Mafia 64: The New "C9" - Game over!
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Like I usually do, rather then trying to take copius notes and figure it all out at once, I'm going to respond to stuff as I see it during my re-read.
Question: This may or may not be relevent to anything, but have you played with either Jdodge or SV or both before? Or if not, did you read through games with them in it?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Was that randomized or were the night actions in ?
Damnit, some of the 2 best players are out...cunning mafia.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Don't really like this post here; with those specific night choices, I think there are very good reasons to try to use that to figure out who would have killed those specific people. I certanly don't see why you'd want to shut this down as an avenue of speculation this early on day 1.Glork wrote:MBL seems to want to begin the often-fruitless process of "nightkill choice speculation." The only ones among us who could have any legitimate insight into the scums' kills would be the scums themselves. MBL is experienced enough to know by now that talking about N1 kills (especially in a night-start game) is rarely (if ever) useful.
I'd like MBL to answer BBB's question only because I'm curious myself to know why exactly MBL would label a spectrumvoid kill as "odd." But for the most part, I want to nip this "speculation on why so-and-so was killed" issue in the bud. Simply put, we will not be able to discern anything at all from who was killed. And any insinuations that X might be scum because Y died will without a doubt get a vote from me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Glork wrote:You're kidding, right? You mean you think that Guardian actually believes that I am the perfect mafia player and that I know all of the scums' identities without everyone even having posted yet? You think that language like "I demanded that he find all five scum" and "Tsk tsk Glork" is "far from a joke"?
Please stop talking, BM. You're just making yourself look like a fool.fos:Glork. Battle mage is actually making some sense here; I don't like how Glork just shuts him down and tells him to "stop talking".I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
heh...you know, that's almost a reason to lynch you right there.Battle Mage wrote:well im not the ideal judge of my own scumminess. of course, me being hard to read is only bad for me as town. as scum, i can get away with murder
Seriously, though, I'm not really seeing the BM wagon at this time.
...which dosn't mean we just ignore BM either, I just saw a town lose a game by ignoring him when he was scum because he's "always scummy". I'd suggest people actually, you know, read his posts and try to figure out if he's scum, perhaps put together a case against him or something if you've got a problem with him? BM does play differently when scum then when town, everyone does; but I don't like how this BM wagon seems to be just gliding along on autopilot with very little reference to any specific thing he's actually done so far this game.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:We hashed this over in the thread I posted. I've come to the conclusion that I'm going to more or less ignore his behavior unless he 1) brings up a good point or 2) acts more unusually than usual.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No, Jack is right. You also attacked MBL for talking about the night 1 kills at all; saying thatGlork wrote:
No. I was attacking MBL for calling the SV kill "odd."Jack wrote:
This is exactly what you were attacking MBL for.Glork wrote:But if Albert thought they were "two of the best," that would certainly give him incentive to kill one of them.Vote:Glork
...and I kept it there for his refusing to explain why he thought it was odd.
Jack's hardly "strawmanning" you here, Glork, he's pointing out that you've contradicted yourself.Glork wrote:MBL seems to want to begin the often-fruitless process of "nightkill choice speculation." The only ones among us who could have any legitimate insight into the scums' kills would be the scums themselves. MBL is experienced enough to know by now that talking about N1 kills (especially in a night-start game) is rarely (if ever) useful.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok...general summery...
I don't trust Albert or Glork at this point. Glork, especally, is rubbing me the wrong way. A lot of his posts don't feel right to me right now.
vote:Glork
Yogurt has made a few unusual posts. Not sure what to think of him at this point.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Glork: I don't know, I think Battle Mage's point was reasonable.
He was saying that it's dangerous to just follow Glork, and that he's seen the town do so often. And yes, Guardian was half-joking, but I think he was he was "joking on the square"; I honestly think that he was more then half-serious about being willing to follow your lead, and I think BM was just pointing out that that's dangerous.Battle Mage wrote:i agree with Haut Boy. ive seen this happen before in other games, and Glork-scum is allowed free reign to do as he pleases till about day 4 or 5.
in future, dont class 'Glork must be right' as a reason to vote for somebody. such blind following is worthy of my vote.
