a comment on the two votes in quick succession to lynch South. Not everything is about you. On July 24 2010 16:42 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2010 16:38 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 16:26 tree.hugger wrote:On July 24 2010 16:06 youngminii wrote:On July 24 2010 09:48 youngminii wrote:My case on Chaoser.+ Show Spoiler +Let us delve into the mind of scum. The pattern for a normal, general scum that doesn't go out of his way to do anything out of the ordinary is quite simple. Lay low on the first day or two and slowly come out with accusations. Be very careful of jumping on bandwagons as it may arouse suspicion. Rather than openly coming out and making a case on someone on the first day/two, try to find someone that is making a fool of themselves and make a small case to see if it gains momentum. I think we can all agree that this is a standard way of playing as scum, keeps the suspicion low while still contributing information. Now let us look at chaoser's early game. One of his first posts is to abstain. This vote does not change for the entire day. Fits perfectly in line with my 'lay low' theory, especially (as the wonderful Pandain pointed out) as chaoser was so against my 'no lynch' strategy. One would have to wonder why he didn't simply vote for someone if he was so against it. He raises the counter argument that voting to abstain is different from voting to no lynch, which is a moot point in my opinion really. I think it's less about the days and more about the fact that we get tons of information from looking at vote lists Cool, chaoser wants information from voting lists on the first day. In fact, he even points this out to the public. So why does he not vote for anyone? Oh right, abstaining doesn't label you as 'against' someone. Good stuff in my opinion, I'd probably do it too if I was scum. So up until early Day 2, chaoser continues to bring in a wealth of information (such as the voting history of certain people etc.) but doesn't actually accuse anyone. All he does is make some accusatory comment that doesn't really have any flair to it. See below. chaoser to BB: So basically you just said: "lawl, i messed up/made a mistake but oh well, not going to change." Anyone else find that suspicious? So early on in Day 2, after a small group of people (Divinek, DTA and Amber[light]) already vote for BB, chaoser joins in and mounts a small case against BB. + Show Spoiler +And to be truthful, I don;t really believe that BrownBear is townie just from the way he's posting. For the first day he pretty much posts nothing and bandwagons with no real reason. When people point him out of it (that he voted before reading) he goes oh well, it doesn't matter now when it CLEARLY did, the vote ended 6-5. Then, after a whole DAY of people pointing fingers at him he decides to come in and post about vets claiming and basically giving horrible advice. I'm inclined to say he's mafia who fucked up the first day and now he's trying to play dumb townie. Also, his whole ramble about claiming is pushing us off the topic of Subversion's suspicious vote as well as his little statement about how mafia isn't really making mistakes.
I'm not 100% clear on my vote yet but I'm watching BrownBear for now. And I also think we should vote double lynch. It's going to be 52 hours till the next lynch give or take, you guys don't think we'll have more than enough information then? After a page or two a LOT of people jump on the bandwagon. It's uncanny. Chaoser realises that if BB is lynched and he flips town then things will look bad for him, so he switches his vote to Subversion, another bandwagon being formed at the time. It's funny, after using that argument against BB he immediately switches to Subversion after seeing the possibility that he might be labeled as mafia (note: someone actually said that the '3rd/4th person on the bandwagon tends to be mafia' and could have affected chaoser's thoughts). The argument he uses against Subversion is one that has already gained traction from BC/Protractinium and so it's easy to ride with. Pandain then mounts an argument against chaoser, who responds by responding to each and every point. I believe they continue this argument via PM and sort it out there and Pandain drops his case on chaoser (I attribute this to Pandain being new to this game and not being very good at picking out lies/deceit etc.). Anyway, what does chaoser do now? Of course, he abstains. Oh, the joy of not really voting for anyone. A common trait of mafia is that they won't contribute too much in the accusations etc. early on. They will however, try and 'appear' to be useful by posting stuff that doesn't really cause them any risk in any way (ie. pointing at someone of being scum). They will often side with someone else or pick on a player that seems to be causing a ruckus which won't be seen as suspicious. In addition to this, scum will go to great lengths to defend themselves. Think about it (directed at newer players), if you are scum you are much more willing to come back to this thread and try to shake off any accusations against you. This is why RVS is quite helpful in smaller games. Often scum will 'lurk' meaning they'll browse around, read everything but won't post too much in order to stay under the radar. However, accusing them and voting for them will force them to come out and defend themselves profusely. We can see this in DTA, he was town and everyone started voting for him. He didn't reply in the thread for a looooooong time (I actually pointed this out but I was ignored /yay), indicating that he was in fact, not lurking but actually AWOL, which is a townie trait. Chaoser falls into the above mafia category. He immediately comes out of his 'useful/informative' shell and starts defending himself a LOT. His posts start becoming a lot of the 'discussion' going on. This continues for a long time, only defending himself and never accusing anyone asides from the occasional "your arguments are weak, why are you trying to get me lynched so bad? Are you scum?" type of argument. Now it's actually really painful to go through skimming page by page but the general trend I see right now is that a lot of people start jumping on the chaoser bandwagon. It's funny, he votes for DTA because he's getting a lot of votes for him. He then states: From reading this, I'll change my vote to Subversion even though that means I'll 100% die.
Darth, if you wanna help me, you could switch it over too and I think he'll be first.
##unvote
##vote Subversion Look at this from a scum perspective. He knows DTA is town. He knows that if DTA is lynched then he'll get an even worse image than before. So what does he do? He tries to side with DTA to lynch someone else that already has a lot of people voting for him. This is actually a good play by mafia as he had already taken the side of voting for Subversion earlier so if questioned, he could retaliate by saying "I already had my suspicions on Subversion before!" + Show Spoiler +On an unrelated side note, I find it funny how people are so quick to link me to Subversion (tree.hugger especially) because I defended him a bit whilst nobody links me to DTA's town and Hyperbola's town when I actually gave them proper defenses. Quite ridiculous imo. Blah blah DTA ends up getting lynched (one of the final votes by chaoser, although it could be argued that he did it to save himself) and ends up flipping town. I know I've always been wary of chaoser but I'd like everyone to read my analysis of him. I'm not going to analyse Night 3 'cause that was just a big spam fest and lots of people probably have an ill image of me now. I'd just like you all to trust me for once (I was right on hyperbola/DTA even though it doesn't mean anything, yes I know) and vote for chaoser. I would also like to mention that I believe infundlibsuvxkum and chaoser are linked but that discussion can be saved for another time. It's okay tree.hugger, you don't have to read this. You're clearly too good at this game to deal with my incessant postings. What did I even say about you? My post was a comment on the two votes in quick succession to lynch South. Not everything is about you. On July 24 2010 16:04 tree.hugger wrote:
Mafia have been posting, they always do, and we should be able to find them based on evidence, not lack of evidence.
Not that I don't think southrawrea could easily be mafia, but I want to lynch someone who is active and who has people attached to him. I should've been more clear. I'd like to lynch a mafia with those characteristics. On July 25 2010 05:22 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 04:18 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:
Well the excrement has hit the air conditioning.
I need to think about this.
I'm actually not sure if the correct play is to lynch South here.
The feces has impacted the ventilation? This is going to require some thinking... A counter-claim here doesn't make a whole lot of sense for the mafia, I think they'd rather fake a DT claim, then counter claim this. But... Stating the obvious: -Do not roleclaim to anyone.
