Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (70 users) | |
|
| Miltonkram United States. June 15 2012 09:09. Posts 310 | Profile # |
 Fuck yeah |
|
|
| s0Lstice United States. June 15 2012 09:10. Posts 855 | Profile # | |
| | how if I seem like fox b Lynch I not inspire hippie--Blazinghand |
|
|
| austinmcc United States. June 15 2012 09:11. Posts 2942 | Profile # | |
| |
|
| s0Lstice United States. June 15 2012 09:11. Posts 855 | Profile # |
| Pretty sure I've got an idea of who his buds are too ;D |
| | how if I seem like fox b Lynch I not inspire hippie--Blazinghand |
|
|
| alan133 Malaysia. June 15 2012 09:12. Posts 136 | Profile # |
| Awesome job! 1 down, 2 to go. |
|
|
| sciberbia United States. June 15 2012 09:12. Posts 781 | Profile # |
fuck yes :D
well done everyone! |
|
|
 roflwaffles55 Canada. June 15 2012 09:19. Posts 58 | Profile # |
| Solid lynch guys! Time to continue the hunting! |
|
|
| trackd00r Chile. June 15 2012 09:30. Posts 283 | Profile Blog # |
NICE!!!
Beaware you both scum, we are going for you now! |
| | ''They put signs, but I can't read'' |
|
|
| s0Lstice United States. June 15 2012 09:33. Posts 855 | Profile # |
On June 15 2012 09:08 prplhz wrote:
Heavonearth got lynched.
This blue part scared the ever loving shit out of me |
| | how if I seem like fox b Lynch I not inspire hippie--Blazinghand |
|
|
| Miltonkram United States. June 15 2012 10:02. Posts 310 | Profile # |
This blue part scared the ever loving shit out of me
Memories of hegeo, s0Lstice? heh heh heh |
|
|
| O.Golden_ne Australia. June 15 2012 10:10. Posts 204 | Profile # | |
| | Like a baneling in a mineral line |
|
|
| O.Golden_ne Australia. June 15 2012 10:11. Posts 204 | Profile # |
On June 15 2012 10:02 Miltonkram wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 15 2012 09:08 prplhz wrote:
Heavonearth got lynched.
This blue part scared the ever loving shit out of me
Memories of hegeo, s0Lstice? heh heh heh
not funny  |
| | Like a baneling in a mineral line |
|
|
| s0Lstice United States. June 15 2012 10:31. Posts 855 | Profile # |
On June 15 2012 10:02 Miltonkram wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 15 2012 09:08 prplhz wrote:
Heavonearth got lynched.
This blue part scared the ever loving shit out of me
Memories of hegeo, s0Lstice? heh heh heh
lol yes  Zen_Man too from XVI. In half of my games I have ended up on a medic lynch bandwagon D1.  <---- that's me
|
| | how if I seem like fox b Lynch I not inspire hippie--Blazinghand |
|
|
| Crossfire99 United States. June 15 2012 12:54. Posts 592 | Profile # |
Sorry I missed the vote. We lynched a scum, so great job everybody. I was going to be here before the vote, but then my car became the victim of a hit and run accident (see spoiler for proof)+ Show Spoiler +. The last i don't know how many hours I have been going back and forth with different police officers and waiting for them, etc to get this all sorted out (it still isn't over).
I just logged on now to post an update because I'm sure some of you were probably wondering where I went. I'll be reading through the thread for what little time I have now and respond to some questions people had for me.
Am I going to be modkilled? |
|
|
| suki Canada. June 15 2012 12:59. Posts 183 | Profile # |
@Crossfire99
Hm.. On the one hand, missing the vote is definitely something a mafia would do if they thought they could get away with it, as it's easier to push a no lynch that way. I like how he just conveniently got in a car accident exactly before the lynch. It's possible that he's town, but I can definitely see scum motivation for this gambit.
.... JUST KIDDING. I hope everyone is okay and things work out for you. I also hope he doesnt get modkilled cuz he has been contributing and sometimes shit just happens. |
|
|
| Crossfire99 United States. June 15 2012 13:25. Posts 592 | Profile # |
First I'll go with roflwaffle:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 04:03 roflwaffles55 wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 15 2012 03:23 Crossfire99 wrote:I'm just going to go down the thread and respond to people who have questions or suspicions addressed to me. Let me know if I miss your particular post. First up Austin: + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 03:37 austinmcc wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 01:56 Crossfire99 wrote:As for my current thoughts: The bolded part of this post by austin makes me suspicious of him. + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 22:23 austinmcc wrote:
I don't read those posts as contradictory, believe the second one clarifies the first and explains that, while he'd consider a NL, the standard is higher than "Town is lynching someone that isn't one of my top couple reads."
That said, even if the two statements are entirely contradictory, I don't really see anything scummy in that. More inclined to see contradictions concerning votes and reads as scummy, where someone has stated one thing but then has to take a party line, rather than super early statements concerning a no lynch. There's no agenda to push on that issue.
Two completely contradictory statements without reasoning for the change is very suspicious. This is a good way to catch scum. They know the alignment of every person, so they have to make cases that they know are wrong (excluding bussing). This can lead to contradictory posts to make them better fit in with the current town mindset. Austin, why don't you think that contradictory statements are suspicious?
They can be, depending on what they concern, and when they occur. See the italicized above, although I should have more explicitly qualified the bolded bit. If someone had barged into the thread yesterday saying "I love no lynches" and then "I hate no lynches" in the very next post, that's not scummy to me. There's no debate here (nobody is proposing we NL), it's not important at this time (start of day, no NL proposal). There's no scummy reason to swap between those two statements on that particular topic at this particular time.
Thanks for qualifying your statement. I was confused why said it, but now I understand what you meant. I definitely agree with your italicized statement. Differences in voting behavior and reads are very important in finding scum. Next up Milton: + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 08:05 Miltonkram wrote:
@ roflwaffles
Ok, I see what you're saying. I thought you were completely backing off of alan even though you've made a decent case against him. I still don't like the fact that you took your vote off of him based on a wrist-slap from Crossfire, but I guess I misunderstood your intent. Since you're still pursuing your case on alan the unvote seems less scummy.
