| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote: odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town. Doesn't seem like an odd choice for me because Ace is one of the best players and Bill Murray was pretty cogent so far this game. | ||
|
Qatol
United States3165 Posts
On September 23 2010 11:29 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: "Ingérence" is French for "interference." "Ingannations" are deceptions. "Invicitive" means "undefeatable" which isn't a word according to irrelevant people who fancy themselves hegemons. It is, without a doubt, the title of a fantastically awful movie. I understand the French, but dictionary.com does not like your other words! | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
On September 22 2010 07:24 Incognito wrote: Are you trying to defend him? Yeah, we know they're acting weird. You don't need to bring it up yet again. Especially since you're acting weirder than they are. You clearly are reading the thread. On the other hand, it seems to me like BC is in I don't care mode. The last two sentences just don't make sense. Nobody's switched to Team 7, and I didn't present anything against Team 7 yet. So I don't know what you're talking about. I was trying to explain what I thought he was trying to say, which didn't seem as suspicious to me as it did to you, so yeah I suppose it is a defense. I misread the vote count. It showed that meeple and yellowink were voting for bc/rol, when I was reading it the other way around (bc/rol voting for meeple/yellowink). | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit. I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC. vote team 6 | ||
|
Infundibulum
United States2552 Posts
On September 23 2010 09:35 Infundibulum wrote: Did Korynne ever confirm whether or not mafia have to make a kill each night? I just PM'd her the same question, then noticed you mentioned it in the thread. I'm also asking whether or not people are notified if they are saved by a medic. If they aren't notified by the host then it becomes a lot harder (impossible?) to confirm someone via protection. I kinda want to move past this topic but feel it would be good to tie up those 2 loose ends. 1. mafia must make a hit each night 2. there is NOT pm notification if a medic makes a save. | ||
|
BrownBear
United States6894 Posts
(im assuming they were vanilla town) So where to today? | ||
|
Incognito
United States2071 Posts
On September 23 2010 09:11 Foolishness wrote: Incognito and Infundibulum are an internecine ingerence. They invaginate incondite, inchoate ingannations, that inquinate inimical ideas in infaust innocents. Their iniquity causes ingerence, so inly instruments to interpose their ingravescent inveighs only makes their interference inexpugnable. For infinity, they indite inopinate, inconscient inconsistencies, that incommode us insouciance innocents. Indeed, indiscriminatory interlude is inescapable. Indispensable intelligence is imperative, that these indign imbeciles be inculpated for their incontestably invictive interchanges. Their impregnable indecency is not imprevious to the induction of the innumerable innocents that inhabit this enterprise. Indubitably, Incognito and Infundibulum intention to insidiate us incontrovertibly interlocks them as mafia. I'm still waiting on content from you. Real content that is. Unless your contribution is that you like to play word games and take shots at people from the shadows while not really caring about actively convincing everyone that I'm mafia. I'm not at all opposed to seeing what you have to say about me being mafia. So by all means, bring on the accusations. Once I present my case against Team 7 we can all decide which seems more plausible. Kapiche? On September 23 2010 10:59 meeple wrote: odd choice for mafia... people seem to have a grudge against them Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town. Wow. This coming from you is hillarious. As if you're trying to downplay the fact that Ace was suspicious of you. Its not an "odd" choice for you to kill the team that agreed with the scumminess of YOUR team and Team 1. I'm 100% positive you didn't miss the part where Ace accused you. Notice how meeple says "Now comes the analysis of their posts knowing that they were town", while doing nothing to analyze them. Analyzing a dead person's post is easy. Meeple, however, doesn't want to do this because he has no interest in exposing the fact that Ace agreed with my reads. Meeple is not walking the talk. This should raise red flags for everyone. Killing Ace/BM is convenient if Team 1 and Team 7 are mafia. Mafia killing Ace/BM is equal to killing a less vocal and aggressive version of me/Infundibulum. It eliminates the only Team who agreed with me that Team 1 and 7 are scum right now. Which means I lose a supporter and need to work even harder to try to accomplish my goals. I think everyone would agree that I would be more likely to receive a medic prot than Ace. I'm guessing mafia took this into consideration and decided it was easier and safer to effectively cripple my steamrolling machine by sniping the quieter supporter. Now I have to find yet another vote to help me get them lynched. Real convenient, huh? Team 7 is mafia. Analysis coming up in a few. | ||
|
Incognito
United States2071 Posts