-Either Tricode, citi.zen, or South is mafia, but likely only one of them. On July 25 2010 05:34 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 05:24 SouthRawrea wrote:
Look..I've been busy for the past few days anyways. Do you want me to go take a picture of everything that I've been doing in the backyard in the pouring rain? Just one yes is all I need. This is my first time ever playing a forum mafia game and I'm not used to this way of posting extremely long posts and having every single word scrutinized. The few times I've played the game people would say their reports, and chat in a chatbox. Not to mention this is filled with much more text. I've never even encountered the Mad Hatter role. If you look at the game EpicMafia, although they have like 50 roles, they don't have a single one that I know of that resembles the one in this game. I figured that it was a town-favoured role that was only supposed to be used later in the game when you had a higher chance of hitting the mafia with your bombs. Hence why I only placed one on the person I was most suspicious of at the time. What we could be doing here is giving citi.zen all the info he needs if he is mafia to win the game for that side. DT claims especially. I'm sold. Vote citi.zen. On July 25 2010 07:54 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 07:29 youngminii wrote:
This is ridiculous, I can't believe this many people are actually voting for citi.zen. Let me say it one more time.
There is more information to be gained if SouthRawr is lynched than if citi.zen is lynched. Also, you are a mafia noob, not just a mafia, not just a noob. I think we gain plenty of information about this, seeing as how we have a 50% chance at catching mafia, and this is a split vote. Role list analyzing is going to be cake after today. I call upon every player in this game to vote for either citi.zen or South. One of them is confirmed mafia. There is no hiding under this "I think they're all innocent" nonsense. Pick one.
But more importantly, pick citi.zen. There are four possible outcomes: If we lynch citi.zen the Mafia: Then it's the coup de grâce. We've taken out their best player, and we have two confirmed town members to form a circle around. If we lynch citi.zen the Mad Hatter: Then we still have an intact town circle with a DT and a person who was checked. Also, citi.zen's bombs go off, and two people die. It's not unreasonable to assume that citi.zen, being an experienced mafia player and scum-hunter will have caught at least one mafia in his net. I'd trust his bomb placement, providing he has them. If we lynch Southrawrea the Mafia: Then we've taken out the newest, or one of the newest members of the mafia team. That's about it. If we lynch Southrawrea the Mad Hatter: Then chaoser dies—another player who is newer, and not really driving any buses. I know youngminii thinks he's mafia, but I think that's just silly. Decide for yourself, but I'd trust citi.zen's judgment in bomb placing over Southrawrea. *** I think out of these four options, assuming for a moment that the probability of either being mafia is 50/50, then the obvious better outcomes will come from lynching citi.zen. I hardly think there's anything to recommend Southrawrea as a natural mafia, or even a natural mafia selection to go out and try to sabotage this plan. On the flip side, pretty much the only player on TL who I would expect to pull something as crazy as a MH/town circle claim as mafia is citi.zen. I think, if we're talking character types, citi.zen fits, and Southrawrea does not. On July 25 2010 07:59 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 07:50 citi.zen wrote:On July 25 2010 07:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 25 2010 07:41 lakrismamma wrote:On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
see bolded part. He wasn't actually cleared with no counterclaim for a reason I listed earlier which was this
IF you were the mad hatter and you saw someone claim your role, You know instantly he's most likely red. You then wait a day, move your bomb to him get lynched following day (confirms both of you). Instead, he said "if no one claims im legit." He did however get a claim, regardless, his point was moot regardless.
Agaisn you are using the fact that people are looking up to you to present some solutions that are not evident at all.Not everybody would play like this I sure as hell wouldn't. On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I most likely wont trust citizen until he proves to be trustworthy. He is far too inactive at this point for the plan he proposed. He has legimate concerns raised against him, a counter claim, etc....
Where is he? Nowhere to be found, instead people who have been semi inactive all game have decided to vouch for him. It comes of as extremely suspicious.
Also, it has no matter where he placed his bombs. If he has them on reds or not. A dt circle is still confirmed, and as much as dead townies suck to have, they do lower the dt pool of checked targets finding reds faster. Anyone who flips red dies, then its a hunt for the gf. If you find three of one blue role, boom you found him, etc...
I find it weird that you can chose between two people, oneof them is mafia. One you have already made a case against and told that he is most likely mafia. Still you vote on the other guy. Was you play earlier a scam to get people to trust you because you found Southrawrea as mafia? Simple, i based one persons scum level based on activity, and the person I am now voting for put out an option with holes and not only has not refuted them, has barely even touched the hatter claim. Instead he is rallying on "trust" to get him through without being here. What to you is more scummy? Someone proposing a make or break strategy with the idea of "trust me" while vanishing into the night, or someone who desperately wants to live. As for hatter play, maybe you wouldn't play like that BUT I am giving a logical idea of what someone might do. Just because you wouldn't do it, nor consider it a viable option is odd as your assuming someone else is completely legit, or that people always play this game under a normal sense of "logic". Not considering it a viable option because you wouldn't do it as other players might. You know offering South hasn't saved you, don't you? You just dug the hole deeper. You realized you've essentially just claimed that out of the three Town KP roles that have been claimed, two of them are mafia? You know that right? Where's the fourth claim? We need it now. Find the fourth claim. On July 25 2010 08:05 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:02 SiNiquity wrote:On July 25 2010 07:50 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 07:48 BrownBear wrote:On July 25 2010 07:40 SiNiquity wrote:
I bet Tricode and BC are cackling maniacally at their good fortune. Kill a medic, claim 3rd hit + protection (both unverifiable), draw out the other 2 KP roles. Let them kill each other. Bonus is that they're both hatters instead of vigilantes.
So much for 50/50. You bring up a very good point here, and I think everyone should read it. It is still possible that Tricode is the liar, and there are 2 Mad Hatters in the game. I would think Tricode's story is the most believable. Same, which is why I'm not voting for him. Had citi.zen said nothing, we would likely be lynching Tricode today to verify his claim (better safe than sorry, etc). If Tricode is innocent, then why should citi.zen say anything... to get in the circles before a counter-claim? But why? Why not just let us lynch Tricode, confirm his vigi-ness and do all this mess next day? Unless he's afraid DT circles would connect before then? This seems like a strong argument to me. Why would citi.zen come out now and not tomorrow, after we've lynched Tricode (and likely gained nothing)? What does Mafia have to gain from a ploy like this? ## Unvote citi.zen## Vote SouthrawreaCiti.zen if you're Mafia, props for fucking with my head. You believe that BC, Tricode, and Southrawrea are all mafia? Because that's what citi.zen has been forced into arguing now, and that seems to be the point you're trying to push as well. I don't think we were anywhere close to lynching Tricode for confirmation, I'd call the premise of your argument unbelievable to begin with. He was our biggest resource, and there literally was no bandwagon for him forming at all. On July 25 2010 08:07 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:05 zeks wrote:
People really need to evaluate how risky it was for citi.zen to claim the last MH role after most of the town agreeing with Tricode.
SR claiming however has a lot less repercussions than citi.zen.