As far as alan133 is concerned I think you may have something. He's put very little pressure on anyone. When he does pressure he seems wishy-washy as hell.
Top two scumreads as of this moment: Mouldy Jeb and alan133.
@Crossfire, Golden, and HeavOnEarth
What do you think of these two players and the cases against them? Are there any scummy players you think we're missing? We need more activity out of you guys. Of the three of you, only heaven's put decent pressure on anyone and even that is difficult to take seriously because he hasn't followed up on his reads at all.
Mouldy: If I can read the time right on his post (hopefully I can lol), he hasn't posted in a day even though he promised a case when he came back from work yesterday. So far he's just thrown around baseless accusations and hasn't contributed. He needs to post. Alan: I don't like his case on suki. I don't know how she has played in past games, but it seems like she is being open and contributing her own reads and putting in good work like going through my game history (props for doing that, I don't have time for that much research). I also don't like him trying to link people together so early. We know next to nothing so far. Don't make links between supposed "mafia" when no one has even flipped yet. Just find one person based on their scumminess and push to lynch them. This makes me feel a little suspicious of him. Respone to sciberbia: + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 14:10 sciberbia wrote:As promised, here are my thoughts on crossfire and heavonEarth. crossfireThere isn't any one thing that looks super scummy, but nothing in his filter gives me a townie feel, and there are a handful of small things that suggest he is scum: his suspicions on austin + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +The bolded part of this post by austin makes me suspicious of him. + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 22:23 austinmcc wrote:
I don't read those posts as contradictory, believe the second one clarifies the first and explains that, while he'd consider a NL, the standard is higher than "Town is lynching someone that isn't one of my top couple reads."
That said, even if the two statements are entirely contradictory, I don't really see anything scummy in that. More inclined to see contradictions concerning votes and reads as scummy, where someone has stated one thing but then has to take a party line, rather than super early statements concerning a no lynch. There's no agenda to push on that issue.
Two completely contradictory statements without reasoning for the change is very suspicious. This is a good way to catch scum. They know the alignment of every person, so they have to make cases that they know are wrong (excluding bussing). This can lead to contradictory posts to make them better fit in with the current town mindset. Austin, why don't you think that contradictory statements are suspicious? This is exactly the kind of D1 case I would expect a scum to make. Austin makes the somewhat peculiar assertion that there is nothing scummy about contradicting yourself on policy during the early game. Whether or not you agree with this statement is irrelevant. The point is, what does a mafia Austin stand to gain by making a statement like this? Is he planning on contradicting himself later? No. It's very likely that he actually believes what he said so the fact that he said it isn't indicative of his alignment. I don't think Austin's statement is scummy at all. But, it is definitely a statement that a mafia could attack, because it seems illogical. It's easy to criticize. And that's what crossfire did. This is the kind of thing mafia do D1: attack people for seemingly illogical statements even though it isn't a scumtell. Like the mafia's attacks on Vivax from last game. his stance on Mouldy Jeb + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 03:38 Crossfire99 wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 02:45 s0Lstice wrote:
Crossfire99, what do you think of what I said about Mouldy Jeb?
Roflwaffles55, same question.
Yeah Mouldy is acting really weird. He needs to get active to explain himself. Everything he has said so far lacks good reasoning.
s0Lstice, an influential player and good townie, calls Mouldy Jeb his #1 suspicion. s0Lstice then explicitly asks crossfire for an opinion on Mouldy. Crossfire does exactly what I would expect a mafia to do. Agrees with the influential player on his #1 scumread, reiterating what s0Lstice said. Mouldy Jeb would undoubtedly be an easy lynch today, and assuming that he is town, would take the pressure off mafia. And if crossfire is so suspicious of MJ, why didn't he say anything until s0Lstice prompted him? I grant that none of this is solid evidence and that a townie could plausibly act the same way, but crossfire's response is definitely consistent with mafia behavior. Otherwise is avoiding scumhunting + Show Spoiler +
Looking through the rest of his filter, he doesn't say much meaty stuff. In his first post, he rehashes a lot of what previous people had said. And after that, he talks a lot about policy issues such as when to vote and how to pressure people. Nothing too controversial in his entire filter.
Overall, I'd say crossfire looks a bit scummy.
Yeah I questioned Austin because I found that one sentence suspicious. Isn't that the whole point of this game: to ask questions about suspicious behavior, so they respond and then you can learn more about their alignment. (I also responded to him above) Yeah I responded to solstice's question. There wasn't much original content that I could put forth at the time. I believe Mouldy had like 3 posts with little content, therefore I agreed with him because it made sense. Also, I had just woken up and responded to what were the hot topics at the moment and then started going through the thread and pointing out different things I saw and responding to questions like solstice's. Also, sciberbia, you have a lot of expectations about how mafia should play. They can play any way they want. Don't assume that they will play a certain way. Ask austin about anacletus from our game. He had way too many thoughts about how mafia should play and I don't think my mafia team played the way he assumed we would at all. Another one from Milton: + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 19:21 Miltonkram wrote:
Ok I've been thinking pretty hard since work and there are three players I would feel good about lynching: Crossfire, HeavOnEarth and MJ.
Crossefire99
His play has already been outlined by sciberbia, so I won't expand on it too much. I'm also really suspicious at the timing of his disappearance from the thread. He hasn't posted since his defense against s0Lstice's probing pressure. It seems like the perfect time to go lurkey if he's scum. He just made his post and then could have hoped that his defense would be enough to keep himself out of further discussion. Obviously it hasn't, but I can definitely see scum motivation in his decision to go silent at the time that he did.
Just to sum up, I feel pretty confident in a lynch of any of these three players. I'll gladly put my vote behind any of them.
In regards to suki, I'm really on the fence about her. My opinion keeps flip-flopping as I read through her filter. I'm no longer confident in my suspicion of her. I liked parts of her defense and then her later pressure on alan, but there are parts I didn't like too. I'm withholding judgement until I have more time to think on her play.