BM
And he also said that he ould vote for anyone who voted following you, and who gave as his only reason "Glork must be right". Which is again quite reasonable, IMHO. Even if you're town, that can be dangerous.
The impression I got was just that he was mostly trying to prevent people from using "let's all follow glork" as an excuse for their votes, the way people have done in other games.
The fact that in response you tried to shut him down completly, told him to stop talking and called him a fool, really bothers me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Meh. BM told him that he didn't like the whole "let's all follow Glork' thing; yes, it was a joke, but I think he was also serious. Guardian ignored him and continued to go on in the same vain, so BM voted for him. He even said:Glork wrote:I agree that blindly following Glork -- regardless of what his alignment is -- is not generally a good thing. I experienced an unusually high amount of that in McDonald's Mafia, and I actuallyused Pink Princess' repeated Glork-support to catch her as scum in that game. I agree with that point. But I maintain that Guardian was joking, and that BM's attack on him was over-the-top, to a scummy degree. I wasn't trying to shut down the "following Glork is bad" notion. I was trying to shut down what I thought was becoming a distracting and possibly-pointless debate.
I don't think that was an "over-the-top" reaction, esepcally not page 2 of day 1. Your reaction to his vote, though, that seemed over the top to me.Battlemage wrote: I seriously wish you were joking, but unfortunately i dont think you were.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I was going to say "because we know her from scumchat but haven't had a chance to play a forum game with her yet", but that answer works too.AutumnEvenings wrote:
*points to her avatar*Albert wrote:Why was everyone getting so excited about playing with AutumnEvenings ?Duh.
Guardian: Could you explain in a little more detail why you think BM's scum? The reason you just gave, that "he votes for me whenever i unvote him" sounds kind of OMGUSy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
So...you expected him to trust you more now that you were calling him town, and you were annoyed with him for voting for you after you called him town?Guardian wrote: TCS, it isn't me being OMGUSy, it is BM not making any sense at all. I unvote him, acknowledge that he may not be scum, do independent analysis and look for more scum targets.... And then he finds me as scum for it. I would be equally frustrated if he did this to any other player in my situation.
fos:GuardianI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That's not why he voted you. Now you're representing him. He actually had a reasonable point about you, I think, which you never defended yourself against, just voting him instead.Guardian wrote:Yos, I feel like you and others are straw-manning me here... I am annoyed with him for voting me for scum hunting. Like I said, if he did this to any other player who did the same things I did, I would be equally frustrated with him.
He voted you after this post:
When asked why he was voting you, he said this:Guardian wrote:Meh, I believe BM. I don't particularly think either of the two wagons are scum. BM was just being an idiot.
unvote
Meh... he could be scum though... I echo the sentiments of TCS here. I could definitely be convinced to get back on BM. At the moment I shall
vote: N9Vbecause he made one post with a vote and used someone else's reasoning for it... and got on near the end of a lynch-an-easy-target wagon.
One more day of hiking, adios!
So, he wasn't voting for you "Because you were scum-hunting". He thought your "Well, I don't really think he's scum, so I'll unvote him, but eh, he could be scum, I might get back on his bandwagon later" comment "seems like scum keeping their options open." Which is actually quite reasonable; you said you believed him and thought he wasn't scummy and unvoted him, and then in your very same post you said that he could be scum and that you "could be convinced" to get back onto the BM wagon.Battle Mage wrote:his comment about me seems like scum keeping their options open.
And yeah, BM is right, that does kind of sound like you might be scum who's trying to keep your options open; you got off his bandwagon when everyone else was leaving it, but then kept open the option of jumping back on it.
So the way I see it, BM voted for you and gave a valid reason for it, and in response, rather then respond to his argument or make an attempt to defend yourself, you voted him.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yogurt: Did you actually read my posts? I don't think BM voted Guardian "because Guardian thought BM was town". He never said that's why he was voting Guardian, and actually had some good reasons for his vote. It's not like that was the first time BM's attacked Guardian today either, I think Battle Mage has suspected Guardian for a while.
In any case, you should NEVER trust someone just BECAUSE they're saying you're town; I wouldn't expect BM to AVOID voting Guardian just because Guardian unvoted him.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Speaking of Albert, I would still like him to answer the question I asked him a few pages ago...
