Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2016 23:00:05 GMT -5
Really concerned that nobody is putting votes down. Sub-RVS or notc that's no good.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2016 23:12:14 GMT -5
Hedging is the worst thing you can do as town. As I said earlier, votes get reactions and you should use yours to do that. At least until you have a solid scum read.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 0:52:27 GMT -5
I've noticed that Libra WASN'T the one to push us out of RVS this time. And as annoying as it might be when I've FOS'ed him in past games for rushing us, I can't help but feel like there's something up about him not being the first to move beyond RVS this time. Well in fairness, I basically charged in like a drunk bull and killed RVS before we had even left page 1, so Libra did not even have the chance to push us out of it. Mafia regulars DO tend to like their RVS. We just linger in that stage too long IMO and I'd rather it be bordering on too short than treading far past the point of too long. With that in mind, the reaction to my questions was more important to me than how people answered, if that makes any sense. You made a comment earlier about how if people think you and Zebra are useless you might as well stop playing. Well yeah, if several people are pointing out the same flaw and you're not going to do anything to correct that flaw, then quit. But what I would hope you would get from that is not the idea that you should quit but that now you have three real-time days to convince everyone that we're wrong. You changed how you played in Survivor and got to the final three...for that matter I believe Zebra said he changed his approach too, and he won. So why not bring that different mentality over to mafia as well? On the note of changing one's style...while one shouldn't always fall back on '________ played like this in the last few games, so I expect that to mean this,' it is worth pointing out that players tend to have patterns - both because it's something to examine and because it would hopefully encourage all of us to not fall back into certain habits. For example, Liucci tends to be over-excited when he is town but calmer when he's mafia (except that time he thought he was about to clinch a win). Az very often avoids taking hard stances, especially when he is scum. Now Liucci is being fairly calm, albeit still with a touch of aggressiveness; and Az avoided answering my questions almost entirely. Does that mean they're scum? Maybe, maybe not. In Liucci's case I am inclined to think he's taking what people have said about him and trying to be a better player because of it. I don't get that feeling from Az so much right now, but fwiw Az said he didn't want to come off as piggybacking and also wanted to wait until everyone had spoken; both ostensibly reasonable statements. Also, he is not the only one who didn't answer the question. This should go without saying, but if most of us are singling out Zebra or Max on our most willing to vote off lists, the next step shouldn't be 'well let's pick the least useful of the two and off him.' It should be 'okay, do we actually think they're scummy enough right now to commit to that? Even if we did think they were scummy, is there someone else who is even scummier? Let's analyze.' On the flip side, the people we all named as least willing to vote off should not get an auto-pass for that (self included). We should really be examining all those posts and deciding for ourselves whether it's really intended to be helpful or if it's just good spin.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 0:56:39 GMT -5
(pt. II) We tend to fall back on a certain collective train of thought wrt voting that we should step away from: a. 'these people are the biggest contributors/most active players, so we should keep them' b. 'I don't want to vote for any new players b/c they deserve a chance to play the game' c. 'if all else fails we can axe an inactive person who hasn't contributed anything' The problem with all of these is they encourage us to get stuck in a rut where we say little and analyze even less. A few people have thrown out c) as their answer to my first question and while I get it, it is a bit of a cop-out. a) implies our willingness to let just a few people carry the entire game on their shoulders, and if even they fail to get the game moving (and inevitably have almost nothing to analyze since so few other people have done or said much), we can always fall on c) or let a must-lynch mechanism bail us out. b) pretty much guarantees a newbie scum at least two free days, in which time a more experienced partner can coach him or her to success (e.g., Zebra and Albie in my game). I lost the first game I played, but got by for three solid days before getting caught because of the new card. Voting off an inactive isn't a terrible idea per se, but it should only happen after we've thoroughly examined every other option and legitimately aren't getting scum tells from any other player. Interestingly Codex was the only person who even came close to breaking away from point a - Who are you least willing to vote off, and why?