I can't do anything about my posting times. I pop in, read some, and post when I have time. I can't make any promises about the exact times that this will be so...idk what else to say. On to Suki: + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 00:06 suki wrote:
Let me go over my reads of the other players.
Crossfire99:
I spent a lot of time trying to figure out if he is scum or not. Looking into the filter of his two previous games, I found that his posting style is more or less the same.
In game 1, he rolls blue and lurks quite hard. He states out of game reasons for lurking, but he plays more or less non-commital, pointing out suspicious behavior but not really heavily pressuring anyone.
In game 2 as mafia, he starts out the game by doing two things. First, he posts a defense of a townie that had come under scrutiny. Second, he immediately starts pointing out errors in one particular person's posts. He actually tunnels this person for the entire Day 1 and only just fails to get him lynched. He survives for the whole game without really being under fire and mafia wins the game.
In this game I see a lot of policy talk, a lot of guidance talk, and hardly any pressure at all. I find it quite different from his previously successful mafia play. In addition, his helpful tone is quite present in the mafia QT from the previous game, which makes me feel more inclined to think he's actually trying to help, despite his posts not really pressuring or helping town much.
Basically, his meta has changed from his last scum game, and it's changed in a confusing way, and he isn't using the tactics that lead him to a win in the previous game. I'm waiting for more contributions from him before deciding whether I think he's scum or not.
Impressive research. I hadn't even thought about my helpfulness until you pointed that out until. I'll let people make their own conclusions about this, so I'll leave it at that.
Your responses to s0lstice were clearly lacking, you said that you questioned austin on his sentence to extract some information, however you never actually followed up on your question. While that may have something to do with your posting schedule, it is still a problem. You can't expect to play the game and get away with posting no real cases and content without being lynched. As of yet, you still have not formed your own suspicions it seems, you're just giving your opinion on other people's suspicions. The MJ question I'll let you off on because there's honestly nothing to talk about with him. As to s0lstice's third point, you never responded as to why you haven't been more actively scumhunting.
I backed off my pressure of Austin because it was just that one question that I had that really jumped out to me. He explained himself sufficiently so I felt no further need to pressure him on that issue. I haven't been scum hunting because I didn't have the time the first time I posted. When I posted the second group of posts, I had to go out for bit right after and was going to scum hunt when I got back, but then my whole car situation happened, so that's the reason.
Now for Austin:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 08:28 austinmcc wrote:
That leaves me with cross.
##Vote: Crossfire99
What I'd ask of everyone is to show me where Crossfire has done any scumhunting. He posted a little, dropped off the face of the earth, came back, responded to everyone's comments towards him, but never even gave us a single read throughout the day. Nobody looked scummy, because he really just didn't comment on ANYONE. I'm confused as to how that can be towny behavior, and he dropped in, spent time responding to all these people, but spent 0 characters doing any kind of hunting himself.
Lurking is bad, but you can lurk and contribute when you pop up. HeavOnEarth didn't contribute when he came back. Crossfire didn't contribute when he came back, except addressing our concerns about him. Between the timing of the votes on HeavOn and the lack of any push on him, I'd rather go with Crossfire today.
Austin, the only thing I can say to you is that I know you will hold me accountable and make sure I post good stuff after I'm done with what I get done tonight. Hopefully I'll make it to day 2, so that you can see I'm trying. I also implore you consider that you might be getting a lot of your certainty and strong feelings on me from our last game. Try to look past that game, and look how I'm playing this game.
|
|
|
| sciberbia United States. June 15 2012 13:46. Posts 781 | Profile # |
awesome job guys. I'll be going through filters during the next few hours. I'm optimistic about lynching another mafia tomorrow.
@Crossfire
That sucks man. Good luck with getting everything sorted out. And I hope you don't get modkilled.
@all
Now seems like a good time to share a couple more thoughts about night actions that have been bouncing around in my head. Nothing too crucial, but just some suggestions.
@vigi: consider claiming your shot just before the daypost
+ Show Spoiler +
There's a lot of personal judgement that goes into this, but if you are afraid of being NK'd, and you are using your shot, consider claiming it seconds before the daypost. Then if you get NK'd and flip vigi, we aren't deprived of information.
on claiming RB's
+ Show Spoiler +
If you are RB'd by the mafia roleblocker, it would be really helpful for you to claim the RB. It just gives the town information that the mafia already has.
If on the other hand you are RB'd by the jailkeeper, claiming the RB probably isn't in the town's best interest because it lets mafia know the existance of a jailkeeper.
Of course, the problem is that you will not know for sure who RB'd you. But depending on who you are, it could be pretty obvious. If you are pretty sure it was a mafia roleblocker that roleblocked you, you should claim it.
|
|
|
| suki Canada. June 15 2012 14:01. Posts 183 | Profile # |
Alright lets get this show on the road!
I've gone through everyone left, and let me say that one person really sticks out to me, more than anyone else.
trackd00r
The first thing that I did when looking for scum is see who targetted MouldyJeb, and Crossfire. Between those two and HeavOnEarth, these three made up the prime candidates for the day 1 lynch. Also keep in mind that HeavOnEarth targeted Mouldy, Crossfire and Golden as I go through trackd00r's history.
To start, trackd00r posts a meh case on Mouldy early on but doesn't press it. Later on he posts that he's not convinced of Mouldy's case.
He says that the most suspicious players on his list are me, crossfire and golden, and that he'd push a lynch on any of them.
First, he totally forgets to post analysis on me. At this point three players (Milton, sciberbia and Alan) have stated their suspicions on me. It's really weird how he states that he's suspicious and doesn't back it up.
He's willing to lynch me, which means he must have a strong opinion on my play. He posts big analysis on crossfire and golden but then forgets to justify his suspicions on me.
This alone isn't suspicious but it questions the clarity of his thoughts, and its easier for mafia to get confused as they're constantly trying to spin things.
He targets Crossfire. At this point Crossfire is under pressure by austin, roflwaffle, Milton, and sciberbia. Golden and I have been the ones backing crossfire up.
trackd00r lists the things that Crossfire has done. He dislikes how Crossfire disappeared from radar and was just checking the thread, and how he didn't bring anything new to the table.
