EPTOn December 11 2010 04:50 Infundibulum wrote:
Am i the only one that thinks this is a rather pointless post?
Am i the only one that thinks this is a rather pointless post?
At the very least he's voicing his disagreement with the Gabriel bandwagon.
TL Mafia XXXIV: Pokemafia - Page 18
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
seRapH
United States9706 Posts
At the very least he's voicing his disagreement with the Gabriel bandwagon. | ||
|
Insanious
Canada1251 Posts
People are like "its only 6 out of 31" but really, once a bandwagon gets running its hard to stop unless you slow it down early... I don't think any more votes on Gab right now will help the town, all it will do is seal Gab's fate... | ||
|
zeks
Canada1068 Posts
| ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6782 Posts
| ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
| ||
|
Kavdragon
United States1251 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + BROWN BEAR! I never even got to play with you in Salem! But I'm super excited for no reason anyways! WOO HOO! | ||
|
annul
United States2841 Posts
| ||
|
KtheZ
United States813 Posts
But this is beside the point, and something I wrote while browsing the forum. What I really want to note is: dinmsab's behavior is strange. Now why would I say this? In the voting thread, he voted Gabriel. However, if you look at one of his posts in the past, Imo, I think it's inevitable to lynch inactives. I'm an amateur at this but in my last game I was mafia and I tried to stay low. So yeah, from my perspective inactives might be mafia, worse case scenario they're just bored pikachus. So not much harm there. Although if we have solid leads and clues on active players, I believe that should take priority. So he has voted an active player, Gabriel. Obviously, I'd like for him to explain his vote and why he thinks there are SOLID LEADS and CLUES on Gabriel. I'm having problems understanding the reasonings of people who voted Gabriel. Eiii, i have a bone to pick with you too. I'd like to know why you posts 2 contentless posts I might be missing something, but how is this godfather any less powerful than the salem godfather? Oh, is it just that this godfather doesn't have 1 KP all on his own? And then you jump on the Gabriel bandwagon with no reasoning at all? Please explain. Brocket, you post this My reasoning for my vote is that Gabe wasn't getting along with the rest of the people on day 1 and if I had to vote then he'd be my 1st choice. Who needs in fighting right? (Except the mafia) Infund so far hasn't earned any of the votes against him as far as our discussion has progressed. And no one as of yet has made a big impression on me. And yes I'm super noob as you can tell by my post count. I really don't know anything. So basically your reasoning is that he is mafia because he is not getting along with people. However, I feel that debate (although it is extremely hot debate) is needed for town to be able to analyze anything; Simply following the words of a single individual leads to incorrect bandwagons and town tears. I'm just wondering if you could clarify your position. For town to win, we need town to back up their votes on people, rather than just blind bandwagoning. This way, we have some content to analyze, so we don't lynch a bandwagoner just to find him to be a stupid townie. I'm not defending Gabriel in any way. I just find people's reaction to ward Gabriel to be analysis-worthy. | ||
|
dinmsab
Malaysia2246 Posts
On December 11 2010 08:30 KtheZ wrote: I'm not sure if we should really take Gabriel's actions that greatly into consideration. Considering that he is a relatively veteran player, I don't think the bandwagon against him is of great value. If he was mafia, isnt it common sense for them to talk about a game plan and think things out before posting, rather than actively arguing with people? But this is beside the point, and something I wrote while browsing the forum. What I really want to note is: dinmsab's behavior is strange. Now why would I say this? In the voting thread, he voted Gabriel. However, if you look at one of his posts in the past, So he has voted an active player, Gabriel. Obviously, I'd like for him to explain his vote and why he thinks there are SOLID LEADS and CLUES on Gabriel. I'm having problems understanding the reasonings of people who voted Gabriel. Eiii, i have a bone to pick with you too. I'd like to know why you posts 2 contentless posts And then you jump on the Gabriel bandwagon with no reasoning at all? Please explain. Brocket, you post this So basically your reasoning is that he is mafia because he is not getting along with people. However, I feel that debate (although it is extremely hot debate) is needed for town to be able to analyze anything; Simply following the