I remember a game when Libra was scum and fooled the f**k out of everyone. Kunt is very manipulative and can control the game in a bad direction if he's scum. Cynthia fools everyone with long essays. But at the same time they contribute a lot, so that puts their average usefulness meter at 0. So really the only one I wouldn't want to vote off is Mikey because it's his first game. I don't read this as scummy (for now anyway), just an acknowledgement that the people we prefer to keep should be given the same side-eye that we would to a less active or aggressive type pf player. For some reason my first thought was to put a vote down on Az for now, but skimming back through the thread he's not the only one who didn't definitively answer the 'most willing to vote off' question. Libra gave a very Libra scales answer about weighing one's contributions against their general standing in Mafia. I think bigfan didn't answer either question at all, unless I missed it; and Kanenra:ke doesn't have enough info to answer it, for obvious newbie reasons. For now I am going to vote: bigfan; he has posted a lot but said little, which gives a slight impression of someone who wants to give the appearance of activity without actually being that active.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 1:28:47 GMT -5
@antigonerising Why would Az wait until everyone had spoken (also where did he say that? Must have missed it.) You keep mentioning him then kind of shift gears last minute and vote bigfan for doing the same thing, and while it's reasonable, it's also far more suspect that Az is doing this because he is a player who should know better. Not only that, but bigfan never takes hard stances. That's not to give him a pass at all, because that's just bad play, but between the two it's interesting you would opt with bigfan over Az. I guess I'm calling FoS on you and Az since I'm already voting for him for reasons already outlined by both of us. On another note, I'd disagree that Liucci has stayed calm. He isn't giving the thread the AOL chat room treatment like he usually does, but he's been very aggressive with his votes and making hard pushes.
Max actually raised a good point about keeping new players in the game for at least the first day unless it otherwise becomes apparent they are scum-- I assumed that was understood. Iirc he stated that we can pay attention to how knowledgable they appear to be relative to what's going on, similar to how Albie played game one. I generally agree with the idea that we shouldn't psyche ourselves out because they're knew, but thought I'd bring up that counterpoint again because I think it's valuable to consider.
I'd like to hear more from Stacey in general. It's not a default scum tell for a new player to stay silent for most of D1, because I barely said anything my first game, but the general lack of anything is concerning.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 1:30:22 GMT -5
Yeah I really need to proof read this shit.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 2:03:30 GMT -5
@antigonerising Why would Az wait until everyone had spoken (also where did he say that? Must have missed it.) this post, but you'd have to ask him why he would wait. I assumed that was his way of saying he'd be go with the person who contributes the least but that he can't decide who that person is until everyone has had a fair chance to respond. I actually went back and forth between putting my vote on Az and bigfan for that reason. Az should know better, I agree; I am also not really crazy about the flavor role theory he tossed out there...he admitted himself it was weak but something about the way he offered it up kind of put me off. But when I went back through to see how other people answered my questions I realized he wasn't the only one who didn't answer them, so I couldn't put my vote on him just for that. bigfan is still a little bit newish (I tend to not hold his first game against him b/c that was mine and the learning curve for it was really steep), but is edging to the point where he should also know better by now. in fact the majority of his posts have been about how he played in last games and plans to do it differently this time, but hasn't actually put that plan in motion yet. he pretty copped out of answering the question entirely[/rul], while Az eventually conceded to having the same answer most other people did.
my reads on everyone else are a mixture of null and town so these are the two i am looking at for now, barring something else catching my attention more.
I don't disagree with this actually, but compared to some long-ago games I've played with him I'd call it calm by Liucci standards, lol.