On September 22 2010 05:52 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: I think he is worried because if the votes are split between two teams it is likely the mafia will be able to save the guilty one, if one of the two are guilty. My original post states that YellowInk's behavior is "interesting". My comment also implies that this "interesting" behavior is suspicious. In this post, Pyrr is being apologetic about YellowInk's behavior and is trying to justify it. Why is this weird? First of all, Pyrr hasn't really been directly defending people other than himself. In this post, he defends YellowInk directly, theorizing why YI would behave in such a way. Pyrr hasn't been defending anyone directly (although he has been saying we should give people time to respond before accusing aggressively (which in essence is its own type of defense)), yet pops up out of the blue to defend YellowInk. The most plausible reason why Pyrr did this is because YI is his other mafia teammate. Furthermore, in my original post, I merely stated that YI's behavior was "interesting". But Pyrr feels a need to defend YI preemptively. The are other possible reasons why Pyrr did this (like, he wanted to clarify a possibility), but these possibilities are improbable. Pyrr hasn't really been the clarifying type this game. He has had a far greater role raising questions about other teams: namely, Teams 2 and 6, and all of a sudden he pops up to clarify what someone was thinking? This is an out of place defense and certainly warrants heavy suspicion. Finally, the circumstances under which Pyrr defended YellowInk are out of place. Look at the posts of Pyrr and YellowInk and their relation to one another. On page 17, YellowInk says that he agrees with what people (presumably me?) had to say about Team 1's scumminess. He follows that with a vote on Team 1. He never changes that vote. Two pages later is Pyrr's post defending YellowInk. Pyrr is defending YellowInk even though YellowInk is voting for him. Now just think about that for a moment. Why would you defend someone who has voted for you? It doesn't make sense to defend someone who voted for you if you were a townie. The only reason why you would do that is if BOTH PLAYERS ARE MAFIA. Pyrr's defense of YellowInk confirms my suspicion that YellowInk didn't really want to lynch Pyrr and used meeple's no-lynch to effectively neutralize his vote. Pyrr wants to support YellowInk but overlooks the fact that YellowInk voted for him. Oh well, I'm happy with two easy mafia. [Vote]Team 7 Main Point: 1) Pyrr slipped up. He defended someone out of the blue when there was no direct attack involved. He defended someone who voted for him. 2) Team 1 is mafia 3) Team 7 is mafia + Show Spoiler + *Note* This is supplementary information should you not be convinced by my unspoilered argument. This section is spoilered merely so that it does not distract people from my main point which is unspoilered above. Pyrr On September 23 2010 12:10 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: @ this whole LSB vs. Incognito thing Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit. I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC. vote team 6 The only reason why LSB isn't passive is because he's popping up to defend himself. BrownBear has generated more real content than LSB. The most notable thing he said was: On September 21 2010 02:15 BrownBear wrote: There's a bit of an interesting dynamic starting to come out here. This could be a slip, or it could be Pyrry trying to gently suggest SR as mafia to us. This early in the game, I would be astonished if Pyrry slipped up that spectacularly, so I think he's trying to plant the SR-scum idea in our heads (inception?). On a related note, you claim here that SR is always a cryptic useless babblemouth. This is not a true statement. Look at TL Mafia XXX. SR is pretty concrete and understandable here, even if he posts a lot of one liners. He actively gives input, questions, theorizes, and states his opinion. That game he was townie. So either you're intentionally inaccurately portraying someone, like BrownBear said, or its another honest mistake. In any case, BrownBear bringing this point up is generating content. And BC does have his I don't care moments. I've seen plenty of games where BC just messed around or didn't take the game seriously. Most of them are in the middle of TL mafia history after he gets vanilla townie a bunch of times in a row. For an example, check out Mafia XV. Or the beginning of TL Mafia XXX where he was smurfing as Vayesh Moru. As for RoL, you either have a bad memory, or you don't care about having a good one. Check out TL Mafia XV. RoL is plenty active in that game. The vast number of gross misrepresentations that I have pointed out here is astonishing. Memory is a weird thing, so I can't really say much about this except that its bad play. Your play this game doesn't match anything from your past two games which have samples of both mafia and town play. I would buy the idea that you are trying to change up your style. The thing is, this game, the style you have chosen to switch to is not just bad play, its pro-mafia play. Memory is a weird thing, so I won't say you're mafia because of your horrid misinterpretations of others' posts, but that fact cannot be ignored. Its hard to believe that all the incorrect statements that I've outlined here are just coincidence. Lets take a look at Pyrr's post history this game. Bashing my plan Stating you have no suspicions Making non-committal prod statements against Ace/BM Misrepresentative statement about SR Defense of LSB Refuting the statement "SR is appealing to Pyrr's authority" More wishy-washy statements about SR Says we should be investigating people who are not Team 1,2,7 who were the most suspicious people at that point. A post that is illogical for a townie to make. A NL post A poke on Team 6 Chatter on medics/DT Pyrr is posting like LSB. An overall characteristic of Pyrr's posts is that he either posts neutral statements, defends against an accusation, or joins in on non-essential (non-scum hunting) conversation. No pro-town direction at all. Pokes out Team 6 for some shoddy reasoning. Mysteriously avoids getting suspicious of Team 7 and actually defends Team 7 directly. In this post, he starts crying and saying that he's trying to switch from the blame game (which failed him miserably last game), to a more cautious playstyle. Then he claims that he is unfairly perceived as scummy because he "points the finger" too much or "doesn't take a stance on anything". The finger pointing is only bad when based on bad logic and when it is actively pursued in a way that floods the thread so much