Mafia is already out with a lead in this game is it even necessary to play such a huge gambit with citi.zen? What is the point of even taking such a risk? If it was any other player on TL, I'd be arguing this too. citi.zen loves these gambits though, and he's pulled them off time and time again. He shot L with no warning in the last game, and he completely made up a role that didn't exist to save himself in one of the other mafia games. (Can't remember.) citi.zen has balls. On July 25 2010 08:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:06 SiNiquity wrote:On July 25 2010 08:00 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 07:59 tree.hugger wrote:On July 25 2010 07:50 citi.zen wrote:On July 25 2010 07:47 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 25 2010 07:41 lakrismamma wrote:On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
see bolded part. He wasn't actually cleared with no counterclaim for a reason I listed earlier which was this
IF you were the mad hatter and you saw someone claim your role, You know instantly he's most likely red. You then wait a day, move your bomb to him get lynched following day (confirms both of you). Instead, he said "if no one claims im legit." He did however get a claim, regardless, his point was moot regardless.
Agaisn you are using the fact that people are looking up to you to present some solutions that are not evident at all.Not everybody would play like this I sure as hell wouldn't. On July 25 2010 07:24 BloodyC0bbler wrote:
I most likely wont trust citizen until he proves to be trustworthy. He is far too inactive at this point for the plan he proposed. He has legimate concerns raised against him, a counter claim, etc....
Where is he? Nowhere to be found, instead people who have been semi inactive all game have decided to vouch for him. It comes of as extremely suspicious.
Also, it has no matter where he placed his bombs. If he has them on reds or not. A dt circle is still confirmed, and as much as dead townies suck to have, they do lower the dt pool of checked targets finding reds faster. Anyone who flips red dies, then its a hunt for the gf. If you find three of one blue role, boom you found him, etc...
I find it weird that you can chose between two people, oneof them is mafia. One you have already made a case against and told that he is most likely mafia. Still you vote on the other guy. Was you play earlier a scam to get people to trust you because you found Southrawrea as mafia? Simple, i based one persons scum level based on activity, and the person I am now voting for put out an option with holes and not only has not refuted them, has barely even touched the hatter claim. Instead he is rallying on "trust" to get him through without being here. What to you is more scummy? Someone proposing a make or break strategy with the idea of "trust me" while vanishing into the night, or someone who desperately wants to live. As for hatter play, maybe you wouldn't play like that BUT I am giving a logical idea of what someone might do. Just because you wouldn't do it, nor consider it a viable option is odd as your assuming someone else is completely legit, or that people always play this game under a normal sense of "logic". Not considering it a viable option because you wouldn't do it as other players might. You know offering South hasn't saved you, don't you? You just dug the hole deeper. You realized you've essentially just claimed that out of the three Town KP roles that have been claimed, two of them are mafia? You know that right? Where's the fourth claim? We need it now. Find the fourth claim. How does this post correlate in any way to the post you just quoted? Yea idk what tree is on. Tricode red => BC red, Tricode not red => BC _____ [aka implies nothing] I take that back, you're both right. I thought for a moment that the relationship between the two was the inverse of what is actually is. Fair point, but it just means that citi.zen didn't dig the whole I thought he dug. Doesn't make his post much better... On July 25 2010 08:16 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:07 youngminii wrote:
I call upon every player in this game to vote for either citi.zen or South. One of them is confirmed mafia. There is no hiding under this "I think they're all innocent" nonsense. Pick one.
But more importantly, pick SouthRawrea.
There are four possible outcomes:
If we lynch citi.zen the Mafia: Then we've taken out one red. We have a town member to form a circle around (SouthRawrea), and this player is 100% new to forum mafia.
If we lynch citi.zen the Mad Hatter: Then ASSUMING citi.zen's already given the second DT party (his inactivity cough) AND if we rule out the possibility of TWO DT groups claiming to him, then we have a town circle with a DT. Two people needlessly die and if you all really think that citi.zen's scumhunting abilities are so good, then why don't you trust him on his SouthRawrea hunt?
If we lynch Southrawrea the Mafia: Then we gain a whole load of information with many implications (unfortunately no one listens to me anymore). We've got BC backed into a corner, we've got chaoser (imo) and a few more, AND we have a huge townie group with TWO DTs working together.
If we lynch Southrawrea the Mad Hatter: Then chaoser dies. Only one death compared to two if citi.zen's Mad Hatter. I do think he's mafia and maybe you would too (directed at tree.hugger) if you got off your high horse and read my analysis posts once in a while.
***
God I can't believe how fast you all just follow tree.hugger's bias 'situation report'. You're cherry-picking and plagiarizing. We gain the same amount of info from vote lists no matter whom is lynched, since this is a polarized vote. The question is of who's bombs you want to go off, or who you'd rather take out if they were both mafia, as they have equal chances to be both. For both answers, the clear answer is citi.zen. And that's full of nonsense. How come we don't go along with citi.zen's analysis on South? Well, dur dur, because if he's mafia he's not likely to help the town out with some accurate analysis is he? If citi.zen truly is town aligned, and he knows he's on the block, do you think he'd honestly leave the second day DT check out of the loop? That's absurd. And you've accused me repeatedly of not reading your analysis. That's not accurate, I have and I think it's junk. Again, there are two variables here that make citi.zen the better lynch, and they're the only two that matter. Bombs, and Skill. And it's citi.zen both times. On July 25 2010 08:44 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 08:38 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On July 25 2010 08:33 chaoser wrote:
guys, please respond to the VERY scummy thing that he did which is keep the triple claim for DT from town. That's VERY WEIRD. Yeah he says that he's leaving, knowing he could be dead by the time he gets back, and doesn't mention that? Aside: Aren't you glad we killed DTA? If he was still alive, we had a vigi claim, we had two mad hatters claim, AND we had all of DTA's wink and nod posts about mad hattering this would be so much worse. That's why you don't dink around as town. DTA is a good enough player to know that he would've had to claim or non-claim in that situation. Lynching DTA was a poor mistake. On July 25 2010 09:39 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 09:33 citi.zen wrote:
The townies who voted with the mafia need to stop playing this game. Forever. This is as clear cut as it gets: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South are red. Perhaps after you lynch me you will... I don't know... go after one of them. You have a double lynch to use.
By the way: to avoid this dumb town situation, the mad hatter is actually the SECOND player my DT checked, not myself. I claimed in his place to keep them safe for one more night. Now they have all they need to accurately place their bombs. I am plain vanilla town, as you are about to find out when I flip.
Remember: BC, Inf, Chaos, Tree.hugger, South. Plus whoever fake claimed. If this saves you, I'm going to furious. If you flip green, I'm going to be furious. This was something that should've been claimed a long time ago. But at least it makes your lynch casualty-free. And not only that, this doesn't change anything. It's still a 50/50 between your version of events and Southrawrea's. If you die green, then we can take your word for it. Fair enough. So nothing changes. On July 25 2010 09:46 tree.hugger wrote:It's iNfuNdiBuLuM. This isn't funny, it's embarassing. On July 25 2010 09:49 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 09:48 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:lol guys i don't really care if he purposely types my name wrong. it takes more effort to do that than write 'infun' but i do appreciate the support  He should show some respect to other people playing the game. That doesn't mean that you need to take your foot off the pedal when going after mafia, but this stuff? It's just petty, and has no place in these games. On July 25 2010 10:04 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:00 BrownBear wrote:On July 25 2010 09:58 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 09:55 bumatlarge wrote:Just wanna go over tricodes posts to find something + Show Spoiler +On July 18 2010 07:56 Tricode wrote:
From that list above i believe it can be a agreed on a majority is saying we should lynch an inactive. Other then that I don't really feel like we have enough information yet to even try to snipe someone....well unless they're is a very stupid mafia member. On July 18 2010 10:30 Tricode wrote:
##vote abstain
Just doing this if I don't make it tomorrow to vote. My dad is spending his last full day at home before he has to leave for a few months for work.