Also don't disagree with this, but I brought the point up because there is a danger in the understanding we give to newbies turning into a blind spot. Obviously if they are not giving off any scum tells there's no reason to be offering them up as potential lynches. (That's why I don't really have anything to say about Stacey right now; there isn't anything to say, and it hasn't quite been 24 hours yet so I imagine he is still just trying to take everything in.) The issue is just that we need to actually look at them to make sure they aren't giving off scum tells and I feel like that in past games that typically didn't happen until day 3 or later, unless the newbie was ridiculously inactive. Albie did a good job for his first time, but he gave off clues early on that people missed because they weren't looking.
My double post was a really long-winded way (is there any other way?) of saying 'there's nothing innately wrong with doing these things or following this logic, but make sure we have a well thought-out reason for doing them.'
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 2:04:06 GMT -5
Yeah I really need to proof read this s**t. [2]
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 2:07:35 GMT -5
ok, let's try this without the jacked up url. @antigonerising Why would Az wait until everyone had spoken (also where did he say that? Must have missed it.) this post, but you'd have to ask him why he would wait. I assumed that was his way of saying he'd be go with the person who contributes the least but that he can't decide who that person is until everyone has had a fair chance to respond. I actually went back and forth between putting my vote on Az and bigfan for that reason. Az should know better, I agree; I am also not really crazy about the flavor role theory he tossed out there...he admitted himself it was weak but something about the way he offered it up kind of put me off. But when I went back through to see how other people answered my questions I realized he wasn't the only one who didn't answer them, so I couldn't put my vote on him just for that. bigfan is still a little bit newish (I tend to not hold his first game against him b/c that was mine and the learning curve for it was really steep), but is edging to the point where he should also know better by now. In fact the majority of his posts have been about how he played in last games and plans to do it differently this time, but hasn't actually put that plan in motion yet. He pretty much copped out of answering the question entirely, while Az eventually conceded to having the same answer most other people did. my reads on everyone else are a mixture of null and town so these are the two i am looking at for now, barring something else catching my attention more. I don't disagree with this actually, but compared to some long-ago games I've played with him I'd call it calm by Liucci standards, lol. Also don't disagree with this, but I brought the point up because there is a danger in the understanding we give to newbies turning into a blind spot. Obviously if they are not giving off any scum tells there's no reason to be offering them up as potential lynches. (That's why I don't really have anything to say about Stacey right now; there isn't anything to say, and it hasn't quite been 24 hours yet so I imagine he is still just trying to take everything in.) The issue is just that we need to actually look at them to make sure they aren't giving off scum tells and I feel like that in past games that typically didn't happen until day 3 or later, unless the newbie was ridiculously inactive. Albie did a good job for his first time, but he gave off clues early on that people missed because they weren't looking. My double post was a really long-winded way (is there any other way?) of saying 'there's nothing innately wrong with doing these things or following this logic, but make sure we have a well thought-out reason for doing them.'
|
|
Libra
Diamond Member
The One Who Knows Where All the Bodies Are Buried
:)
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 14,376
My Charts
|
Post by Libra on Jan 19, 2016 2:17:58 GMT -5
RE: Liucci - There's something off about the profile of him as a Town player, IMO. Or at least, there's something that...isn't really being considered.
While it's well-known by now that Liucci and Invince are physically the same person, Liucci doesn't really have the same personality AS Liucci that he did as Invince. At least, the read I get of him in general points to this being the case. So, it stands to reason that his playing style now will be different than it was then - and whether he is Town or scum will really not have much bearing, if any, in this equation.
Why does this matter? Because he's played a grand total of two games AS Liucci. And both times, he was scum. So I don't find the consideration of his perceived Town gameplay style to really be applicable at all. I think his gameplay here will still resemble the two most recent games moreso than it will of any time before that, but that will be due to the way his personality seems to be now - i.e. it will NOT be either a Town tell or a scum tell.