that other people's voices are not heard. Which is what Pyrr did in TL Mafia XXX. So yes, the suspicion for these behaviors is warranted. Pyrr tries to get pity points by using two extreme examples of playstyle in an attempt to make me look like a triggerhappy. This is not the case. Pyrr is thinking in absolutes. There is more than a "finger pointing" style and a "neutral/no-stance" style. Namely, thoughtful analysis followed by a confident support of the conclusions of your analysis. (Read Ver's TL Mafia XXX review/guide to see how Pyrr's "analysis" in that game really wasn't very good). Another pro-town activity would be discussions of suspicions, but NOT to the point of spamming the thread. Its not that pointing out a lot of suspicions is bad. You have to rely on the quality of the suspicions and the quality of the discussion that follows. Pyrr's "finger pointing" is more than finger pointing. Its aggressive finger pointing with shoddy evidence. In this post, Pyrr is asking for pity and is using appeal to emotion and faulty logic to shrug off accusations on the basis that I'm trigger happy. Main Points: 1. Pyrr's complaint that I'm being unreasonable by attacking his vicious finger pointing and his "neutral" stance + uselessness is absolutist and absurd. 2. Pyrr's posts spread doubt and do not draw informative conclusions. 3. Pyrr's posts are useless, don't show direction, and fit the motive of a mafia wanting to spread doubt while staying low profile and preventing town from going in the right direction. 4. While LSB's posts are scummy, Pyrr's posts are too. There is little doubt that Team 1 is mafia. + Show Spoiler + I was going to post some motive analysis on Team 7, but got side tracked with Pyrr and his unnatural defense of YellowInk. I now feel that a complete analysis of Team 7 is unnecessary at this point, but I will post that tomorrow IF AND ONLY IF people don't buy my above argument. I'm too tired to post it now. | ||
|
Divinek
Canada4045 Posts
baa baaa ##vote team 7 | ||
|
SouthRawrea
Canada608 Posts
On September 23 2010 12:10 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: @ this whole LSB vs. Incognito thing Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit. I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC. vote team 6 Nah it has nothing to do with being passive. He comes out with a strong accusation against my team and then fails to followup or explain himself properly. I'm having quite a dilemna right now because I know very well that it's obviously considered anti-town behaviour to not post much at all and so I'm looking to the inactive teams. The problem I have is that I can't shake the feeling that the mafia may be an active team as well. I've got to go for now but I'm going to look over Team 6 when I get back from school. | ||
|
Foolishness
United States3044 Posts
On September 23 2010 16:24 Incognito wrote: I'm still waiting on content from you. Real content that is. Unless your contribution is that you like to play word games and take shots at people from the shadows while not really caring about actively convincing everyone that I'm mafia. I'm not at all opposed to seeing what you have to say about me being mafia. So by all means, bring on the accusations. Once I present my case against Team 7 we can all decide which seems more plausible. Kapiche? Nah, I already indirectly told you I wanted to kill team 7 as well. Even if I think you're mafia I'd much rather kill team 7 right now. I don't agree at the moment that team 1 is suspicious, but we can agree to disagree at this point at worry about each other later. I'll be posting analysis later, but I think meeple is way out of character than his normal town behavior. | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
On September 23 2010 18:52 Incognito wrote: A few posts back, I noted Pyrr's defense of YellowInk: My original post states that YellowInk's behavior is "interesting". My comment also implies that this "interesting" behavior is suspicious. In this post, Pyrr is being apologetic about YellowInk's behavior and is trying to justify it. Why is this weird? First of all, Pyrr hasn't really been directly defending people other than himself. In this post, he defends YellowInk directly, theorizing why YI would behave in such a way. Pyrr hasn't been defending anyone directly (although he has been saying we should give people time to respond before accusing aggressively (which in essence is its own type of defense)), yet pops up out of the blue to defend YellowInk. The most plausible reason why Pyrr did this is because YI is his other mafia teammate. Furthermore, in my original post, I merely stated that YI's behavior was "interesting". But Pyrr feels a need to defend YI preemptively. The are other possible reasons why Pyrr did this (like, he wanted to clarify a possibility), but these possibilities are improbable. Pyrr hasn't really been the clarifying type this game. He has had a far greater role raising questions about other teams: namely, Teams 2 and 6, and all of a sudden he pops up to clarify what someone was thinking? This is an out of place defense and certainly warrants heavy suspicion. Finally, the circumstances under which Pyrr defended YellowInk are out of place. Look at the posts of Pyrr and YellowInk and their relation to one another. On page 17, YellowInk says that he agrees with what people (presumably me?) had to say about Team 1's scumminess. He follows that with a vote on Team 1. He never changes that vote. Two pages later is Pyrr's post defending YellowInk. Pyrr is defending YellowInk even though YellowInk is voting for him. Now just think about that for a moment. Why would you defend someone who has voted for you? It doesn't make sense to defend someone who voted for you if you were a townie. The only reason why you would do that is if BOTH PLAYERS ARE MAFIA. Pyrr's defense of YellowInk confirms my suspicion that YellowInk didn't really want to lynch Pyrr and used meeple's no-lynch to effectively neutralize his