Other then that, I do suggest we lynch an inactive.
1.if we keep abstaining cause we are always uncertain of what to do, we will never push to killing and finding a mafia member if we went at that rate.
2. That person who is being inactive is probably useless to us anyways just because they are not doing anything to participate.
3. One of the inactive are likely to be mafia just because there is usually one or two guys that are inactive or just post a little bit just so they can stay alive.
Either case, we won't accomplish anything by abstaining, it might even hurt us cause if we keep the option in our head we might use it to much in fear of constantly killing townies/blues and such. So I suggest try keeping abstains as placeholders or if you are truly uncertain in what to do.
Otherwise I encourage and highly suggest that we always use our lynches.
On July 18 2010 10:45 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2010 10:40 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 10:13 SiNiquity wrote:On July 18 2010 09:59 youngminii wrote:On July 18 2010 09:51 Bill Murray wrote:
EVERYONE abstaining? I guess it'd no lynch. Didn't expect that to happen! Okay so everyone should abstain imo. If you have any objections to this idea, please raise it asap because we need everyone to switch their vote to abstaining. Even one vote = lynch and that will be very suspicious of the person who left their vote by 'accident'. ##Unvote Pyrr
##Vote Abstain I'm not sure I like it. The inactives will get modkilled, no one gets lynched, the mafia kills 2 more people, and then we're back at square one, no? On July 18 2010 10:16 Jayme wrote:
No-Lynch?
Oh hell no absolutely not.
I don't understand how a no-lynch is beneficial to the town if you're going to kill an inactive anyway. You learn absolutely nothing from it, you don't even have a CHANCE at hitting a red, and you're basically wasting a whole day on nothing.
No lynch is a terrible idea. If we lynch someone on the first day without any good reason there's a solid chance (12/15) that we'll hit a townie. That's 80%. There's also a better chance of lynching a blue than there is of scum. A no lynch is a gift that we should utilize instead of RVS. Keep using that reasoning through the whole game. Mind you that there are clever players and mafia will always try to manipulate the game by lying. Add to the equation everyone's fear of being lynched. Then add the fact we have no clues. Mafia don't have to really say anything. You would have to leave the game to a dt (if they find someone and if they come out) to tell you who is red. Then add the fact if that DT is really a dt. But like i said, try using your reasoning through out the whole game if we just kept abstaining cause we aren't sure all the time. On July 21 2010 04:02 Tricode wrote:
Hey just finished catching up, sorry for inactivity had to drop my dad off the airport last night and then went to a relatives house. Also every time i refresh or hit next page, it seems like you guys would just add another page on me!
There was just so much to read!
As for now, I find BrownBear's ideas are unhelpful. Wanting to have our vets reveal themselves. Might be a good plan for other circumstances, but in your one and only example that you gave where your scenario worked, you seemed to have some godly player who was just able to survive for once. That doesn't mean that same scenario can apply here (no offense to you vets).
Also this doesn't take the heat off BrownBear for his posts earlier and inactivity especially how BB voted. It seems like you just analyzed a situation real quick came up with a game plan to throw people off your back. I feel you are a better player then how you are presenting yourself this game and I will be awaiting to see more of your responses before making a vote.
Also a few of you seem to be causing annoying chaos. I would keep an eye on these people. They could possibly be a mafia member who are trying to be active, but just annoying enough to act like a stupid townie and cause confusion. Like DTA (though he could just think acting like this would keep him alive in the game for what ever purposes he has in mind, even just being a townie that just wants to avoid mafia attention).
For w/e reason (I'm desperately looking for a job/Real life shit/ video games) if I am absent for the time being I will vote for BB for how odd he is so far in this game with inactivity, his vote, his suggestion that seems to only distract attention from him, what others have pointed out about him, and I feel he hasn't portrayed himself in this game like he did in the last game I played with him where he had more of a dominate presence that helped the town. My vote will change if there is a better candidate.
##Vote BrownBear On July 22 2010 12:07 Tricode wrote:
This is pathetic, it took me a whole freaken day just to catch up to all your posts and even then I had to skim through some of them and the crap that you guys filled it up with.
There is just way too much chaos and this game is moving faster then I can keep up.
The only reason I see for killing Darth is because his nonsense is causing more confusion to the game more then others, but there are still others who are causing confusion.
With this madness I am abstaining so I can watch and see what unfolds. Hopefully everyone can start watching and reading to things more carefully instead of cluster fucking the thread with useless information that does not help the case or killing someone for hindrance reasoning.
Though I am believing we are in need of a plan and looking into analyzing what people say more. Though if people like DTA keep their shit up, it will become more difficult to do this cause it is distracting.
Also please people don't just see one little action and instantly call out mafia. Try to watch the person and build up a reasonable case. I am betting a portion of you are just confused and not sure what to do and just voting with the crowd or who ever argues the most aggressively.
For now I am abstaining my vote like i said, for reasons of just wanting to have a bit more solidness of reasoning in who I pick and vote for.
##unvote
##vote abstain
So far he doesn't mention BC once, which I find odd. If he planned on hitting him, it was certainly spur of the moment. Why wouldn't he pick one of the people he mentioned? I also find it weird that he now supports BC :/ sounds fairly wishy washy. On July 23 2010 16:11 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:07 d3_crescentia wrote:On July 23 2010 15:52 SiNiquity wrote:
Right. But there's .. *double checks BM's post* 12 townies, 7 blues remaining. So the Vigi revealing gives the Mafia a 6/18 (33.33%) chance instead of 6/19 (31.58%) chance for hitting a "real blue."
But there's gotta be some other catch I'm missing. Or maybe I'm just wary of people roleclaiming in general which is why I'm getting that "vibe" from this plan. Don't think there's any real reason why mafia would be operating by chance. I feel like they're just trying to snipe blues, or people that would be useful. If the vigi reveals themselves + target, we can lynch them to confirm this information. Targeting Roffles or Jayme would reduce chances of BC being mafia since the mafia had no way of planning to put in one or two hits. One thing stands in the way of that, and that's BC's abilities to fake it. If BC himself was targeted by the vigi, then simply by lynching the vigi we can make some clear conclusions about BC. I don't really see the mafia making a fake claim if they know we're going to do this, considering that a 1-1 trade for them isn't very good, though it is possible they'd do this. If the vigi really DID flip blue, then it's harder to say but I believe it would semi-confirm BC. Am I making sense? I'm not sure I am. It's late. Yes and now after letting the vigi know you are going to lynch him lol, how do you propose in finding this vig? soft claims vig? On July 23 2010 16:24 Tricode wrote:
Meh fine I guess, I will take one for the team.
I was the vig. I was aiming at BC
Reasons:
Who the fuck didn't see it coming from me?
Also to the med who protected BC. I hate you with a true passion.
When you guys do kill me to prove what I am saying, I will be honest, I tried reading this thread but it is hard with flame wars and ridiculous claims and finger pointing.
The person under most of my suspicion is youngminii. From comments he had in the beginning when he seemed afraid that BC was accusing him as being mafia (which BC wasn't). To attacking and finger pointing anyone he had a chance to do so at.
Everyone was scummy for what ever lame reason and he tried to push it hard until he could jump to the next person. He jumped a lot from what I can tell.