He ends without a solid opinion, states that there's nothing to quote to show for evidence. Basically, his words amount to 'I dont like the way he is playing'. Yet he is willing to push a lynch on Crossfire.
Following this he writes a case on Golden. He specifically states that Golden is 'very similar to crossfire, but acts in a much scummier way.'
Bragging to much IMO about his task of writing stuff. He states that he wants write a summary for himself. Dude, you are not playing alone, you have 8 any other people doing the same thing, and the only way is by working togheter.
His argument has nothing to do with, and doesn't label this, as scummy behaviour. Annoying, maybe(?) but not scummy.
He also finds Golden's wall of text "quite disappointing"
In some parts, where he clearly explains events, it's got the name of an opinion.
I don't quite understand his words. I believe he's saying something along the lines of Golden explaining events clearly, and that it has something to do with an opinion... But regardless of the exact meaning, he isn't labelling this behaviour as scummy.
Finally to end all this post, he FOS'd MouldyJeb with NO reasoning or whatsoever. He even took s0lstice analysis to back up his descsion, instead of using his unique arguments.
Here, it clearly shows that his opinions are not more than a influence from other players. In just 6 minutes, CF passed from being okay for him, to ''omg might be suspicious''.
And, where is his case against MJ anyways?
Basically trackd00r is arguing that Golden brags about the task of writing stuff, that he explains events (maybe without making an opinion?? if i try to find an argument in his words, since golden doesn't really attack anyone in that post) and doesn't have unique arguments.
In summary, Golden has been really inconsistent with his play The expectations I had from him are far from satisfactory, in function of what he has promised.
In summary, he is willing to lynch three people, but he doesn't elaborate on why he thinks any of the three are suspicious. His arguments amount to not bringing anything to the table, and not playing satisfactorily.
He votes golden, and makes a comment that if he comes back on time he'll vote to prevent a NL.
He then does so, changing his vote to HeavOn. This was at the last minute, and HeavOn already had the majority, so the lynch was more or less set. He can't even argue that he didn't realize that HeavOn had the majority because prplhz had posted a list that clearly pointed this out just a few posts above.
I've gone through trackd00r's play in detail, now I'd like to summarize the points and explain why each point is suspicious.
1. Soft aggression vs Mouldy early on but later says he's not convinced. Slightly important point because Mafia want to avoid all targetting the same people.
2. Goes after Crossfire and Golden. Crossfire was a sort of easy bandwagon since so many players were after him. The Golden push is suspicious because so few people targeted him, one of whom was HeavOnEarth.
3. Does not comment on HeavOnEarth at all until the very very end. Definitely scum motivation for avoiding this. trackd00r was around back when s0lstice first started his push on HeavOnEarth. That was when trackd00r was pushing his cases against Crossfire and Golden.
4. His cases are all weak. He never points out scummy play despite singling out the three people who he would push for a lynch. His arguments are weak and consist of not contributing and not playing 'satisfactorily'.
There's no townie motivation that late in the day to simply target people for unsatisfactory play, as opposed to finding scummy play. There is plenty of scum motivation to try to find something, anything, to attack, while not putting themselves fully on the radar.
5. He bandwagons at the last minute on HeavOnEarth. A pointless move. His analysis is flaky. He says, "I must admit that he looks suspicious at this stage of the game."
Trackd00r has been noncommital, he's been weakly targetting people for playing unsatisfactorily as opposed to playing scummy. He went for the easy target of Crossfire, and you can argue he tried to push a bandwagon on Golden with HeavOn. He refused to comment on HeavOn, and comes back at the last minute to appear like he's supporting town by voting against HeavOn as the last, and wholly unnecessary vote.
I am posting this now because I have no life and I really should be doing something else but I'm here reading filters and writing extremely long posts instead. I figure I'll get this out there now and let people mull over my thoughts.
I'm interested in other people's opinions of who might be scum. I (and I kid you not) quickly went through everyone's filters and I picked the most scummy looking person of the bunch to target. I wonder if someone can point out other scummy stuff that I missed.
Cheers. |
|
|
| suki Canada. June 15 2012 14:03. Posts 183 | Profile # |
@sciberbia
Uh.. regarding night actions I don't know. I honestly haven't even considered them yet cuz a) last game I died day 1 and b) we didn't even have any blues. Sooo.. I will comment on night actions in the morning when I wake up.
It seems like a really relevant topic so I want to explain why I posted a giant scumhunting thread and then didn't talk about night actions at all. Well that's the reason. See you guys in like 8 hours. |
|
|
| Crossfire99 United States. June 15 2012 14:24. Posts 592 | Profile # |
Ok now let's analyze this lynch.
Solstice drew the first blood with these + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 10:07 s0Lstice wrote:Alright, so I went filter spelunking and explored every nook and cranny. My general impression at this moment is one of disappointment. I know it's rare to get good reads on day 1, but some people's filters are incredibly barren. If I had to lynch right now, here would be my suspects. HeavOnEarthHe's pretty lurky. His hard stance is on Golden, where he builds a case on the poor guy's intro post. Look at the case:
Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 23:52 HeavOnEarth wrote:morning everyone  First off, id like to say im suspicious of everyone who tries to stay under the radar. I feel newer mafia players have a tendency to try and stay quiet. That said O.Golden_ne looks the most suspicious to me-
On June 13 2012 09:43 O.Golden_ne wrote:
On June 13 2012 09:25 austinmcc wrote:
-snip
I'm not looking to push lurkers early and stay on them for an entire day cycle, killing discussion, but they need to be considered and I'd rather be looking at them on earlier days than when we're close to/at LYLO/MYLO.
agreed. NL is bad. Killing lurking is necessary. Lynching scum is great. Lets get the ball rolling and squeeze out the lurkers early so we can narrow things down later on. Looking forward to scumhunting, i'm happy with the deadline on this as its 10am for me in Aust, which means i'll be able to meet the deadlines for lynching in the mornings a little easier. I'll try my hardest this game to meet these deadlines and to contribute useful information rather than filler. Essentially i'm all for an agressive early game. I want to be able to establish some basic reads by the end of Day one, and if theres no-one who's appropriately scummy then we lynch a lurker. Golden
Is there anything even remotely helpful in this post? Everyone knows NL is bad. he seems to be posting for the sake of it also, i checked his last game, (he was townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=92568 u can tell his tone is completely different, and he is generally more helpful.