vote. Pyrr wants to support YellowInk but overlooks the fact that YellowInk voted for him. Oh well, I'm happy with two easy mafia. [Vote]Team 7 Main Point: 1) Pyrr slipped up. He defended someone out of the blue when there was no direct attack involved. He defended someone who voted for him. 2) Team 1 is mafia 3) Team 7 is mafia + Show Spoiler + *Note* This is supplementary information should you not be convinced by my unspoilered argument. This section is spoilered merely so that it does not distract people from my main point which is unspoilered above. Pyrr On September 23 2010 12:10 Pyrrhuloxia wrote: @ this whole LSB vs. Incognito thing Incog and SR seem to be locked in on LSB because he is supposedly too passive. He's not close to the most passive person here. BrownBear hasn't done much except advocate a no lynch. More importantly, BC hasn't done shit. I don't believe BC has an "I don't care mode." I see his name pop up on MSN often enough. I called him out for his placeholder vote on Foolishness and he didn't ever come back around to move it. RoL, is of course active this game, but that's even weirder than an inactive BC. vote team 6 The only reason why LSB isn't passive is because he's popping up to defend himself. BrownBear has generated more real content than LSB. The most notable thing he said was: On September 21 2010 02:15 BrownBear wrote: There's a bit of an interesting dynamic starting to come out here. This could be a slip, or it could be Pyrry trying to gently suggest SR as mafia to us. This early in the game, I would be astonished if Pyrry slipped up that spectacularly, so I think he's trying to plant the SR-scum idea in our heads (inception?). On a related note, you claim here that SR is always a cryptic useless babblemouth. This is not a true statement. Look at TL Mafia XXX. SR is pretty concrete and understandable here, even if he posts a lot of one liners. He actively gives input, questions, theorizes, and states his opinion. That game he was townie. So either you're intentionally inaccurately portraying someone, like BrownBear said, or its another honest mistake. In any case, BrownBear bringing this point up is generating content. And BC does have his I don't care moments. I've seen plenty of games where BC just messed around or didn't take the game seriously. Most of them are in the middle of TL mafia history after he gets vanilla townie a bunch of times in a row. For an example, check out Mafia XV. Or the beginning of TL Mafia XXX where he was smurfing as Vayesh Moru. As for RoL, you either have a bad memory, or you don't care about having a good one. Check out TL Mafia XV. RoL is plenty active in that game. The vast number of gross misrepresentations that I have pointed out here is astonishing. Memory is a weird thing, so I can't really say much about this except that its bad play. Your play this game doesn't match anything from your past two games which have samples of both mafia and town play. I would buy the idea that you are trying to change up your style. The thing is, this game, the style you have chosen to switch to is not just bad play, its pro-mafia play. Memory is a weird thing, so I won't say you're mafia because of your horrid misinterpretations of others' posts, but that fact cannot be ignored. Its hard to believe that all the incorrect statements that I've outlined here are just coincidence. Lets take a look at Pyrr's post history this game. Bashing my plan Stating you have no suspicions Making non-committal prod statements against Ace/BM Misrepresentative statement about SR Defense of LSB Refuting the statement "SR is appealing to Pyrr's authority" More wishy-washy statements about SR Says we should be investigating people who are not Team 1,2,7 who were the most suspicious people at that point. A post that is illogical for a townie to make. A NL post A poke on Team 6 Chatter on medics/DT Pyrr is posting like LSB. An overall characteristic of Pyrr's posts is that he either posts neutral statements, defends against an accusation, or joins in on non-essential (non-scum hunting) conversation. No pro-town direction at all. Pokes out Team 6 for some shoddy reasoning. Mysteriously avoids getting suspicious of Team 7 and actually defends Team 7 directly. In this post, he starts crying and saying that he's trying to switch from the blame game (which failed him miserably last game), to a more cautious playstyle. Then he claims that he is unfairly perceived as scummy because he "points the finger" too much or "doesn't take a stance on anything". The finger pointing is only bad when based on bad logic and when it is actively pursued in a way that floods the thread so much that other people's voices are not heard. Which is what Pyrr did in TL Mafia XXX. So yes, the suspicion for these behaviors is warranted. Pyrr tries to get pity points by using two extreme examples of playstyle in an attempt to make me look like a triggerhappy. This is not the case. Pyrr is thinking in absolutes. There is more than a "finger pointing" style and a "neutral/no-stance" style. Namely, thoughtful analysis followed by a confident support of the conclusions of your analysis. (Read Ver's TL Mafia XXX review/guide to see how Pyrr's "analysis" in that game really wasn't very good). Another pro-town activity would be discussions of suspicions, but NOT to the point of spamming the thread. Its not that pointing out a lot of suspicions is bad. You have to rely on the quality of the suspicions and the quality of the discussion that follows. Pyrr's "finger pointing" is more than finger pointing. Its aggressive finger pointing with shoddy evidence. In this post, Pyrr is asking for pity and is using appeal to emotion and faulty logic to shrug off accusations on the basis that I'm trigger happy. Main Points: 1. Pyrr's complaint that I'm being unreasonable by attacking his vicious finger pointing and his "neutral" stance + uselessness is absolutist and absurd. 2. Pyrr's posts spread doubt and do not draw informative conclusions. 