Also, FWIW - If in fact Liucci WERE scum once again, that'd be the third time in a row. I checked, we've never ever had anyone turn out to be scum three consecutive times. Not to say that it COULDN'T happen now, but I'd be legit surprised. (And NGL, I feel like it'd be kind of damning for his gameplay in future games if he were in fact scum yet again here.)
|
|
Mikey
2x Platinum Member
Mainstream Hater
nothing anyhow
|
Post by Mikey on Jan 19, 2016 6:38:52 GMT -5
Hai This is my third game >:( Anyhow, i woke up late then i couldnt use my phone in class, so
|
|
bigfan101
6x Platinum Member
I am Sara Evans other fan.
Joined: July 2010
Posts: 6,651
|
Post by bigfan101 on Jan 19, 2016 9:19:46 GMT -5
Unvote: Zebra because that was my RVS. Honestly, this early in the game it is so rough to get a read on everyone. I have only one clear read. To me, there is no way that Luicci is scum. I have played a game with Luicci when he is scum and he is playing this COMPLETELY different. Granted Luicci is a smart dude and he might be changing it up to just cause havoc but I am reluctant at best to vote for him out first. I also perfer to give the newbies a shot to learn, just for the fact as it always great to get new players in the mafia world. I was given a shot to learn in my first game even through my stupidity and I would like to do the same for these players. Only one thing bothered me in the first few pages: I would be most content with seeing Max or Zebra go because in games that I have played with them, they tend to be the least aggressive players and do not steer conversation much. This bothered me for two reasons: 1) I have played with both Max and Zebra and I would argue that that is not the case. Especially Max to me. He definitely creates new ideas and tries to find the solution. He definitely is not a sideline guy to me. 2) This was on the first page. Why the sudden push to vote people out when we have over 50 hours to decide what to do? And then the two people you picked were so odd and random to me that it seemed to me that you might be covering for someone that you are worried about maybe saying the wrong thing. Again, I do not have much to go on, but for now VOTE:antigonerising
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jan 19, 2016 10:15:58 GMT -5
Last minute job interview this afternoon so I'm going to keep my time short and sweet until after that, but I just wanted to comment on Cynthia's posts from up above. They are so spot on about evolving how one plays these games. With that in mind bigfan101, she does have a point about me when she used myself and Zebra as examples from before, which I did admit to anyway. It's also worth pointing out to you that she didn't lay a vote on either of us after pointing this out, meaning it was likely just an example she was giving anyway. In any case, whether I create new ideas isn't really conducive to us finding scum. I could be the most convincing player in the game, but that also would make me a dangerous one if I successfully convince you that I'm town while actually being scum. While our job is to find the scum players from a group of town players, what we really need to be doing is finding the town players in a group of scum players. Therefore we should be thinking of everyone as scum until they can convince us otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 10:36:12 GMT -5
2) Who do you find the most scummy as of right now?TBH Kunt is on my radar right now, but not for the Kunt-is-always-suspicious thing nor his calling me out on prior flakiness. It's actually kinda weak because it feeds into my BS theory that the flavour roles actually have some hidden significance - 'cause next to every other flavour role so far known to be present, Conner Hastings is nobody and thus sticks out like a sore thumb. But yeah, an odd man out means nothing for the flavour character, and pursuing him for that is dumb if it turns out he's actually a power role of some kind. But hey - a stand is a stand. Meanwhile I do get why there would be umbrage from Max/Zebra/whoever else it was at the suggestion that they might be a good first lynch option on the basis of being perceived 'useless', but I do think that if someone doesn't really contribute to this Day phase and it drags out to deadline (and knowing Pulse it most likely will) then I'd advocate lynching that person regardless if it's a newbie or not. OK, now that Mikey has said something, I will point out that the answers you gave to these questions bothers me for one reason. You continue to hedge without making any sort of commitment, your lone commitment based off a theory, it's as if you're afraid to piss anyone off. Town shouldn't be afraid of pissing anyone off. You also didn't really make a solid commitment to the first question either, and I'm not getting a good vibe from you being so reluctant to commit to things. For now, Vote: Az Zeebz , I have a question for you: Who do you think is the scummiest as of right now?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 10:54:24 GMT -5
vote: Liucci
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 11:07:58 GMT -5
Oh, Az already had two votes on him. I didn't realize Libra still had his vote on him. Oh well, two will suffice for now. I'd still like to see him make some commitments.