Now knowing all of you, you will probably say what I am saying is B.S. and just lynch me.
In which I don't care and go ahead to prove what ever crap you want to believe in. After that I hope you all play well and good luck you will all need it.
If for w/e reason i do live. I will contribute w/e and do w/e to help the town, but to be honest I can't really keep up with how much you guys post. Might be just because of personal issues or something i have going on.
Also everyone should listen to BC keep him alive as long as possible. I trust him and so should you.
You will get your proof of innocence after my death. OK um wow, he says he thinks youngminii is suspicious, and starts saying he doesnt care if he gets lynched, which kinda makes it either seem like an apathetic towny who failed or a really deep scum trying to get away with being a vig, which in itself is pretty ridiculous. Says to trust BC which seems really fishy. Why is he trusting the person he tried to kill? On July 23 2010 16:35 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:33 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 23 2010 16:29 d3_crescentia wrote:
wait what
that post doesn't even make sense
you aimed at BC but you don't want him to die? why the hell would you do that Ask fishball, hes done it to me once in the past. And I would of gotten away with it if it wasn't for that meddling medic! God way to ruin everything. Both he and BC play it off like D3 never even accused them of that... On July 23 2010 16:47 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2010 16:38 Protactinium wrote:
Wow... uh... words cannot express how sad I am that my hour and some minutes spent writing that post just went to waste.
Still, read it anyway. I don't think Tricode is lying (though why would you target somebody you want to remain alive?) but just in case...
Good night town.
##Vote: Abstain
##Vote: Double Lynch You are the only one who has figured me out this whole game. Though I guess you don't know me, if you read my earlier posts I mention how I only join mafia games in hopes that one day I can kill BC. Since now I used up my vig, that dream has to remain for another game. Now I am basically a green townie with the vig name. So since I can't kill him might as well not be a true douche about it. What good would advocating his death and lying do? That would be beyond douchey of me if I did. Either case, my dream failed. So you gunned or him because you wanted to, how very untown-like I really dont feel comfortable keeping someone like this around, if there going to put some secret desire to kill someone for fun. And I don't think tricode is some noob player, which is weird. On July 24 2010 11:04 Tricode wrote:
##vote Abstain
Place holder.
I want to see what everyone says before I place my vote. On July 24 2010 15:55 Tricode wrote:
BC seems confident about southrawrea and does have good analysis on him. And I would like to lynch mafia this time round.
So
Changing my vote
##unvote youngmini
##Vote: southrawrea On July 25 2010 06:50 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 06:47 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:46 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:31 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 06:25 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:17 zeks wrote:
#vote SouthRawrea
Mafia is essentially against a wall so they pushed their most inactive member out to die
How does that make any sense mafia is against a wall so they sacrificed someone who was going to be lynched anyway? if southrawrea is red it doesn't buy the mafia any extra time if he gets lynched 1. His claim is an effort to save himself and get our main man citi.zen killed in the process 2. SouthRawrea is obviously expendable 3. Town organization is becoming a LEGIT THREAT - we've forced the action on them so now they came up with an aggressive reply with South claiming. Scum probably wrote his posts up for him rofl Okay, I can see this line of thinking now. However, so far 1, seems to be backfiring since South has already garnered several votes. And i doubt he had his posts written for him; they're not persuasive at all. Put yourself in the mafias shoes. If citizen is really the hatter, how would you disrupt the plan? The strategies i detailed in my longish post on page 96 (i think its 96) involving false DT claims would be much more powerful and harder to combat than sending out SouthRawrea to meekly claim that he's the real Mad Hatter. Like I said before, never assume the mafia are idiots. The other possibility no one has mentioned is that BC and Tricode are both red and we have 2 Hatters (possible yes... realistic probably not) Oh wow.. never even considered 2 hatters... uh... There is only 2kp roles. So it's unlikely that there are 2 mad hatters when I'm the vig. Also instead of defending yourself, you seem to like to show your hard work that is irrelevant to this game and does not prove anything other then your busy. On July 25 2010 06:57 Tricode wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 06:53 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:50 Tricode wrote:On July 25 2010 06:47 SouthRawrea wrote:On July 25 2010 06:46 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:31 zeks wrote:On July 25 2010 06:25 iNfuNdiBuLuM wrote:On July 25 2010 06:17 zeks wrote:
#vote SouthRawrea
Mafia is essentially against a wall so they pushed their most inactive member out to die
How does that make any sense mafia is against a wall so they sacrificed someone who was going to be lynched anyway? if southrawrea is red it doesn't buy the mafia any extra time if he gets lynched 1. His claim is an effort to save himself and get our main man citi.zen killed in the process 2. SouthRawrea is obviously expendable 3. Town organization is becoming a LEGIT THREAT - we've forced the action on them so now they came up with an aggressive reply with South claiming. Scum probably wrote his posts up for him rofl Okay, I can see this line of thinking now. However, so far 1, seems to be backfiring since South has already garnered several votes. And i doubt he had his posts written for him; they're not persuasive at all. Put yourself in the mafias shoes. If citizen is really the hatter, how would you disrupt the plan? The strategies i detailed in my longish post on page 96 (i think its 96) involving false DT claims would be much more powerful and harder to combat than sending out SouthRawrea to meekly claim that he's the real Mad Hatter. Like I said before, never assume the mafia are idiots. The other possibility no one has mentioned is that BC and Tricode are both red and we have 2 Hatters (possible yes... realistic probably not) Oh wow.. never even considered 2 hatters... uh... There is only 2kp roles. So it's unlikely that there are 2 mad hatters when I'm the vig. Also instead of defending yourself, you seem to like to show your hard work that is irrelevant to this game and does not prove anything other then your busy. I just defended myself against zeks didn't I D  You just asked Zek "why don't you suspect citizen", that isn't really a reason why not to look at you still. You were just trying to bounce off your FoS to citizen instead of defending yourself and giving valid reasons in why we should trust you over citizen. Says he agrees with BC, but doesn't change his vote from south to citi, and posts after a little bit. Thats really suspicious in my book when you add everything up. If a mad hatter gets lynched tonight, I think we need to go after this guy. Hopefully one of them put a bomb on BC, because that would help tremendously in figuring some stuff out. Also hope the DT situation gets resolved very soon... Tricode has an ndying hatred of BC and always wants to kill him. That is a fact of nature. Mafia constants: Chezinu cannot be trusted to say anything useful Ace and BM share a deep hatred of each other Flamewheel is adorable Abenson sucks at mafia Brownbear will fuck up if you ever give him the medic role (and Korynne will be sad) Tricode will try to kill BC every chance he gets  Meeple will always protect mafia. L will try to bandwagon Ace On July 25 2010 10:17 tree.hugger wrote:
Well, at least we know stuff now. On July 25 2010 10:20 tree.hugger wrote:
As I said, we still have an intact town circle, and to make matters better, we've still got the MH left. That's all well and good.
You can suspect me all you want, but basically the more pressing issue is South v. BC/Tricode. We need a good way of figuring that out and only one/two people know.
Either that, or citi.zen's MH is the godfather, which would qualify as a TL Mafia pimpest play, imo.
This is the citizen/BC/South posts. He votes double lynch and Citi.zen with the reason that his bombs would be better placed and he would be more likely to try a daring plan.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 25 2010 10:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:22 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:20 tree.hugger wrote:
As I said, we still have an intact town circle, and to make matters better, we've still got the MH left. That's all well and good.