3. Pyrr's posts are useless, don't show direction, and fit the motive of a mafia wanting to spread doubt while staying low profile and preventing town from going in the right direction. 4. While LSB's posts are scummy, Pyrr's posts are too. There is little doubt that Team 1 is mafia. + Show Spoiler + I was going to post some motive analysis on Team 7, but got side tracked with Pyrr and his unnatural defense of YellowInk. I now feel that a complete analysis of Team 7 is unnecessary at this point, but I will post that tomorrow IF AND ONLY IF people don't buy my above argument. I'm too tired to post it now. I love how I am supposedly defending Yellowink just because I gave a more likely explanation of what he was trying to say than what you were bringing up. I did the exact thing for SouthRawrea and everyone thought we were mafia buddies for the next five pages. Now incognito is characterizing it as an attack on SouthRawrea along with half the town, while the other half is saying that I am defending some mafia buddy. All I was saying was that SouthRawrea has made similar posts while mafia and while not and that a tell was probably not to going to be found from its mere presence, as some had believed. All I'm trying to do is give my perspective on what people are trying to say when people blow it out of proportion. | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
Yes it is more likely that the mafia are actively trying to kill each other on Day 1 and coming very close to it. More than two people's worth of players were going after LSB and I, does that mean I should consider them all mafia and be hostile to them instead of just giving my honest opinion? Yellowink was voting for me but at least he earlier agreed with me about BC's odd inactivity. He might be mafia; I don't know. But when your whole fucking case is "Pyrr is mafia for sure, he is defending Yellowink, and therefore Yellowink is mafia" it is not very persuasive to me, given that I am not mafia, I wasn't defending Yellowink so much as giving my interpretation on what Yellowink was saying, and I've "defended" several other players the same way. | ||
|
Pyrrhuloxia
United States6700 Posts
I do think that meeple's post after the kills was odd. Perhaps he missed the accusation from Ace because it was at Yellowink. I know my eyes were glazing over a lot of these anti-LSB posts. It is also bad of meeple to talk about going over Ace and BM's posts and then not do it. Anyway here is what I can glean to help us from their posts. Ace on medic claiming plans On September 22 2010 09:37 Ace wrote: I was fast reading, that was to LSB. Pretty much anyone advocating a medic claim should be looked at suspiciously. Unless the medic protects someone and the person is hit he/she should be quiet. Of course, if the person is hit then BOTH of them should claim. If there is a medic with 2 scum in the game it would be pretty sickening if on Night 1 they did this. If there is a DT they just ignore those 2 players for now and check other people out. Only way for this to fail is if both players are Scum and we can always lynch the non-medic claimer for confirmation on both if things get bad. Also why would the medic self-protect? That's just ridiculous. Protect whoever you think is most valuable to the survival of the town. Medics and their protted people do not get any PMs, from what I understand, and Ace's reasoning probably doesn't take that into account. Would have been nice to have seen that in the rules post before the game. Ace also was suspicious of LSB for advocating a medic claim, and idea that I think was first brought up by BrownBear(?). I don't know why it's so suspicious. The medic in this game is more powerful than usual in that he can protect himself, and therefore essentially become a stump who can vote, and still choose to prot someone else at some point. Of course the lack of pm notification is a complimentary nerf, but it also takes away one of the reasons the medic would prot someone else, namely to confirm an extra person. The medic could still be reasonably certain their protected person was innocent, given that mafia is unlikely to hold back a hit when we've already made life harder on them by no lynching, and there are, of course, no veterans or other weird stuff. Ace's accusation of Yellowink Notice Yellowink was suspicious for asking us to lynch despite the benefits of no lynch being explained by LSB (obviously Yellowink's mafia buddy) and Ace. Also, from what I can tell Ace was for no lynch, although he had some qualifications. Bill Murray thought no lynching was a bad idea, although I think he ended up voting that way due to Ace realizing the votes on LSB and I were suspicious. Conclusion: there were plenty of reasons for legitimate townies to be on either side of the lynch/no lynch debate, although Ace's suspicion of Yellowink may be well grounded. Here's a Bill Murray post about Foolishness On September 21 2010 19:28 Bill Murray wrote: Foolishness trendily lurks until D2 too bad if he doesnt die N1 he is likely mafia, as he likes to lurk D1 as mafia just like he does as townie or blue so that is very, very, very null from him. I cannot emphasize this more. The funny thing is, though, mafia could choose to not hit him and use it as an argument. "Foolishness didn't die, he is mafia, get him" on day 2. That's the problem with his high level of play if it goes unchecked, it makes all arguments pretty WIFOMy which is why I like to pressure people who lurk I like to do that more on day 2, or forward, though. I like a lynch on D1 vs a No Lynch, so I am tempted to wagon. If I wagon, would you guys take it the wrong way? I like wagons as town these days, but I don't like mislynches, and I haven't seen anything glaring at me saying "this player is scummy as fuck" like I had originally thought I had. It's funny everyone is dead set on a team I initially thought was scum. The minute I back off, people start believing. The world works in mysterious ways. I am going to vote simply to consolidate my vote with my partner's, and Vote: Team 1 Tomorrow we can pressure people based around their posts, and our general suspicions on teams 7 and 2 if they flip red. If they flip townie, then I'll have to look at a couple certain teams, too, so I'm actually happier with this lynch than teams 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and possibly even 2. I got really suspicious of Foolishness last game, just because he was quiet day 1. He was normal after that, and maybe he's always been quiet day 1. I expect him to make some posts of great import today, mafia or not. There was some post by BM where he said infundibulum was matching his "red-meta" but he then took it back due to a post by incognito. Also, BM and Ace made plenty of posts against LSB and I. Go ahead and dig those up if you want. | ||