Think of it like this. Scum will be making cases against people on day 1...they have to. I looked at all the cases people have made, and this one stank especially bad. It's built entirely around a hello post. It has a very artificial feel to it. Also, he just posted this:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:47 HeavOnEarth wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:38 s0Lstice wrote:
Just checking in guys. I'm going to make a post on my top scumreads in a few hours, as well as some errata. Lynch time is fast approaching and we really need to buckle down.
? lynch isn't for another 24 hours?
Townies always feel the pressure of the ticking clock. Half of our time being gone doesn't seem to trouble him. He hasn't really bothered to comment on what's been going on in the thread outside of his own reads. He's been on Mouldy Jeb's case as well. Here's some more recent(!) material:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 09:32 HeavOnEarth wrote:
was sort of waiting for MJ to post something after he was like hurr durr ima post soon. i took a look at his previous game though and his posts seem consistent from when he was townie. hes really not helping at all, and definitely still looks scum, but it feels like poor town play rather than mafia.
Confused? Me too. I think this dude has a chance at flipping scum.
On June 15 2012 00:50 s0Lstice wrote:
Some housekeeping stuff first..
I am removing alan133 from my scum list. The main thing that had me suspicious was his strong-arm defense, but everything following that has been fine. I like that he is holding himself accountable for his style, and I want to see what he can do when not under pressure.
austin and suki have commented on crossfire99, and I have to say I agree. I was planning on wrighting a post similar to what suki has done. The cogent point is that he has long bouts of inactivity when he is both scum and town. He should get the same level of suspicion that every lurker gets, but nothing special beyond that I feel. His filter right now is pretty garbagey, and hard to get a read on. I wouldn't be upset if we lynched him, but I think we can do better.
Here is better: HeavOnEarth. Nothing has happened to change my initial opinion on him for the better. In fact, him buddying up to sciberbia in his latest post makes him look worse. Go read my case if you missed it. I'm not the only one to see him as suspicious, so I think there is plenty of traction here.
##vote HeavOnEarth
Then alan joins the fun with this + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 04:00 alan133 wrote:I see the current pressure are easing off from me. I also realize I has pretty much ignored everyone else except for rolf and suki. @HeavOnEarth His first few points seem disconnected. None of them relates to each other: From FoSing Golden for his opening post, + Show Spoiler +And I thought rofl@me and suki@trap was bad later jumping to accusing Mouldy Jeb (he was an easy target), and then commenting on s0ltice's preception on lynch time + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 08:47 HeavOnEarth wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:38 s0Lstice wrote:
Just checking in guys. I'm going to make a post on my top scumreads in a few hours, as well as some errata. Lynch time is fast approaching and we really need to buckle down.
? lynch isn't for another 24 hours?
. He also state that he is waiting for responses. Upon being debunked on Gold's read, he basically dismiss it similar the way suki has dismissed her case on trap, claiming they are trying to start conversation. In suki's case, this is still believable. Before her case there was no controversy, and very little to talk about. However, when Heave posted on Gold, there were already controversies + Show Spoiler + and he ignore them altogether. I interpret his motive is to lynch a lurker over an already presented scummy player, and this can hardly be town. Very Suspicious Right now, I find Heav and MJ were the best lynch candidates, and HeavOnEarth appears to be more scummy##unvote: Suki##vote: HeavOnEarthI am off to bed, it is 3 am right here. I will get up in 4 hours so we can get a successful lynch. Another refresh reveals more post from crossfire. My opinion on him has not swayed.
Next suki comes to the party + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 04:58 suki wrote:HeavOnEarth: Okay, something really really sticks out to me in Heavon's first post, and it's not about golden. It's this particular line:
Show nested quote +also id like to point out crossfire is completely inactive, whereas in past games he was a pretty talkative little townie.
thoughts?
Above, I posted my opinions on Crossfire, where I had gone through pretty much his entire filter in his two previous games, and the big thing I noted was that Crossfire LURKED very hard in his first game as blue, and somewhat lurked in the second game as red. HeavOn clearly is talking about Crossfire's game as blue, 'He was a pretty talkative little townie'. This is clearly wrong. He continues his case against Crossfire later after sciberbia brings it up. This has already been labelled as suspicious. It's a big point against him that he waited until someone else pointed fingers at Crossfire, when he had so early established a read on Crossfire - a fairly in depth read as he had even looked at Crossfire's filters from previous games. The thing is, the case HeavOn makes against crossfire disregards the previous game filters. Crossfire, as mafia, was assertive actively pushed cases against other players. He also lurked quite a bit.
Show nested quote +
As for golden i admit my analysis was pretty damn bad LOL , but he didn't really have any other posts for me to provoke him with, and i still feel its a strong play to accuse lurkers of being scummy, just to get them to talk. The way he went about replying though felt really odd to me. For example, i don't really care if you're taking a few mins to write up a post. Why tell me about it(unless you're about to be majority lynched or something). Just feels off.
HeavOn votes for Golden despite saying that his case against Golden is weak. He doesn't back off however, stating that the response was scummy and that the scummy thing about it was how golden was commenting on the time it would take to make his posts? Seems like a very strained argument to make. I see clear scum motivation in voting for golden. In my previous game as mafia, I harped on Miltonkram for his early vote against sciberbia. Even when my argument was convincingly rebutted, I continued to press my case against him finding any sort of scummy intent I could make up. Why? Because I didn't want to be wishy-washy. HeavOn's case against golden is that golden 'just feels off'. This makes Golden a 'solid lynch' to him. I'm out of time, but that's my insight into HeavOn. I feel that there can definitely be scum motivation behind his posts. I haven't had time to closely look at other people but for now HeavOn is clearly a scummier target than alan. ##unvote alan113##vote HeavOnEarth
Those three I mentioned above all brought solid analysis and new thoughts on Heavon, so I feel confident in seeing them as town for right now.