words of a single individual leads to incorrect bandwagons and town tears. I'm just wondering if you could clarify your position. For town to win, we need town to back up their votes on people, rather than just blind bandwagoning. This way, we have some content to analyze, so we don't lynch a bandwagoner just to find him to be a stupid townie. I'm not defending Gabriel in any way. I just find people's reaction to ward Gabriel to be analysis-worthy. I voted because I thought that I won't be able to login for a few hours time and might not make it, so instead of just randomly voting some dude in which would raise a ton of suspicion, I just voted for gabriel temporarily. Rest assured, if I have a better vote I will change it. | ||
|
KtheZ
United States813 Posts
| ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On December 11 2010 08:58 KtheZ wrote: How much longer do we have to vote? Around a day, right? Tomorrow night | ||
|
KtheZ
United States813 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6782 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:24 KtheZ wrote: I guess what we are waiting on now is for Gabriel to defend himself. There is still a day for him to prove himself to be a nice, calm townie. This is what I'm waiting for, if he responds in a levelheaded manner without flamming everyone then I'll definetly unvote him. | ||
|
GGQ
Canada2653 Posts
I haven't voted yet and I probably won't until closer to the deadline. | ||
|
Eiii
United States2566 Posts
On December 11 2010 08:30 KtheZ wrote: Eiii, i have a bone to pick with you too. I'd like to know why you posts 2 contentless posts And then you jump on the Gabriel bandwagon with no reasoning at all? Please explain. I asked two questions because I was curious about differences between this game and salem mafia I might not have been aware of, and if you actually look about two pages back you'll see a post by me explaining why gabe has my vote for the time being -_- | ||
|
KtheZ
United States813 Posts
On December 11 2010 09:39 Eiii wrote: I asked two questions because I was curious about differences between this game and salem mafia I might not have been aware of, and if you actually look about two pages back you'll see a post by me explaining why gabe has my vote for the time being -_- My bad. How the hell did I not notice that post lol | ||
|
LSB
United States5171 Posts
On December 11 2010 04:33 Infundibulum wrote: I disagree with this, especially considering the wide range of time zones people are in on TL. I'm taking about not contributing to the town. Making fluff posts. Of course, I don't have an opinion on Kenpanchi, he doesn't act differently much. I'm just trying to see why Gabriel would do this. | ||
|
Kavdragon
United States1251 Posts
On December 10 2010 07:37 LSB wrote: All right, in many games there was an uneventful first day. Lets not make this one of those games. A few things to talk about:
I'll offer my opinions in the next post, but I want to keep this post clean This looks pro-town right off the bat. He’s trying to get the town to talk about stuff. Good for analysis. However, he suggests that we talk about lynching inactives. Inactives are the one source of nothingness that we can’t analyse! The only discussion that this will bring up is arguing within the town, something that will make it hard for real analysis to be done! Point and case: what has the majority of the posting focused on so far? Lynching inactives. On December 10 2010 07:43 LSB wrote: I'll just use posts made before Inactives: Plan Firstly. DO NOT CLAIM DO NOT CLAIM Good now that we got that out of the way, some other ideas. One plan that would work is to use the blue roles to promote activity in the town. The Alakazam should check the inactive people and the lurkers, as it is incredibly difficult if not impossible to tell the difference between a bored townie and a lurking mafia. The Chansey's should protect active players, this way the mafia won't be able to take out the people who are contributing the most to town, so people won't be scared of trying to put forth their opinions. Lol. YES. DO NOT CLAIM. Having taken part in Salem, I cannot agree more. Here he starts suggesting that the blues start checking the inactives. A bad plan unless you are mafia, imo. The way the town wins is by analysis, and the people in the way of that are not the inactive mafia players, they are the actives mafia spamming the forum, stirring up arguments! On December 10 2010 07:48 LSB wrote: Although generally lynching an inactive won't net a mafia. (There are a few close exceptions). Inactives hurt the town as in later days as we have to waste lynches trying to separate them from lurking mafia If someone slips up and is scum, yes we should go after them. However, activity is always important Ok, so we