|
YellowInk
United States578 Posts
Review their posts to see their contributions. It won't take you long. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
BM: + Show Spoiler + On September 20 2010 19:39 Bill Murray wrote: @pyrr excuse me? are you admitting he is your scumbuddy? @everyone else If pyrrhuloxia is mafia, southrawrea could be as well. It might be null, but I feel like that could be a slip. I am liking pro-town discussion of Incognito and Foolishness, and are not really suspicious of teams 8 and 3 as a result. Incognito is capable of spotlighting as scum, so I'm not saying he is cleared, but I have played with him where he is scum, and this does not feel quite the same. Due to meta, and his amazingly pro-town play, I would definitely not be ok with his lynch at this juncture. I am not fully convinced Pyrrhuloxia's team is a mafia slot, though, and am going to reserve my vote for the moment as such a small setup can be volatile. I would be happier with a lynch on team 2, as I found SouthRawrEas post to be all fluff and no content. @mod votecount please ##vote: team 2 Expresses doubt about South's greenness due to fluff posting... says that he enjoys Incog and Foolishness's analysis, but adds a caveat about Incog's ability to spotlight as red. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 05:59 Bill Murray wrote: LSB's admission is only icing on the cake @LSB: how would you be so CERTAIN they're scum? You have a scumlist, buddy? This makes me confident in my earlier read he is appealing to pyrr's authority. Scummy, scummy, scummy. @meeple: I find it funny you ask me to justify my vote when I voted SR on fluff, then make a secondary reason as for voting being fluff yourself. I also dislike you speculating that I was 100% pyrr/SR are the scumteam.... if that was the case, I would have been putting a second vote on Pyrr's team. I didn't. I'm voting SR because I am unsure if Pyrr actually made a slip. The way SR is acting now, though, in the above post, makes me believe that my initial reaction to who I'm voting is actually wrong. I needed to stack on pyrr because his team is way more important as I'm feeling both SR's team #2 with bumatlarge and divinek are scum with Pyrrhuloxia's team #1. My reasoning and justification are how SR is acting towards pyrrhuloxia. I will also give justification in relation to why we should lynch vs a no lynch day 1. I am not saying "let's not ever no lynch", but that we could use it day 2 if we don't lynch scum day 1. day 1 lynching scum: 6 v 1 night kill day 2 5v1 <- possible win here mislynch + night kill day 3 3v1 (mylo) <- obvious no lynch unless 100% certainty night kill day 4 2v1 (LYLO) if we DON'T mislynch now, and no lynch later, we can save it for a MyLo potentially. That's why we need to take a chance on lynching scum today. this is assuming we fuck up later, but we rocked on day 1. I'm not even really worried about this is Pyrrhuloxia's team #1 flip scum, which I expect them to do based upon SouthRawrEa being a newer player who is a dead giveaway. Though I am more sure of SR based upon his posting, AtA, and my not liking bumatlarge's posting earlier, I feel like they implicate team #1 through SR, and there being a vote on a slot that I find scum is enough for me to want to wagon said slot. ##unvote: pyrrhuloxia/LSB ##vote: SR, bumatlarge, and divinek States that SR is a new player and a scum giveaway and they implicate team 1. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 17:06 Bill Murray wrote: + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 08:56 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote: Alright, I am going to be addressing both BM and BB with this, since this seems to be using faulty logic. BM you are arguing that we achieve the same result by no lynching day one or two, this is wrong because on Day 2 we have more information to work with PLUS we have higher percent of just randomly offing a mafia simply because there is one less team in the game. Completely faulty logic. As the game progresses our information increases so saying day 1 = day 2 no lynching is completely wrong, even if it is mathematically the same in regards to WHEN the day ends. Also BM you assume that we are rocking out day 1 and fucking up rest of the time? That's such an unlikely scenario considering as the game progresses information increases. BB inactivity is an easy mafia ploy to pull off day one claiming little to no reason or content to post, so its a given that they SHOULD be posting and if it continues it is very scummy and antitown, in the current set up I am willing to let it slide and not lynch of inactivity Day 1, but come down on it hard Day 2. I would disagree with the we-should-lynch mentality, simply because no-lynching day 1 actually gives us an extra day. Obviously if we're 100% sure we have a scum we should lynch, but failing that we should no lynch, because then we have an extra day of analysis and a nightkill target. Get the cop (if he exists) to rolecheck team 1 or 2 tonight, and if he finds a scum, have him claim and get the medic (if HE also exists) to protect him. This obviously assumes blue roles exist, but since we have a 