Then Milton (+ Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 04:59 Miltonkram wrote:
Oops, slept in a bit later than I'd planned. s0Lstice, I'm inclined to agree with you. HeavOnEarth looks like the best lynch candidate.
Everybody, I'd suggest you take a look at him. His filter is not particularly long, but I think there is enough scummy behavior there to warrant a vote.
##Vote: HeavOnEarth
On June 15 2012 05:09 roflwaffles55 wrote:
I noticed already that his play was scummy, however I felt like it was the easy way out, I was hoping to nail a more influential scum D1, but I guess that's just new player optimism... If he flips scum, I'm not sure what kind of information we're going to gain from it as his posts don't seem to link him to anyone.. and if he flips town then all we really know is that he was a poor townie.
I'll go with the flow because he's fairly blatant with his scumminess (real word?) but I'd like to keep an eye on Crossfire, as well as keeping Mouldy Jeb in mind for a D2 lynch.
##unvote Crossfire99
##vote HeavOnEarth
I'm not sure if I'll be on tonight, I'll do my absolute best to be on in case there's a swing of opinion.
On June 15 2012 06:27 O.Golden_ne wrote:
in regards to HeavonEarth.
In relation to my:
a) knowing i'm town.
b) Him trying to bus me one the grounds of "seems like a solid case".
c) lacklustre contribution and no rebuttle to any arguments.
i feel like he see's a bandwagon forming and jumps on straight away.
#VOTE: HeavonEarth
i still maintain a #FOS on MouldyJeb
i still owe the group a comment on Crossfire99 but i honestly dont have time for it before work.
On June 15 2012 02:44 roflwaffles55 wrote:
I'm going to post as though all of these people are scum, and the impact they have a chance to make if they are left alive. I think it will give a different way of thinking about it.
HeavOnEarth
His play is quite suspicious and his accusations and suspicions lackluster at best. He could just as easily be an awful townie as scum.
Overall he's been fairly ineffectual, but if he's hiding behind a mask of confusion and bad reads, he could be an annoyance as scum later on.
I believe that the most lynchable potential scum right now would be Crossfire99. I understand that there are already votes on HeavOnEarth, but if he really is that incompetent at bringing cases to the table, as a scum, why would he try to post them? He is suspicious to me, but not as suspicious as Crossfire. Unless he responds to the accusations in a convincing and collected manner soon, I strongly believe that he should be lynched.
##vote Crossfire99
This is followed by sciberbia's vote + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 07:56 sciberbia wrote:My thoughts on HeavOnEarth: I was originally somewhat suspicious of him for throwing suspicion onto a handful of easy targets, and then becoming wishy/washy about it. He has since made me more suspicious with his response and attitude towards golden.
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 20:15 HeavOnEarth wrote:
As for golden i admit my analysis was pretty damn bad LOL , but he didn't really have any other posts for me to provoke him with, and i still feel its a strong play to accuse lurkers of being scummy, just to get them to talk. The way he went about replying though felt really odd to me. For example, i don't really care if you're taking a few mins to write up a post. Why tell me about it(unless you're about to be majority lynched or something). Just feels off.
First of all, he admits that his case was "pretty damn bad" and LOL's about it. I see this as slightly scummy. He is being ingratiating and agreeable, rather than firm, objective, and analytic. This is more typical of mafia than of townies. Next HeavOnEarth says that there were no other posts to provoke Golden with. The question I'm left asking myself is: why did HeavOnEarth feel that he had to attack Golden at all? He says it was strong play of him to "accuse lurkers of being scummy", but at the time of HeavOnEarth's accusation, golden didn't look lurky. Golden made 1 post in the first 4 hours of the game, and then HeavOnEarth accused him. 1 decent-sized post in the first 4 hours isn't lurky. Why was HeavOnEarth looking for a reason to "provoke him"? Finally, heavOnEarth refuses to back down from his suspicions of golden, and even ends up voting golden, but doesn't give any good reasons. He just says that golden's posting seems odd. Odd =/= scummy. It looks like he just arbitrarily picked a target to attack at the beginning and now won't back down. Overall, I think he has a good chance of being mafia and I'm happy with lynching him. ##Vote HeavOnEarth
Then austin comes in and votes for me with this + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 08:28 austinmcc wrote:I think Heavon looks scummy. But his voting took off after he posted that he was going to be gone for auto repairs. And there's been very little pushback. I'm particularly worried by: (1) us going for the guy who basically said "Won't be around to defend myself," and (2) the lack of any pushback against him, when we had multiple targets recently. There could be some bussing going on, but we had a couple other juicy targets, and I wouldn't expect a bus in that situation. At the very least, my stance right now is that he doesn't look good, but the vast majority of the votes and comments on him seem to have occurred after he said he was leaving. I don't want to lynch him today based on that alone. See your comment towards him. Yes, his reads would help town. Yes, he ought to defend himself. But he may actually have been gone these last few hours, and I want to see his response before I lynch him. If it looks bad, there's D2. I think I'm saying the same thing over and over, so I'll knock it off. Apart from those basic statements, I'll note this. He DOES fit into a category of people trying to look like they're scumhunting but not. The 1 post suspicion of Golden, his comment on MJ -
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 02:39 HeavOnEarth wrote:check out Mouldy Jeb's posts, and accusations
On June 14 2012 00:20 Mouldy Jeb wrote:
nope roffle that was a gut feeling about you that why I stated I have no evidence
Why would someone try to direct suspicions with NO reasoning?
his chiming in on crossfire - + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 20:15 HeavOnEarth wrote:@Sciberbia in addition to what u said on crossfire, notice that he 1) only replies when called out. Every message he is replying to someone, not making his own points aside from his opening. 2) Every one of his posts feels like complete filler to me. he is trying to LOOK helpful, without actively contributing anything + Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 02:06 Crossfire99 wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 02:00 roflwaffles55 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
On June 14 2012 01:56 Crossfire99 wrote:Just woke up. I'll start with that only as a last resort will I be for lynching a lurker Day 1. If we can get some good scum hunting done Day 1 we will have a more productive lynch than just a random lurker. Now onto what has been happening. On the whole suki and trapdoor issue: + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 12:44 suki wrote:Is it just me or is trackd00r coming off as scummy already?