You can suspect me all you want, but basically the more pressing issue is South v. BC/Tricode. We need a good way of figuring that out and only one/two people know.
Either that, or citi.zen's MH is the godfather, which would qualify as a TL Mafia pimpest play, imo. Haha yeah. Wait so.............. Out of South, Tricode, and Citizens "Mad hatter" ONE OF THEM IS MAFIA I think after tonight, citi.zen's MH should claim. Meaning, the mafia still has to worry about him tonight, but after that, the MH's usefulness to town is probably more as a visible member in this fight. And I know that's like asking the MH/GF to just come out and be a town suspect, when they have nothing to lose personally from being hidden, BUT, the value to the town is pretty obvious, (yes?). On July 25 2010 10:43 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 10:30 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 10:27 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:25 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 10:23 Pandain wrote:On July 25 2010 10:22 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:
I dunno how to make this any clearer:
Being Townie 101
1. Do not lie to town.
1a. Do not pretend to be blue.
Being Blue 101
1. Do not lie to town.
2. Do not give your blue role to someone who isn't fully confirmed, especially not in the first couple of days.
We've had so much trouble over the past 3 days because of the refusal of good players to stick to the fundamentals. Some people want to be flashy, they wanna be a hero, they are impatient, etc. The key to town is to act as a crowd, to not stick out. That way, the mafia sticks out and gets caught. When town members get these bright ideas about goofing around to draw out reds they just end up sticking out themselves. The problem is that we were going to let young into the circle yet as soon as citizen turns out to be green(not even blue) he just recklessly posts it. Lol 'recklessly'. I warned you. Yeah, but right away? Heck. HE WASNT EVEN BLUE! You can't deny that citizen had been playing weird. He had been. Everyone knows that, and its evidence from his plans within plans and fakeclaiming. Youngmini we were doing a logical play to figure out if your mafia. It didn't reveal the true dt. 'logical play', okay. This is the most far fetched story I've ever seen come out of a mafia game and I don't care if you're green/blue/red at this point. The majority of the people on the list make up mafia and if you need to be sacrificed to get rid of that entire list, then so be it. You say things like this all the time, and you never really back it up. You throw around words like "flawed" and "inconsistent" like you're the sole arbiter of truth, and that your claims are so self-evident, that they ought to fight for themselves in the thread of public opinion. Part of this game is guessing. Part of this game is skill. Part of this game is persistence. Part of this game is the ability to work with others. You have these abilities in varying qualities, but you don't have the most important trait in mafia, which is patience, and cool headedness. Lynching citi.zen made a lot of sense. It was basically a way of confirming one player over another in a near 50/50 set-up. citi.zen had been on the radar of a ton of people from the game's beginning, including my own. He had a history of useless posting, just as he had a history of making grandiose gambles. But he screwed up hugely today, first by falsely claiming blue, and second by somewhat arrogantly not defending himself. This undoubtably intensified some people's convictions of his guilt, but if you took the chance of him and South being 50/50 mafia, then he was still the obvious choice. His outcomes were better than South's outcomes, and it made logical sense to kill him as a test of this. Unfortunately, the fact that he WASN'T the MH makes this somewhat worse. A new possibility; that of the MH being the GF is now fair game, and his analysis and "bombs" will be missed. He claimed that way to late, and I really don't have any sympathy for him because of that. That said, what you've been right on since the day post is that this isn't over yet, not by a long shot. It's the mafia's move now, and if they continue to suck at killing blues, then the town is in a solid position. We have a split vote today, with only a couple outliers (we need to be focusing on those as well) and so we should be able, as you're saying, to isolate the mafia pretty easily. There's only one wrinkle, and I hesitate to even add this, because we're probably screwed if it's the case. IF citi.zen's MH is the godfather, then we can assume that our two detectives will die tonight. This puts us in a huge hole, but it also makes SouthRawrea look innocent. Which means that the mafia was able to split it's votes between both candidates. At which point, we're done. Hence why citi.zen's fake blue claim could turn out to be so devastating. Here's what On July 25 2010 11:03 tree.hugger wrote:
Basically, it works like this:
We lynched citi.zen because in doing so, we would find out which he was, and thus Southrawrea would be the other. Of course, we could've done the same thing by lynching Southrawrea, but due to suspicions I, and many others held, along with the advantage of catching a bigger fish, or using the skill of a superior hatter, we decided that citi.zen was the better target.
However, the fact that citi.zen is NOT the MH candidate, makes our choice a mistake. Whereas lynching Southrawrea would've had the same effect; either validating citi.zen and his friend/Tricode, lynching citi.zen means that we still have a third option on the table; namely that citi.zen was a pawn of the GF. And now we can't ask him about it. Not only that, but if this is the case, then the GF knows both detectives.
Or Southrawrea could be mafia.
Or Tricode and Bc could be mafia.
We should've had two choices, but now we still have three.
So here's what we need to do. If citi.zen's MH was the mafia, then we could probably call gg right now, because we're done. At any rate, our detectives should make sure to confide in someone that they trust, because they'll both die. A suicide bomber is likely in this scenario, and that means Southrawrea would die as well, leaving a total of five town deaths and one mafia death in a night.
But because of how bleak this other outlook is, I think we have no choice but to reject it. We can't win the game that way, and so we shouldn't even consider it, and pretend like citi.zen's death has given us the two-pronged choice that we aimed for. On July 25 2010 11:09 tree.hugger wrote:
Which is why, after tonight, I think we'll know if citi.zen's Mad Hatter was legitimate or not. If all hell doesn't break lose tonight, then citi.zen's Mad Hatter MUST roleclaim, and we should all roleclaim to them. That way, they can put the blues in touch with each other.
If the Mad Hatter in that scenario is killed tonight, then the detective MUST roleclaim. It's that simple. We can confirm these players simply on the basis of necessity.
I would expect counter-claims at this point. I would therefore advise one of the players involved to take measures that would confirm you in the future. I hope you can think of something plausible.
This is our chance. On July 25 2010 11:10 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:07 zeks wrote:
Let's blow the real taco stand.
Citi.zen was my mouthpiece.
I am the real mad hatter.
My bombs are on BC and SouthRawrea.
I am missing a medic and a DT. Claim to me if you wish.
I'm right here. Kill me.
Oh hell, why? I was writing my post, goddammit! On July 25 2010 11:12 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:05 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 11:03 tree.hugger wrote:
Basically, it works like this:
We lynched citi.zen because in doing so, we would find out which he was, and thus Southrawrea would be the other. Of course, we could've done the same thing by lynching Southrawrea, but due to suspicions I, and many others held, along with the advantage of catching a bigger fish, or using the skill of a superior hatter, we decided that citi.zen was the better target.
However, the fact that citi.zen is NOT the MH candidate, makes our choice a mistake. Whereas lynching Southrawrea would've had the same effect; either validating citi.zen and his friend/Tricode, lynching citi.zen means that we still have a third option on the table; namely that citi.zen was a pawn of the GF. And now we can't ask him about it. Not only that, but if this is the case, then the GF knows both detectives.
Or Southrawrea could be mafia.
Or Tricode and Bc could be mafia.
We should've had two choices, but now we still have three.
So here's what we need to do. If citi.zen's MH was the mafia, then we could probably call gg right now, because we're done. At any rate, our detectives should make sure to confide in someone that they trust, because they'll both die. A suicide bomber is likely in this scenario, and that means Southrawrea would die as well, leaving a total of five town deaths and one mafia death in a night.