3/4 chance that they do, I think it's pretty safe to assume there's at least 1 blue in the game (if we get lucky, we get two!) I do agree with the fact that we need to get good discussion going, and that we need to get LSB to 'splain himself further about his accusation. This entirely reeks of shit to be blunt. It starts with kind of what I was saying but dissolves into the most retarded plan I have ever read. The whole DT CAN CHECK SOMEONE THEN SAY WHAT HE CHECKED AND THEN MEDIC PROTECTS HIM = GG is retarded. You are basing SO MUCH off of the chance its a 1/4 scenario where we lucked out and got both a medic and a DT. When deciding what to do we have to see what would benefit us the MOST in every possible scenario, which I believe is clearly day 1 no lynching (in our current predicament) Obviously if we have a strong suspect we should ALWAYS go for it, but quite simply the reasoning that you are justifying no lynch is nonsensical. Now, to get some discussion going: What do you guys think of the possibility of having cop (if cop exists) claim day 2? Obviously he shouldnt claim now, because if he exists there's only a 1/3 chance that medic also exists and can protect his ass tonight. However, I'm assuming that since cop is more than 1 person, and this game is mostly talented players, the rolecheck tonight should turn up something good. I think it would absolutely be worth it to trade cop for 1 of the mafia. Obvious flaw with this: If there's no cop, and mafia fakeclaims, who's gonna counterclaim? Still, I'd love to hear other peoples' opinion. DT should only claim if he feels a good enough reason to. Personally I think as soon as the DT confirms someone as red he should claim. Trading mafia for DT in a small game like this seems beneficial. The only reason NOT to do that is if that individual is getting lynched anyway for whatever reason, but if the vote is close I would still claim as a DT and make sure a mafia got killed. Besides that claiming for the sake of claiming is stupid. I disagree. If team 2 are mafia, and I get team 2 lynched, it is 100% likely on both days they will flip mafia. I don't look at it "randomly", I look at who is fucking mafia and who isn't fucking mafia. That being said, over the past couple of pages, I have been really happy with SR and Divinek. I was happy with bumatlarge until he started using really odd language. bumatlarge, explain the ending of your most recent post, as seen here: ...What? Basically, I am fine with no lynch at this point. I was pretty sure I had caught scum, but I am admittedly not so sure now. vote: no lynch Expresses doubts about his previous convictions and changes his vote to no lynch + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 19:28 Bill Murray wrote: Foolishness trendily lurks until D2 too bad if he doesnt die N1 he is likely mafia, as he likes to lurk D1 as mafia just like he does as townie or blue so that is very, very, very null from him. I cannot emphasize this more. The funny thing is, though, mafia could choose to not hit him and use it as an argument. "Foolishness didn't die, he is mafia, get him" on day 2. That's the problem with his high level of play if it goes unchecked, it makes all arguments pretty WIFOMy which is why I like to pressure people who lurk I like to do that more on day 2, or forward, though. I like a lynch on D1 vs a No Lynch, so I am tempted to wagon. If I wagon, would you guys take it the wrong way? I like wagons as town these days, but I don't like mislynches, and I haven't seen anything glaring at me saying "this player is scummy as fuck" like I had originally thought I had. It's funny everyone is dead set on a team I initially thought was scum. The minute I back off, people start believing. The world works in mysterious ways. I am going to vote simply to consolidate my vote with my partner's, and Vote: Team 1 Tomorrow we can pressure people based around their posts, and our general suspicions on teams 7 and 2 if they flip red. If they flip townie, then I'll have to look at a couple certain teams, too, so I'm actually happier with this lynch than teams 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and possibly even 2. Votes Team 1 to with Ace, and still expresses concerns about teams 2 and now 7 Ace: + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 17:40 Ace wrote: Ah damn I was somewhat supporting your post until you said We need this lynch for information. What information are we getting from a lynch besides his alignment flip? LSB is still the scummiest person so far in my book though. + Show Spoiler + On September 21 2010 18:40 Ace wrote: actually I dont think your case by itself is really that strong, it just seems convenient. LSB's accusation of Team 2 and his weak explanation, which didn't even seem to answer my concern is still my prime motive for leaning towards them. I'll rethink this again later for sure but for now ## vote Team 1 States suspicions about LSB and votes for him + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 03:03 Ace wrote: this is such a terrible lynch. Just way too many easy voters. Bill Murray unvote them, this lynch just doesn't seem legit at all. ##unvote Team 1 Gets anxious about the easy votes and unvotes Team 1 + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 09:33 Ace wrote: No it isn't. This post is blatantly misleading. No lynching is for when you can't conclude someone is scummy enough to lynch. Like I've said, the town does not have to lynch every day. So most of the time it's in your best bet to No lynch unless you are in a situation where there is clearly going to be a benefit. Being in the end game does not matter for a No lynch, all it means is that you're decision has a more immediate consequence but it's also easier. Towards the end of the game it is actually much rarer to have a No lynch. Remember what I said? It's in your best bet to avoid a lynch when you aren't sure someone is scum or there is no clear benefit. At the end of the game you have so much information