Show nested quote +
If I understood correctly, it doesn't mean that I would stop any lynch that I didn't mention on my analysis. Just because I have a candidate for lynch, it doesn't imply that I discard any other possibility.
It's something related to common sense. If any other cases are convincing enough, I'll throw my vote there in the case I can't get a majority. In the other hand, if we end up like RNG lynching (which is a bad idea), any other poster that could be doing silly mistakes, or even a player practically saying ''hey guys, I'm mafia, lynch me'' that's when it goes against my mindset. Any possibility is valuable, but if there is something absurdly wrong, I'll call it, even if that means a no lynch.
This post screams to me that he's trying to be super cautious with his words, so that he'll have a safety net if/when he ever changes a vote or bandwagons on someone else. He throws out some 'obvious' examples of reasons of what wouldn't agree with him, and even mentions that he would follow through on a read, even if it that means a no lynch.BUT WAIT! Just ONE post previous to that he says this:
Show nested quote +I won't accept a NO LYNCH unless I believe we may have a serious mislynch coming.
... Dude. You try to take a firm stance against something, and then you do the most scummy wishy-washy-ness thing ever the very next post. You're clearly informed about mafia as you brought up the idea of a day 1 RNG lynch, and being against a no lynch is not a difficult or complicated policy to hold. I feel that such a simple logical slip only happens if you're trying to play it safe and keep your options open. ##vote trackd00r
I think suki was just being aggressive. I admit that I found trapdoor's response post to be weird, but then I realized that English is probably not his native language, so I reread it a few times. I don't see a contradiction in there, he is just explaining that he would try to stop a lynch that he really believed was on a townie. I'll give suki the benefit of the doubt on this case and say she is an over eager townie for now. On roflwaffle and alan: + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 22:28 roflwaffles55 wrote:I woke up this morning to the arguments made towards trackd00r, and while the arguments made against him weren't particularly convincing, his defense was a little bit lackluster as well. However, I would like to bring your attention to someone else that is acting quite scummy as it stands.
Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 13:05 alan133 wrote:
On June 13 2012 11:12 roflwaffles55 wrote:
On June 13 2012 11:03 alan133 wrote:
Good morning everyone. Looks like the first thing I am going to do in the office is to play mafia on TL. I don't recognize anyone here since this is my first game, well except for s0Lsitce since he is in the game I read. That's my brief introduction, and habitually in the beginning of any game, GLHF.
I am new and am unsure how to proceed with the game, but my current strategy is to wait for more post to come. Currently I have no FoS. That also mean I do not trust anyone yet.
What are your thoughts on what's been posted as of yet?
On the inactive/lurkers lynch + Show Spoiler +
I believe inactive players/lurkers are generally anti-town/bad town play in any mafia game, so lynching them isn't a bad idea (Since I believe d1 lynch is good, refer below), if there aren't better candidates of course.
On the day 1 lynch/no lynch + Show Spoiler +
I agree on lynching day 1 based on my experience with other mafia games (outside TL) with similar setup. By reading other games on TL I also notice the current meta game is to lynch when there are more players, as it gives townies clues.
I am off to lunch, will be commenting on my thoughts later as I see some interesting posts/votes already.
His first post puts him on the bandwagon with his opinion on the inactives and lurkers, and is generally a contentless post with little to no controversy. Otherwise, nothing to bring the spotlight to him at all. While this is not by any means evidence of scummy play, there comes to attention the next post he makes.
Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 15:40 alan133 wrote:My thoughts on suki's case: + Show Spoiler +
Any possibility is valuable, but if there is something absurdly wrong, I'll call it, even if that means a no lynch.
I won't accept a NO LYNCH unless I believe we may have a serious mislynch coming.
I started writing before I refresh and saw s0lstice's post. As he already pointed it out, there are no contradictions between the two statements. trackd00r merely states that NL is bad unless it is a "serious" mislynch in both highlighted sentence. If I am missing something, please correct me. Also, Miltonkram: + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 10:35 Miltonkram wrote:
Hey all, glad to see we've got a bit of activity already.
In NMM XV we actually had a decent discussion about no-lynches (involving me making a fool of myself) and how they can actually be beneficial in certain setups. That being said, we don't know for certain if we'll have any modkills so we should leave no-lynches off the table until we hit the unlikely scenario that a no-lynch is beneficial for the town.
Town, the best way to contribute is just to get posting. Let everyone know what your thoughts are. Did someone post something suspicious? Let us know about it. Do you think the town is making a bad move? Let us know about it. If a townie lurks he/she is letting down his/her entire team. So don't do it, K? I'm sooooooooper serious. Like sooooper, soooooooooooper serious.
Hey sciberbia, remember this
##Vote: sciberbia
...heh heh heh
Is it me or you are not actually + Show Spoiler +
soooooooooooooooooper serious
? I personally think (well played) townies are not the ones that bluffs around, let alone voting someone without any reason at all? Generally, fooling around, to me, is anti-town/ bad town play. My current opinion + Show Spoiler +FMPOV, suki's case was most probably based on a misunderstanding, but (s)he could very well did it intentionally hoping for a bandwagon leading to a mislynch. Note that I am merely listing the possibilities, I do not FoS anyone yet, which can also mean that I do not trust anyone yet.
This is the post that really got me wondering. How by now can you have no suspicions? There has been quite a few suspicious decisions by several people, giving you more then enough time to form a case against someone, or at least apply some pressure. His statement about trackd00r comes after s0lstice, leaving his opinion tied to a fairly influential player and just reiterating what s0lstice said with no additional evidence or opinionated comments. Again, seeming like he's contributing without actually bringing anything to the table. He throws around some suspicion towards Miltonkram, however not enough to constitute a case or apply any pressure, just enough to make people go filter milton and consider what he might have done, which yet again, leaves him out of the spotlight. The last statement he makes in this post is the most suspicious and the largest tell of his indecision and lack of real input. He restates his opinion that suki's case is a misunderstanding, again, nothing of value. He then continues to explain that he has no FoS and that he doesn't trust anyone, leaving his options open, and having no real contrary opinions. His current play is anti-town at best, as he hasn't brought any of his thoughts to the table, and has only left ambiguous and bandwagoning answers to keep attention on those with controversial opinions.