Yosarian2 wrote:Like I usually do, rather then trying to take copius notes and figure it all out at once, I'm going to respond to stuff as I see it during my re-read.
Question: This may or may not be relevent to anything, but have you played with either Jdodge or SV or both before? Or if not, did you read through games with them in it?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Was that randomized or were the night actions in ?
Damnit, some of the 2 best players are out...cunning mafia.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
...so, you're on the biggest bandwagon in the game, and are pushing for it to get more votes and go to a lynch, but you don't have any actual reason for suspecting Guardian?The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Nope, no particular reason.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Heh...I agreed with basically everything you said in post 406 , Glork, and that makes me feel a little bit better about you, but you're still on my list of suspects; I really got a bad gut feeling from a lot of your posts earlier in the game. I'll probably re-read your posts in isolation tommorow and see if I can explain it better.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Anyone else notice a contradiction here?
Guardian wrote:You not being able to read me is a good thing for me whatever my alignment is. You are suspicious of me enough that I likely won't get NK'd but are not suspicious of me enough so that I will get lynched today. I used to think it was in everyone's best interests to look really, really pro-town all the time... but MeMe has begun to convince me otherwise in another thread. So go ahead, and not be able to read me. That's great for my team (the town).
First, he tries to say "Oh, it's good that you can't tell if I'm town or not, because that way I don't get night killed". Then in his very next post, he attacks Tcs for what apperas to be basically following that exact same logic.Guardian wrote:OK, so first, you propose a metagame lynch on BattleMage because you are incredibly frustrated about how he acts unreadable, and second, you say that, just like BattleMage, you act deliberately scummy so that people can't get a read on you. This is more than a little scummy hypocrisy.
I hate that logic, by the way. If you're town, then it's in the best interests of the town for the town to be able to tell you're town. "If I look scummy then I won't get nightkilled" is terrible, terrible logic; unless a pro-town role gets lucky, or unless the town gets really lucky and the mafia kills the SK, the mafia will kill one pro-town person every day. Period. If you're town, intentionally trying to look scummy and/or be unreadable so you don't get nightkilled dosn't help the town if it just means that some other pro-town player gets killed. If you look scummy and you don't get nightkilled that just lowers the odds of the town lynching sucessfully later on because you're still alive and people still remember you looking scummy.
I also don't like the way Guardian's just stating for a fact that he's not going to get lynched, dispite the fact he been the biggest wagon and that many people are suspicious of him.
I'm not really sure what to think about Guardian in general; some of his play might just be because he's played a lot more scumchat then forum mafia, which encourages a kind of fast-and-loose play, but even taking that into account he's still done several things that look like legitimate scumtells.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Albert: The point is that the town does not want pro-town people to claim. The more power roles get outed, the easier it is for the scum to win. So if you're pressuring someone to claim, and you don't actually think they're scummy, you're hurting the town and helping the scum, which obv. makes you look more suspicious.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Why should who you think is scummy matter?Albert B. Rampage wrote:
Clearly.Glork wrote:
Also, I find it amusing/ironic that you insinuated that I'm "terrible." Clearly, that mafia-hunting award shows that I have no idea what I'm talking about.
But Glork, why would who I think is scummy matter, when there are more experienced players who can more easily find the scum ?
If you're pro-town, then it's your job to figure out for yourself who the scum are. You certanly can't just trust someone else's judgement. Not only that, but the fact you're just following and bandwagoning without doing any of your own anlysis makes you look scummy, because that's a good way for scum to get townies lynched and not be noticed.
unvote:Glorkvote:AlbertI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, from Albert's perspective, the answer would be that if he's town he should say his own thoughts so that we can figure out he's town; if he's scum, he might avoid posting his own thoughts so we can't figure out he's scum and so he can avoid giving hints about his scum partners.
ANd yeah, I could see a possible Albert-Glork connection here. Then again, I could see connections between any of my top 3-4 suspects and I'm sure they're not all scum together.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That's the point, though; if Albert is scum, he might want to lurker so as to not give himself away, but if he's town that argument dosn't make sense.AutumnEvenings wrote:Perhaps because he was trying to give him incentive to post, as opposed to incentive to lurk and/or not contribute?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Albert, Guardian, Glork, and perhaps you. I've noticed so many different possible links between all of you that I'm just confused now.YogurtBandit wrote:
Who are your top 3-4 suspects?Yosarian2 wrote:Well, from Albert's perspective, the answer would be that if he's town he should say his own thoughts so that we can figure out he's town; if he's scum, he might avoid posting his own thoughts so we can't figure out he's scum and so he can avoid giving hints about his scum partners.