between votes, player interaction, the knowledge of what roles have been revealed and your own ties to players that it's really not often you'll be No lynching then. In a typical game a single medic save gaining you a day is false. Saving a player and them possibly being confirmed innocent is a pretty big deal don't you think? It may not directly add more days to your win condition but adding more players to the likely pro-town pool, that TWO players know about is pretty heartbreaking for scum once it's revealed. Using a No Lynch now would actually be the best bet...if this were 10 hours ago and this was a normal setup with infinite No Lynches. Clearly though, LSB has been posting god knows what and well I'm a little intrigued by this post of yours. I thought you were a good player so how could you actually believe this nonsense you just posted? The only thing worrying me is that Incognito seems to have pegged both your teams also which shows his scumdar is operating on great batteries like mine, or he's just good at picking off easy townies. So I'm going to ask you this one time: Let's assume you were a detective. What team would you investigate tonight and why? Accuses Yellowink (Team 7) Now lets see... Amongst the people that are included in the "easy votes" on Team 1 are: bumatlarge Divinek Infundibulum YellowInk SouthRawrea Incognito Also the people that accused BM/Ace YellowInk - albeit halfheartedly + Show Spoiler + On September 19 2010 14:22 YellowInk wrote: I think we should hang Ace and Bill Murray. LSB + Show Spoiler + On September 22 2010 08:20 LSB wrote: As for the things I'm supporting 1) No lynch. 2) Bum's medic plan The thing is, if I was mafia, I would be supporting an erronous plan, trying to get the town to take part of a plan that is easily exploitable. A great way to do that is to support your plan! Your plan has problems. Strangely you haven't address these problems. Right now you are saying, "LSB seems skummy, so therefore I don't need to worry about the holes in my plan". That isn't logic, that's misdirection. I'll repeat myself: We should use the DT and the Medic in the places where they will be most effective. The Medic should focus on making sure that someone doesn't die. And the DT should be used to try to investigate targets. I don't like the list idea, since it tells the mafia what to stay out of. Again, please address this problem. Tell me why I am wrong, don't just make a long post on why I'm supposed mafia to distract others from seeing that your plan has a problem. I don't have this list of possible plans in my pocket and try to use them. If I think of something, I'll use it sure. I moved on of course, chiefly no lynch once we figured out that it could be used. What I am saying is that your accusations twist my words. You admit that you can't read my posts at face value because if you do, you'll find that I'm a townie. You now are relying on the fact that I haven't taken any positions? What positions are you accusing me of not taking on? Planning: You claim that I haven't made a plan. Therefore I am Mafia. Thats just silly. I'm not going to make a plan unless I think of one. Ace/BM is scumYou said that I didn't give enough input into the Ace/BM lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. Because I think there're town Rastaban/Foolishness is scum: You said that I didn't give enough input into the Rastaban/Foolishness lynch. Well, I don't feel like I should. So you expect me to 1) Pull out plans or die, or 2) Accuse random people. <sarcasm>Sounds townie to me </sarcasm> I would have liked more time to see what Bum would do, and how SR would play this game. But like you said, people wanted me to post. So I did, and I said that I didn't really think that they were mafia since new posts didn't fit with my general theory. Conclusions: I think we should examine some of the players that bandwagoned on Team 1... especially Team 2 since we know BM had some serious concerns about them. | ||
|
meeple
Canada10211 Posts
Vote: Team 6 | ||
|
SouthRawrea
Canada608 Posts
On September 24 2010 03:57 meeple wrote: States that SR is a new player and a scum giveaway and they implicate team 1. I'm going to assume that you mean that he said that I was an obvious scum rather than someone who revealed scum easily. If I'm making any wrong assumptions excuse me but, shouldn't you read the post before you quote it? Conclusions: I think we should examine some of the players that bandwagoned on Team 1... especially Team 2 since we know BM had some serious concerns about them. Just a couple things here before I actually go look team 7 because of this: On September 24 2010 03:15 YellowInk wrote: ##Vote Team 6, BloodyC0bbler and RebirthOfLeGenD Review their posts to see their contributions. It won't take you long. What on earth? That is the worst attempt I've seen at redirecting suspicion. I also have an idea about a different mafia team but I'm going to see if I can make good connections first. | ||
|
YellowInk
United States578 Posts
On September 24 2010 04:59 SouthRawrea wrote: Just because some people seem to have some odd ideas, I'll respond to this. I'm not redirecting suspicion. The accusations made against me are laughable.What on earth? That is the worst attempt I've seen at redirecting suspicion. I want people to look at T6 and give it some thought. I believe the difference to be sufficiently stark that the evidence speaks for itself. Currently, I see a few different likely combinations of potential mafia teams. Most of the sensible combinations I've figured include T6. Hence, my vote. | ||
RebirthOfLeGenD
USA5860 Posts
| ||
| ||
BSL: GosuLeague
RO24 Group C
UltrA vs TBD
Hawk vs TBD
nOmaD vs TBD
perroflaco vs TBD
Hejek vs TBD
VenOm vs TBD
ZZZero.O110
[ Submit Event ] |
|
|
|
OSC
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
SOOP Global
NightMare vs GuMiho
Classic vs SHIN
SOOP
NightMare vs Oliveira
SC Evo Complete
WardiTV Invitational
CSO Cup
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