|
|
Mikey
2x Platinum Member
Mainstream Hater
nothing anyhow
|
Post by Mikey on Jan 19, 2016 11:26:40 GMT -5
@mod: if you're not actually 44 going on 45, why IS your original username jeff1971? #Mod_ I was named after my Uncle Jeff, who died that year. :( But carry on... Chelsea Press 2 Chi CHi seems to be taking an extra long lunch, so I'm sure we'll get started with the shoot at some point. Might as well do a vote count while I'm here: Day One: Vote Count 7Kunt: Codex Zebra: bigfan Libra: Az, Liucci Liucci: Kunt Max: Zebra Az: Libra Not voting: Cynthia, Stacey, Max, Zebra The shade of it all Anyhow, i'm still not sure about whom to vote for, but it's nice that we finished RVS rather quickly. Just wanna point out sth : even if someone's new, they might be scum, so i say don't rule them out of the list. People shouldn't use their newbie-ness as their excuses.
|
|
popstop
6x Platinum Member
Pulse's Summer Intern
Advancing the Mountain Time Zone for all mankind
|
Post by popstop on Jan 19, 2016 12:41:24 GMT -5
At least josh remembered you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 13:39:53 GMT -5
I've tried my best to suppress the glee I've been feeling inside at finally being town after a two-year drought, which might be why I've sounded so aggressive. I've been trying my best to help town, and right now I don't necessarily think my methods are working correctly yet. I'm also starting to realize I do need to simmer down a bit more still, and I will attempt to do just that. I also need to show more purpose and not let certain people elude my/towns radar. Anyhow, today and yesterday I've had school off, today, but I will have school both tomorrow and Thursday, so I won't be able to reach the same level of activity. I'm going to try to make the most of it. The deadline isn't really convenient for me, frankly. Just a reminder for everyone, it is less than two days away. We need to get to business sooner or later.I would also like to see Kanenrá:ke chip in a bit more, ask a few questions, tell us who you think is lying, etc. One thing is for certain, kanenra:ke, and it boils down to there being at least 2 liars among us, and at most 3-4.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Marlena Nylund on Jan 19, 2016 14:04:04 GMT -5
Just wanna point out sth : even if someone's new, they might be scum, so i say don't rule them out of the list. People shouldn't use their newbie-ness as their excuses. Definitely. But I find we tend to use someone's activity level as a reason to believe they may be scum, but in the case of newbies, they may be quiet because out of caution. So it's really just something to consider, rather than a pass.
|
|
Az Paynter
Diamond Member
On Dsico's Block List™
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 110,542
|
Post by Az Paynter on Jan 19, 2016 14:04:51 GMT -5
O look the gangbang seems to be kicking off now~ Could you elaborate on this please, @antigonerising? I think I understand what you're saying about hard stances, but I also don't want to lock myself into a line of thinking and just proceed with tunnel vision. I get if that looks wishy-washing, I'm not interested in charging in all guns blazing and give scum an easy kill if I'm wrong. I'll grant you D1 we have nothing to go on, any power roles haven't had a chance to act on their abilities yet so we're flying blind. I don't think it's inherantly scummy to hold back a little on D1 tbh, I don't mean waffle the entire Day phase away but give everyone a chance to turn up, be part of the conversation. We practically bypassed RVS and are well into solid discussion, which is partially why I wanted to wait for everyone (or at least most people) to comment on things. There is stuff to actually talk about, and just as you said you wanted to see how people reacted to your questions I wanted to observe how people respond to the discussion. Most people have now, so I'm ready to look a little closer at things. Who else didn't answer your questions? Frankly if most people are in agreement re: possibly lynching Max/Zebra then I think at least in D1 we should drop it and not even go there. A lot of people agreeing probably means that we're on the wrong track and scum aren't going to make much of an effort to steer us elsewhere. I'm also aware what I said about lynching inactive/less contributing players, but I'll speak more on that in a bit. Thanks for pointing this out, Cynthia. Seeing that