I think roflwaffle is jumping a little too hard on alan here. It is like 1/3 of the way through Day 1. We are not going to have a lot to work with and consequently we aren't going to really know what to think of people until we get more information. Therefore, I feel alan is playing smartly by not rushing to find every little thing that might possibly be suspicious and throw a vote on someone because of it. On Milton: He was just joking around. If he doesn't stop then I'll start getting suspicious of him. As for my current thoughts: The bolded part of this post by austin makes me suspicious of him. + Show Spoiler +
On June 13 2012 22:23 austinmcc wrote:
I don't read those posts as contradictory, believe the second one clarifies the first and explains that, while he'd consider a NL, the standard is higher than "Town is lynching someone that isn't one of my top couple reads."
That said, even if the two statements are entirely contradictory, I don't really see anything scummy in that. More inclined to see contradictions concerning votes and reads as scummy, where someone has stated one thing but then has to take a party line, rather than super early statements concerning a no lynch. There's no agenda to push on that issue.
Two completely contradictory statements without reasoning for the change is very suspicious. This is a good way to catch scum. They know the alignment of every person, so they have to make cases that they know are wrong (excluding bussing). This can lead to contradictory posts to make them better fit in with the current town mindset. Austin, why don't you think that contradictory statements are suspicious?
We need more information, and the only way to get that information is by pressuring people, scum starts with an information advantage and the faster we work to even that out, the better position we'll be in.
I agree that we need more information and we get that from pressuring people, but we need to do that smartly. If too many people are throwing around minor accusations all the time, it just confuses the town and allows mafia to sit back and laugh. That is what happened in NMM XIII when I was mafia. Ask austin, he was in it too.
On June 14 2012 03:38 Crossfire99 wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 02:45 s0Lstice wrote:
Crossfire99, what do you think of what I said about Mouldy Jeb?
Roflwaffles55, same question.
Yeah Mouldy is acting really weird. He needs to get active to explain himself. Everything he has said so far lacks good reasoning.
On June 14 2012 03:50 Crossfire99 wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 03:24 s0Lstice wrote:
On June 14 2012 02:02 Crossfire99 wrote:
--snipped
Be careful roflwaffle, votes are only easily removable if you are around to remove them. You never know what might happen. Also, votes early on in the day cycle that don't really mean much followed by complete disappearance during a controversial lynch can be scum tactic to avoid making mistakes in a heated debate that occurs last minute.
What an odd thing to say. Your message boils down to: don't vote because you might not be around later, and when that happens you are going to look scummy. Discouraging voting for such an arbitrary reason looks kind of scummy. Also, this hall-monitor stuff is a comfortable way for scum to post and have it look like they are pro-town.
I never said don't vote. I just said be careful about throwing your votes around willy-nilly under the premise that you are going to remove them later. I never even said don't do that. I just don't want someone sticking someone else with a vote for flimsy reasons that ends up sealing a lynch because they couldn't get back in time to change it. That was the entire point of those two sentences. As for the mention of the scum tactic, I'm just saying that sometimes scum can not take part in big discussions later in the day by voting early and then disappearing. I'm just trying to help roflwaffle, by trying to get him to think about taking his vote seriously and having good reasons for whatever he does. If no one holds anyone accountable mafia can just breeze on by.
3) notice his defensive, and meek tone; in addition to his low post count. he's obviously afraid to attract attention to himself 4) he was lurking for a LONGGG time before he finally decided to post . What u thought we all forgot about that?
Not much there. His bit on crossfire is way more robust than his bit on golden or MJ, but still doesn't feel like a whole lot of scumhunting for a day. Again though, I want to wait on him.
That leaves me with cross. ##Vote: Crossfire99What I'd ask of everyone is to show me where Crossfire has done any scumhunting. He posted a little, dropped off the face of the earth, came back, responded to everyone's comments towards him, but never even gave us a single read throughout the day. Nobody looked scummy, because he really just didn't comment on ANYONE. I'm confused as to how that can be towny behavior, and he dropped in, spent time responding to all these people, but spent 0 characters doing any kind of hunting himself. Lurking is bad, but you can lurk and contribute when you pop up. HeavOnEarth didn't contribute when he came back. Crossfire didn't contribute when he came back, except addressing our concerns about him. Between the timing of the votes on HeavOn and the lack of any push on him, I'd rather go with Crossfire today.
Trackdoor then comes in and votes last with this + Show Spoiler +
On June 15 2012 08:52 trackd00r wrote:
I was checking Heaven's filter.
I must admint that he looks suspicious at this stage of the game. I was expecting from him a more detailed analysis of his play, since he stated that he has more experience in playing mafia.
I dislike the fact that he took the most easy target to pressure (golden), instead of trying to outline the other players, He also adds some points against CF, but isn't really big of a deal.
Although I share some suspicions with him, I see that he is not contributing at the same level as the rest of us are. I don't really think that it will be that much of a loss if he flips town. If that is the case, he have a whole post history behind us too see who bandwagoned and who tried to hunt down mafia
As I don't want a NL, I'll change my vote to heaven.
##Unvote: O.Golden_ne
##Vote: HeavOnEarth
I think that leaves everyone except for me and Heavon. I won't even bother quoting Heavon. He just went with a weak vote on Golden and then got lynched. And I missed the lynch for the reasons stated above.
Ok. That's all the time I have for now (I should have gone to bed an hour and a half ago, but whatever). I don't know if I'll be back in time before the night ends to post some more thoughts, so consider this my contribution for now. If I survive the lynch, I'll look into roflwaffle's filter and get a better read on him. I encourage you all to do the same and let me know what you think whether you agree or disagree.
|
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kAG8f.jpg)