wouldn’t be wasting lynches by sorting through them now? Shouldn’t we be working on lowering the mafia’s KP? (You say this later!) Agreed on the activity thing though. On December 10 2010 07:56 LSB wrote: We shouldn't rely on night KP though. Having a general system for how blues play is pretty important. We need to establish a good town environment where the most pro-town players won't find themselves dead. We need to establish a place where everyone is active. Sure, we could leave everything to RNG, but we could do so much more with the blues. Agreed on the somewhat obvious point on town’s night KP. Having a good public system for blues? I agree with Amber here. We should stop focusing on Blues, and focus on Scum. On December 10 2010 09:40 LSB wrote: How do you propose we deal with inactives/lurkers then? We can't just 'leave it for another day'. It's going to be a problem, and if we have no good leads day one, we should do this early, rather than late. So your saying that plans are bad? Interesting. Take my plan, what's bad about it? LSB continues to fan the flames of the argument that is taking up much of the town’s time. More spam leading to more spam leading to less discussion useful analysis. On December 10 2010 09:49 LSB wrote: The scum will just choose to let the inactives live, because inactives don't threaten them. Also a lot of the times, inactive are mafia. For Example: TL Micro Mafia IV: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=161868. Drag_ the mafia makes like 5 posts throughout the whole game and is able to skip out of the public eye. The issue is that it is virtually impossible to tell the difference between inactive mafia and inactive town. Lynching inactives hopefully allows us to not worry about trying to guess between the two. Uh…that last statement is totally self contradictory. You can’t tell the difference between them, so you don’t have to worry about guessing? How would you not be guessing? On December 10 2010 09:53 LSB wrote: You must understand. In order to make sure that people are active, we have to decide early that we going to punish people who are inactive. This way, people are going to be warned and hopefully people won't be inactive. Best case scenario we won't have to lynch an inactive person in the first place since everyone will contribute to the town. I notice you avoided discussion on my 'general direction.' Do you support it? Why? Do you now think we should give general directions to blues? Here he explains a reasoning behind lynching inactives. Still a weak plan imo, but I can accept clarification. On December 10 2010 10:11 LSB wrote: Remember, the town's best weapon is analysis. By checking the inactives, we flush out the mafia to the limelight where they easily could be found. We want the mafia to attempt to distract the town, this way we can catch onto what they are doing. The town has to be vigilant to guard against these attempts + Show Spoiler + Discussing a plan is one of the best ways to generate activity and catch a scum btw BOOM! The man says it himself: Analysis is the key! “But LSB! Where’s this analysis you are so rightly endorsing?” You say the we have to be vigilant to keep people from distracting us? Ironic that this is the post that made me go back a look at you closer. You seem to fit your own description. Huh. On December 10 2010 10:12 LSB wrote: Btw, in the future, don't edit. Just double post. This way you can reach zealot faster! This was actually just really confusing to me. What don’t you get? On December 10 2010 10:17 LSB wrote: The problem is that Lynching an inactive takes up an entire town lynch, which is far more useful and powerful than a DT check. Our lynches must work twords lowering mafia KP. Ha! Weren’t you just saying that we should lynch inactives, even though you have repeatedly said that the chances of hitting a inactive townie are high, and that it is “Difficult if not impossible” to tell the difference between the two? On December 10 2010 10:21 LSB wrote: Again, what do you propose to do about inactives? Looking to keep the spam argument alive. On December 10 2010 10:31 LSB wrote: Wait. What? Lynch is less important than a DT check? Wait. What? Totally agreed here. On December 10 2010 10:34 LSB wrote: Discussion is always good. That's why I start off every game with suggesting we lynch inactives and (hopefully) a plan Discussion is only good if is benefits the town. Spamming the forum with tons of discussion on topics that are bound to turn into useless arguments is hurtful to the town. I suppose it lets us find those who are creating the arguments… On December 10 2010 10:42 LSB wrote: Lets say there are three people that are lurking. That's not a far fetched number, mafia love to lurk. Sure we lynch one of them during day one, but what