laid out made me realize that I was falling into the same trap as usual. I will say though that according to A. that would mean that both yourself and Kunt should be under the microscope as the biggest contributors. In regards to B. I would give them maybe a couple of days to acclimate themselves, but if they don't make an effort during the final 24 hours then we should start raising red flags. Which feeds into C. and I know I said I would do that, but now that you say this, I think we should leave the least active players alone on D1. If they're still alive and lurking as the ranks thin, they have less people to hide behind and even less excuse to be radio-silent. This may not be the best example but that's how we caught Jess out in the very first Pulse Mafia game ever. Kunt probably worded my thoughts a bit better in his post direct after the two of yours, Cynthia.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:06:29 GMT -5
Last minute job interview this afternoon so I'm going to keep my time short and sweet until after that, but I just wanted to comment on Cynthia's posts from up above. They are so spot on about evolving how one plays these games. With that in mind bigfan101, she does have a point about me when she used myself and Zebra as examples from before, which I did admit to anyway. It's also worth pointing out to you that she didn't lay a vote on either of us after pointing this out, meaning it was likely just an example she was giving anyway. In any case, whether I create new ideas isn't really conducive to us finding scum. I could be the most convincing player in the game, but that also would make me a dangerous one if I successfully convince you that I'm town while actually being scum. While our job is to find the scum players from a group of town players, what we really need to be doing is finding the town players in a group of scum players. Therefore we should be thinking of everyone as scum until they can convince us otherwise.Although I am quoting only you, this is really a response to both you and bigfan101. I wanted to push us out of RVS early, hence my questions. That should not have been construed as me pushing to vote someone out immediately; as you (Max) said, I didn't actually vote for anyone after starting the question. I didn't think it would appear as if I were suggesting we vote out someone right away just based on those two questions, but I see now that this wasn't clear. Nonetheless I accomplished the three things I wanted with that post - 1) get away from RVS 2) get people to thinking about how we actually regard other players in general 3) stir up substantive discussion so that no one has an excuse that there is nothing to analyze. The nice thing about that third point is that it now forces us to step away from whatever answers we might have given due to point #2. Like the bolded sentence above - I never thought to approach the game that way before, so already Max has started to prove me wrong by bringing up angles that no one else has suggested. If I'm not mistaken you two played in one of the last couple of games that I didn't so maybe Max's style was different in that one? but I based my comments on his history of game play, as I recall it. It's not inaccurate, but I do think that Max has tried to step his game up the past few times he has played. It's a work in progress; none of us are super amazing at this, including myself, but I try to aim for a method to the madness. Also, based on the way discussion has flowed yesterday, neither Max nor Zebra are on my radar right now. (Not to say they wouldn't be later, just that neither of them have given off scum signals, while a couple of other people have said things that stand out more at the moment.) And fwiw I would have much rather asked those questions as soon as the game started and taken some heat for it than us drag on until the 21st and then have to throw those questions out there, leading to a lynch that had almost nothing to do with any perceived scumminess and everything to do with us scrambling for a last-minute lynch. I'm in between classes right now and this is going to be one of my long days, so I probably won't have much to add re: analysis after the next hour or so today. However, I plan to be around mot of tomorrow. Deadline is technically Thursday but I'll just be waking up and driving to class when it passes so I will likely be absent for those last 10-12 hours.