But because of how bleak this other outlook is, I think we have no choice but to reject it. We can't win the game that way, and so we shouldn't even consider it, and pretend like citi.zen's death has given us the two-pronged choice that we aimed for. I'm forced to believe that this is a mafia attempt at covering up the situation at hand. I've tried all game to ignore tree.hugger's scummy posts because I had an initial suspicion that he was town which I clearly followed throughout the whole game. If he isn't mafia I just have to /facepalm really hard. We are following my list, even if I'm being over-excessively loud about it. What am I covering up? What? What about that post is incorrect? On July 25 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote:
I'm going to take some time off from this game. I'm sick of analyzing things only to have people turn out to not have been telling the truth, and then for the town to be worse off because of it.
And I'm sick of Youngminii. On July 25 2010 11:55 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 25 2010 11:15 youngminii wrote:On July 25 2010 11:13 tree.hugger wrote:
I'm going to take some time off from this game. I'm sick of analyzing things only to have people turn out to not have been telling the truth, and then for the town to be worse off because of it.
And I'm sick of Youngminii. Coming from the man who said shit about people not being respectful. Look at yourself. This is something I think is important, and I'm not going to let you turn it against me. I think that, whatever Infundibulum thinks about your mis-spelling his name , it became tiresome, unfunny, and annoying. The fact that you repeatedly used it as a bludgeon to get your point across that he was suspicious or mafia was an immature attempt to be demeaning, and, even if he's made of tougher stuff than to be bothered by it, I didn't like to see it as an observer. These games can get heated, but commentary should consist of what occurs in the game, and should stay out of what doesn't. Your posting has been nothing but negativity from the moment you began this game, and while I appreciate your enthusiasm and drive, it's not fun to read through page after page of you flaming people, and engaging in petty disputes. I have no judgments upon you as a person, please know that, but as a mafia player, your style saddens me. I hope you'll take the time to moderate your words and respond to this in a manner that isn't caustic or agressive. If you have criticisms of the way I treat people in this game, then please tell me as well, because I think we can always be nicer to people, and I think in the heat of the moment, it's easy to forget that. I'd love to continue this discussion in pm's. On July 26 2010 08:09 tree.hugger wrote:![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_UBQuEqCJJqk/Sm7fLFOzKMI/AAAAAAAABMw/b7HKoKgJUM0/s400/2009_07_28+Stress+reduction+kit+e.gif) On July 26 2010 08:14 tree.hugger wrote:
So that vote when we were choosing between citi.zen and Southrawrea because both were roleclaiming MH, and only one of them could be correct?
Well it turns out that when citi.zen claimed, he was actually doing it as a proxy, so in fact the entire assumption based on that lynch was invalid. Should've lynched Southrawrea then. Damn we screwed that up. Except Southrawrea was acting as a proxy for BC so in fact the whole reason between us lynching people the last day was a card tower of lies.
Hahahaha! Ahaha! .... Ha!....
...
I advocate the immediate lynching of Zeks and BC because if we're going down, we might as well take out the dishonest anti-town players who got us into this mess. On July 26 2010 09:37 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 08:48 BrownBear wrote:On July 26 2010 08:14 tree.hugger wrote:
So that vote when we were choosing between citi.zen and Southrawrea because both were roleclaiming MH, and only one of them could be correct?
Well it turns out that when citi.zen claimed, he was actually doing it as a proxy, so in fact the entire assumption based on that lynch was invalid. Should've lynched Southrawrea then. Damn we screwed that up. Except Southrawrea was acting as a proxy for BC so in fact the whole reason between us lynching people the last day was a card tower of lies.
Hahahaha! Ahaha! .... Ha!....
...
I advocate the immediate lynching of Zeks and BC because if we're going down, we might as well take out the dishonest anti-town players who got us into this mess. *ducks in* Even after their plan has completely gone to shit, he's still trying to save South. Unbelievable. *ducks out* No, let's kill South too. I wanted to kill the people who got people to proxy for them, but after that we should probably lynch South and Tricode, and then start over. I have no problem killing South. On July 26 2010 09:47 tree.hugger wrote:
Did anybody involved in this, anyone, just stop to think for one moment that this was bad for the town? Did anyone who proxy'd someone to claim for them realize, when they saw my posts about citi.zen being the better lynch, or youngminii's posts about South being the better lynch, that the town was making a crucial decision based upon people lying?
Did it bother you, Zeks, South, BC that he that the town was making a decision based upon facts that weren't true? I mean, the whole premise of that lynch was to rolecheck competing claims. We didn't do that. We didn't rule out anything. We're back at Day 2, and on Day 2, we were back at Day 1.
And yet nobody thought for just a second and realized that through their incredible scheming , they were shooting the town in the foot. Unbelievable.
Of course it all makes sense now. I remarked to Infun that South's 'claim' was suspicious because he never once said the words "mad hatter" in them. He just heavily implied it. I said several times in the thread that citi.zen being citi.zen, he's probably making some ballsy play. But I guess I was just naive, I guess I just assumed that someone, on either side, would play with their brain, and not with their ego. I guess I assumed that at least one side had the town's interests at heart. But having been hyuked by both sides?
It's really annoying. On July 26 2010 11:33 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 09:56 Subversion wrote:
Don't give problems tree hugger. Give solutions. You were right about this, I'm done being annoyed about the last day. (Tricode and Zeks, I didn't actually mean I thought lynching you was a good plan, I just meant that it really annoyed me how much we were played yesterday.) It's really funny how wrong and right I was at the beginning, I had a bunch of people that were working as a team, and that turned out to be right—but it wasn't the mafia team. Oh well. *** And I was going to post about how in fact is wasn't so bad and that Zeks is pretty much confirmed, because if Zeks was the GF, then we were all going to lose anyway, and his roleclaim would make no goddamned sense. BUT I think this should be apparent now to everyone, so if you haven't already, roleclaim to Zeks. And ##vote double lynch
##vote BloodyC0bbler
##vote SouthRawrea
After the fall out of Citi.zen's green flip, he votes BC and South as well as Double Lynch.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 26 2010 11:56 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 11:50 Divinek wrote:
if one of south/bc isnt red then fuck this game If BC isn't red, I agree. South could just be bad. Show nested quote +On July 26 2010 11:53 Divinek wrote:
also there's way too many people in this game that dont post enough that are probably mob, how annoying d3, (citi.zen's favorite) Misder, XeliN (haha, never posts, never has to)
throws out a list (it includes Xelin) but it isn' followed up on.
+ Show Spoiler +On July 27 2010 03:22 tree.hugger wrote:
Wee, sleekit, cow'rin, tim'rous beastie,
O, what a panic's in thy breastie!
Thou need na start awa sae hasty
Wi bickering brattle!
I wad be laith to rin an' chase thee,
Wi' murdering pattle.
I'm truly sorry man's dominion
Has broken Nature's social union,
An' justifies that ill opinion
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, earth born companion
An' fellow mortal!
I doubt na, whyles, but thou may thieve;
What then? poor beastie, thou maun live!
A daimen icker in a thrave
'S a sma' request;
I'll get a blessin wi' the lave,
An' never miss't.
Thy wee-bit housie, too, in ruin!
It's silly wa's the win's are strewin!
An' naething, now, to big a new ane,
O' foggage green!