about the other ones? Not all the DTs have to check of course. But maybe setting something such as a probability system would be enough to flush out the mafia. Roll a 1 check inactive A. Roll a 2 check inactive B. Roll a 3 check whoever you want. As others have said, this sounds like a waste of a DT check. The active mafia players, the ones stopping meaningful discussion from happening, those are the ones I’d look for. On December 10 2010 10:47 LSB wrote: Although lynching inactives is always a start, we shouldn't discount the power of day one analysis I've seen it many times actually. Kenpachi/Coagulation (Almost, but we switched)- Deconduo's Don't lose your village game Me/Pyrr- TLMMM 2 Masq- Haunted Mafia Bill Murray (Almost, but Ace made us switch x.x)- Penalty Mafia And many others... Agreed. You’ve already stated that Analysis is the key to town victory. So why aren’t you doing it? There’s 10 pages of discussion. If that’s not enough to analyze, I don’t know what is. On December 10 2010 11:06 LSB wrote: Some of us (me) carry friendly grudges (my first mafia game) ^^ Spam. But funny spam. On December 10 2010 11:08 LSB wrote: Na, I voted for him before he even posted in the thread. Autovote Ftw! Answering questions, explaining lack of reasoning. Meh. Unhelpful imo. On December 10 2010 11:11 LSB wrote: Oh. By Inactive, I mean someone who is lurking, maybe making one token post in the thread that isn't anything new and doesn't attempt to contribute anything at all, but still votes every day. These are the uninterested townies, the lurkers, and the people studying for finals. A clarification. I’m fine with this. I wish he’d made it clearer in his earlier posts, but w/e. On December 10 2010 11:42 LSB wrote: I think of discussing lynching inactives as a jumping point for town discussion. Most people complain that nothing happens day 1, and I want the thread to be filled with activity. Activity is needed to find scum. Speaking of inactivity, everyone should say something! Its up to the DTs to decide. But the key point of this plan is that it flushes out the mafia. If we get general town agreement, even if the dts don't actually check the inactives, the mafia will be pressured to be more active. On December 10 2010 12:42 LSB wrote: Wrong link, this is for finding the Cop. Something the mafia want's to do. This is the right link http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=JEEP's_Tells_for_Finding_Mafia Now I ask you, why are you looking at that hmmm?  Uh…”Know your enemy” I don’t see this as scum tell, but w/e. When I played Salem, I learned a lot more about how to hunt scum by figuring out how they played than I did learning about how “I(town)” played. I thought this was pretty obvious, did it need to be said? On December 10 2010 13:01 LSB wrote: Give it some time, at least when 24 hours has past. In the meanwhile. What do you think about lynching inactives dinmsab? Still pressing that old argument. Really? On December 11 2010 03:20 LSB wrote: For the DocH, + Show Spoiler + On December 10 2010 10:48 DoctorHelvetica wrote: and BrownBear in salem! i started that wagon ;o That didn't count, as far as I know it was Ghrur who switched the vote for you guys! If Kenpachi was scum on the other hand... Gabriel. The key thing we have to look at Gabriel is why he decided to Accuse Kenpachi. Is this because he is honestly trying to scumhunt, or is he pressured and wants to redirect the lynch The Kenpachi push looks like he is seeing someone that is lurking and wants to figure out what he is. The key point that points me is that he wants to DT check, not lynch Kenpachi (Whoops I gtg brb) Uh…Couldn’t you post this later, instead of leaving us with half of your thoughts? w/e… On December 11 2010 04:28 LSB wrote: The problem isn't that his post came early. 5 hours is a lot of time and enough to get a feel for how people act He pointed out that Kenpachi's posts were spammy and didn't contribute to the town at all. The problem is now, why the bandwagon the bandwagon against Gabriel took place. (i'll look into it later, right now I'm hard pressed for time) Same problem as last post. You repeat what he said, without adding anything other than that the Gabriel bandwagon is confusing. The bandwagon on him could have been for a variety of reasons. He was attacking people. He was spamming. I may not agree with all of them, but it doesn’t actually strike me as odd. Overall he looks like he’s contributing, but I think that he has lead to the waste of the greater part of the day. He has spammed the forums with so much stuff that has already been said, or didn’t need to be said that it takes forever to find the useful stuff. LSB. If you want to show that you aren’t scum, you need to step up your game. Less spam. More analysis. Nuff said. | ||
| ||