|
|
popstop
6x Platinum Member
Pulse's Summer Intern
Advancing the Mountain Time Zone for all mankind
|
Post by popstop on Jan 19, 2016 14:12:54 GMT -5
Deadline has been set for Jan. 21, 2016 at 9:15 AM Mountain Time!(Yay for the return of Mountain time!) You bitch, at least ry4n never questioned the mountain time zone thing when he modded with me. Speaking of which, ryan, come back to the green room! It takes 6/11 votes to lynch! Day One: Vote Count 3Az: Libra, Liucci Kunt: Codex Cynthia: bigfan101 bigfan: Cynthia Liucci: Kunt Not voting: Az, Stacey, Max, Mikey, Zebra
|
|
Az Paynter
Diamond Member
On Dsico's Block List™
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 110,542
|
Post by Az Paynter on Jan 19, 2016 14:25:47 GMT -5
#PartII Please elaborate. [2] What was offputting about how I presented my dumb theory? I just wanted to spell out where I was going with my wanting to know people's flavour characters, while acknowledging the flaws in my reasoning after more research. This feeds a little into what I said before. Too many people sharing a similar idea is a red flag to me, I don't want to push an idea that looks like a red herring. That's just giving scum a freebie. bigfan101 This is flawed reasoning. This is what, your second game? The most you have to go on regarding his play style is other peoples' word. It is not a stretch to imagine someone would try to play completely differently in consecutive Mafia games especially if their play style in a previous game led to a Town mis-lynch or (in the case of last game) a loss as scum. This does nothing to say whether he is or he isn't, all I'm saying is that changes in play style aren't the greatest scumtell or a reason to not suspect a player. Also I have a problem with your reasoning for voting Cynthia. Pulse has a tendency to drag things out to deadline unnecessarily. Wanting to actually be punctual for once isn't a good scumtell either so voting Cynthia based on this is silly. Forgive me for thinking this post is kind of snap-decisiony? Kunt and Cynthia were throwing my name around, and while Kunt was the only one to throw a vote down on me between the two, there was seemingly no build-up from you leading up to this post which looks to me like you're just following whichever direction you see the vote taking you. Seems kinda bandwagon-y and maybe a little bit scummy. I'd like to believe you didn't get scum for another consective game, but still. FoS: Liucci__________________________________________ Now, based on everything I've said in my last two posts: if I A. bypass Max and Zebra since a lot of people suggested they as good policy lynches, and B. give less active players the benefit of the doubt on D1, then for a current vote I rule out: Max/Zebra/Mikey/Stacey I've found flaws in Liucci's and Bigfan's reasoning/arguments as well, but it's Bigfan's second game so I might also give him a D1 pass. I also want to give Liucci the benefit on D1, but remember I did FoS you so you're not off the hook. That leaves Codex/Libra/Kunt/Cynthia. I have no real reason to suspect Kunt or Cynthia yet, but I do acknowledge that I'm keeping an eye on the pair of you as active contributors. Which whittles it down to Libra and Codex. I'm going to Vote: Codex because where did you go? Is it a time zone thing? What do you have to say about Kunt/Cynthia's comments?
|
|
Az Paynter
Diamond Member
On Dsico's Block List™
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 110,542
|
Post by Az Paynter on Jan 19, 2016 14:41:52 GMT -5
Deadline has been set for Jan. 21, 2016 at 9:15 AM Mountain Time!(Yay for the return of Mountain time!) You bitch, at least ry4n never questioned the mountain time zone thing when he modded with me. Speaking of which, ryan, come back to the green room! It takes 6/11 votes to lynch! Day One: Vote Count 3Az: Libra, Kunt, Liucci Kunt: Codex Cynthia: bigfan101 bigfan: Cynthia Not voting: Az, Stacey, Max, Mikey, Zebra Also I do believe Kunt switched his vote to Liucci, unless I missed a post where he moved it back.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:42:13 GMT -5
@mod: I'm voting for Liucci, not Az.