An' bleak December's win's ensuin,
Baith snell an' keen!
Thou saw the fields laid bare an' waste,
An' weary winter comin fast,
An' cozie here, beneath the blast,
Thou thought to dwell,
Till crash! the cruel coulter past
Out thro' thy cell.
That wee bit heap o' leaves an' stibble,
Has cost thee monie a weary nibble!
Now thou's turned out, for a' thy trouble,
But house or hald,
To thole the winter's sleety dribble,
An' cranreuch cauld.
But Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft agley,
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
Still thou are blest, compared wi' me!
The present only toucheth thee:
But och! I backward cast my e'e,
On prospects drear!
An' forward, tho' I canna see,
I guess an' fear!
an appropriate filler post
+ Show Spoiler +On July 27 2010 06:23 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2010 06:11 BrownBear wrote:On July 27 2010 06:10 chaoser wrote:On July 27 2010 05:54 BrownBear wrote:
They's done.
Bill, please for the love of god stop letting people edit posts. who edited? Many people. The problem is, he's given them permission every time, and I really don't like it. The last person to edit was Proactinium on page 135. You posted twice after then without raising a complaint. And if it's to correct a grammatical error...? On July 27 2010 11:06 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2010 09:45 Bill Murray wrote:
I just pmed quite a few good players to see if they want to replace in. Let citi.zen play, so he can yell at us. On July 28 2010 18:26 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 16:04 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 15:33 ~OpZ~ wrote:On July 28 2010 15:29 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 15:22 ~OpZ~ wrote:On July 28 2010 14:43 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On July 28 2010 14:39 BrownBear wrote:On July 28 2010 14:29 Divinek wrote:
i had strong thoughts bc was mafia just based on how he'd been posting (even if that was only based on how he played one game previously) and his pms to me
but he's such a persuasive asshole, damn experienced players BC is damn good at this game. He almost had me convinced yesterday. Shit, for real? rofl. I did way better than I was thinking I had. SOOOO thought I had only stalled you. BC, you had a VERY slim chance of changing my vote...But as I've said, I regularly distrust you. And your instajump on citizen is what hugely pinned my suspicion at you. Was an epic bus of citizen you pulled off tho. GG for you sir. I woulda done it as town as well. As I said, his play was horrendous there, the fact that only a minority of players saw it makes me sad. It also led to one of the biggest breakthroughs in the game. And if he wasn't lynched, he had the names of both people that woulda been a fake dt, and a fake MH. Citizen personally picked the DT's night 2 check too. So....I dunno good sir if it was horrendous play. I think it was pretty baller. Once game is done I shall go into more detail on what he did and the problems behind it, but I don't really want to derail the game (as its still in motion). citi.zen almost shot the town in the foot, but in reality, knowing that both you and South were mafia, that was a poor play from you guys as well. Knowing that it was, in fact a polarized vote, (something figured out because Zeks claimed when he, had he been mafia, had no need to claim) basically meant that if we didn't get the mafia side of the equation that day, we'd get you tomorrow. So why you went almost all-in to buy yourself a day strikes me as a really odd choice. It's true that you hadn't gotten any of your night lynches correct, but there was really no plausible chance anyone would roleclaim to you (woops, Subversion) and you committed yourself to dying the next day, if not that day. I don't get what the thought was behind it. But I guess we'll hear about that later. At any rate, if you were planning to talk your way out of it, not everyone in this game is as easy to convince as BrownBear. Speaking of which.... Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 14:17 BrownBear wrote:
Fuck yeah.
Tomorrow, tree.hugger and a yet-to-be-decided-on fourth.
Town, we got this :D Not with that lynch, you don't. On July 28 2010 18:29 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2010 15:43 youngminii wrote:On July 28 2010 15:31 ~OpZ~ wrote:
and everyone that wanted to hold off on voting for BC, should be looked at with huge suspicion. It will probably lead to ANOTHER overwhelming case against me. Again, my only argument is I'm not sheepish with my votes, AND I didn't want day to end. I also wanted something from BC before he died to point us in the direction of whom is town/mafia.
I didn't vote for citizen, but those who didn't instavote for BC today, but DID vote for citizen should most definitely be scrutinized thoroughly. Just so you know, Pandain totally refused to insta-gib BC (and I think he did the same for SouthRawrea) on the grounds of some totally random reason. He also voted citi.zen even after I PM'd him threatening to reveal his DT claim if he did. Holding a roleclaim over someone's head, even if you suspect they're mafia isn't a very productive way to play... nobody will want to roleclaim to you! But in the end, that split vote worked, we actually did have a mafia on the chopping block. So with some DT leadership (ahem, ahem) we should be in business. On July 29 2010 18:36 tree.hugger wrote:
Okay, I'm going to catch up more fully with the day in a little bit after I wake up, which will be after I go to sleep, which will be after the MSL. But I just wanted to remark how funny it was that literally all the players I had playing 'on a team' at the beginning, and thus on my suspicion list, were DT's and their fellow rolechecks. Except BC. I did get him right.
We agreed upon Pandain right? I'll check Rastaban later, but he's probably scum.
And thank god Infund was a townie, because I was pretty sure, but not 100% I could trust you. gg man. On July 30 2010 03:12 tree.hugger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2010 23:30 chaoser wrote:
##Vote tree.hugger
Until tree responds, I'm going to keep my vote on him No problem, I woke up for the MSL, and then fell asleep after it was over, and now I'm up again. Basically, I was talking to Foolishness at the beginning, and then Infund and several others at different points throughout the game. We identified players who were playing on a team early on and tried to get one lynched as a rolecheck on the whole group. My thought was that they were mafia of course, and it turned out to be a little bit of bad luck that we ended up figuring out the town circle, and not the mafia, although ironically we had much more success in that regard than the actual mafia. I've been somewhat busy in the middle of this week, and I'm actually heading up to Montreal for a music festival tomorrow, so my activity is going to be more suspect I'm afraid. And I stand by the lynch of citi.zen, with what we knew at the time, it was the right choice, and it turned out to not be so big of a deal anyway. I've totally lost track at this point of who's claimed to be a DT or not. Looks like; ##Vote: Pandain
##Vote: RastabanMafia KP goes down to 1 once we axe Pandain, ya? This is very manageable.
These posts catch us up to the present (or at least the time I started on this) where Tree defends lynching Citi.zen and votes pandain and I.
SUMMARY
Tree starts off with being against the lynch of Hyperbola and votes DTA. Day two he starts pushing Subversion as a prime candidate and doesn't change even after subversion soft claims blue. He supports that Tricode is innocent but suspects BC, He wants Tricode to step up and have mass role claims go to him, thinks it is worth the risk. Shortly after we have the Citi.zen/South claims. He supports lynching South and pushes hard for the town to follow suit. The argument is that Citi.zen is more skilled with placing his bombs and that he is more likely to make such a bold play. Follows up by voting South and BC though he is hesitant to add BC at first. He has been pushing Subversion the entire game, did the mafia think they might could get him lynched sooner and then decided it was too late and had to be sure he was night killed so they double hit him (since there was only 1 hit that night and no one claimed. I am not sure that Tree is town like I was with Bumatlarge after reading through his posts. Tree has a lot more grey areas but also some strong town actions. I thought I would post this and check over some of the other candidates before deciding anything.
Also sorry there is a hanging end bold tag, I couldn't find out where it came from.
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.trygve.com/pitchfork.jpg)