FoS Mikey by the way. Dead silent for most of the first two days and his first post is parroting.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:43:04 GMT -5
O look the gangbang seems to be kicking off now~ Could you elaborate on this please, @antigonerising ? I think I understand what you're saying about hard stances, but I also don't want to lock myself into a line of thinking and just proceed with tunnel vision. I get if that looks wishy-washing, I'm not interested in charging in all guns blazing and give scum an easy kill if I'm wrong. I'll grant you D1 we have nothing to go on, any power roles haven't had a chance to act on their abilities yet so we're flying blind. Well, in general you tend to hesitate on naming your suspicions. It stands out most when you are scum - one time you even went out of your way to not vote for anyone at all whenever possible, lest it trace back to you later - so that is why it jumped out at me. With that said, I think when you are town you are just more afraid of pushing the wrong wagon (both b/c you don't want a mislynch and b/c you don't want people grilling you about it, thus leading to another mislynch) and try to wait until you are certain about someone...but of course in a game like this we are rarely if ever certain, so there's not much gained from waiting. You can't be afraid of being wrong. I mentioned it in one of those wordwalls somewhere, but Stacey, bigfan, and kinda-sorta Libra. Libra's answer was pretty much in line with yours, that he'd prefer to observe for a few days and then go with someone who hasn't offered much. However he offered the caveat that he would weigh a person's low contribution against how new they are at the game - i.e. he wouldn't vote off Stacey for having said the least, since Stacey is new. Stacey has hardly said anything though. I give him a 24-hour pass for being new and my questions being aimed more at people who have played, b/c they rely on one being familiar with other players. But I echo Liucci in that I would really like to see him say more now. as for bigfan, and ultimately why I put my vote on him, he has posted a lot but until his recent vote on me offered nothing. he didn't answer my questions, saying he trusts everyone else to make the best decision. that's an even bigger non-answer than "I'd go with an inactive but give me a couple of days to see who still hasn't said anything." Oh, and at this point I think it is safe to say we can abandon my early questions entirely and turn to examining the discussion that came forth from those questions. quoted for truth Yeah, I don't really disagree with that notion. Although I probably should b/c if you catch me on a day when I am tired I'm going to half-ass my responses, regardless of me being town. it is certainly easier to spitball when I know I'm not going to get questioned about it! but for the sake of a well-played game, it is only fair that I would get questioned...if nothing else one should be willing to pick apart any one of my posts because I might just be wrong about something and unaware of it. lol, I remember reading through that. Didn't her scum partner get lynched early? So that made her harder to find too because there was no connection to look for. I wonder if that would work now...that strategy as scum was employed so early on that I think almost everyone knows now not to do it if they are scum . There have been other games where we did lynch someone on the same logic and that person was town, so it didn't pan out. My own thought, which doesn't really contradict with yours, is that we lynch inactives if and only if we have hit a brick wall in terms of finding clues among other players. Like with Jess, at that point the continued silence is evidence. But early in the game, there should be enough going on that we have something else to look at for each remaining and active player before we reach that conclusion.
|
|
Libra
Diamond Member
The One Who Knows Where All the Bodies Are Buried
:)
Joined: September 2003
Posts: 14,376
My Charts
|
Post by Libra on Jan 19, 2016 14:43:50 GMT -5
I'm curious as to what brings this on. I don't like the Az suspicion that generates from his answers to Cynthia's questions - because, well, my own answers weren't all that different from his. Yet he isn't being given the benefit of the doubt? All well and good for me, I suppose...but I fail to see how that points to being a scum-tell on his part. Further, he said he wanted to wait about ~24 hours to give a more informed answer, and he looks to be following through with that, yes? Unvote: Az for now, but I want to take a closer look at everyone.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:44:32 GMT -5
Pop Quiz: of Zebra, Mikey, Stacey, or Codex, who would you lynch and why?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2016 14:45:13 GMT -5
@mod: I'm voting for Liucci, not Az. FoS Mikey by the way. Dead silent for most of the first two days and his first post is parroting. I keep forgetting Mikey is playing Az Paynter I don't know if I will be able to respond to your second post today but hopefully my response to the first encompasses most things
|
|