ANd yeah, I could see a possible Albert-Glork connection here. Then again, I could see connections between any of my top 3-4 suspects and I'm sure they're not all scum together.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, let me just mention a few of them, since you ask:Glork wrote:Huh. Could you explain those links Yos? My interest has been piqued.
First, Glork attacked MBL for "night choice speculation", and then contradicted himself later. Notable because, in this case, night choice speculation seems to make Albert look bad, because of that odd early post Albert made on the subject.
Glork defended Guardian pretty hardcore early in the game.
Some interesting interactions between Glork and Albert; specifically, Glork FOS's him, jumps on and then quickly off Albert bandwagon, ect.
Guardian says Yogurt "looks pro-town".
Yogurt defended Guardian, with a wierd post that semi-attacks me for the way I attacked Guardian
Wierd two-way back and fourth conversation between Albert and Yogurt
And some other things I can't remember offhand. Not sure what to make of all that, but it's stuff I'll keep in mind once I find out the alignment of soem of those people.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
heh...I tend to go with the more direct method, namely "Do X so we can figure out if you're scum, or else if you don't do X I'll just assume you're scum and lynch you anyway because X is a pro-town thing to do."AutumnEvenings wrote:
Well yes, but you don't say to scum "you should do X so we can catch you." You try to make them do X in other ways.Yosarian2 wrote:
That's the point, though; if Albert is scum, he might want to lurker so as to not give himself away, but if he's town that argument dosn't make sense.AutumnEvenings wrote:Perhaps because he was trying to give him incentive to post, as opposed to incentive to lurk and/or not contribute?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Not quite. It's easier to catch scum if they have to pretend to actually scumhunt, it makes it a lot easier for them to make a mistake and so on, wheras on the other hand if a townie is scumhunting it tends to help the town.
So basically, if Albert is town, I want to pressure him to scumhunt rather then to just follow Glork, because that's better for the town. And if Albert is scum I want to either pressure him to scumhunt so he's more likely to make a mistake and get caught or give away his scumbuddies, or else if he's scum I wouldn't mind just lynching him for not scumhunting.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
MOS: What, exactally, has BM done that's been "more dense then usual" or that was based on bad logic? Be specific, please.
And also, which of BM's votes are you saying were OMGUS votes? The only one of BM's votes that could fairly be discribed as OMGUS was BM's vote against Yogurt, and if someone attacked me with this kind of stuff I'd probably vote them back myself:
Followed a few hours later by:YogurtBandit wrote:As much as I'd like to think BM is scum,I'd rather not vote him..
He could always be Serial Killer,and He did suggest who to kill after he was dead.. But then again, who could tell?
Not enough evidence to vote, but...
FoS:Battle Mage
Just a really scummy looking couple of posts, IMHO.YogurtBandit wrote:
You are right, and after reading his scumtell,The Central Scrutinizer wrote:unvote, vote:Battle Mage
Might as well get it over with today.
Vote:Battle Mage
Might as well join on the Wagon
So, sure, I'm defending BM. Much of what he's said and done this game has actually made a a fair amount of sense to me when read in context, and it seems like everyone is just assuming he's making no sense either becasue they assume he's a bad player or because he's got bad grammer or something. I don't know exactally what it is, but it's quite bad for the town, and probably provides cover for scum as well.
So, if there's something spcific abouit BM's play that you find scummy, say so. But just making vauge comments like "Oh, BM's being more dense then usual" without any actual examples is just incredibly unhelpful, and scummy as well.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That dosn't matter. If you're here to play mafia, then play mafia. Replacements are for when your computer dies and your house burns down and you can't get online for a while, not for when a game gets hard. If you get lynched, you get lynched and try to do better next time; it's just a game.Albert B. Rampage wrote:
A more experienced player, savvier with the playstyles of each person would likely help the town in ways I cannot, and see thing that I do not see.Yosarian2 wrote:Albert: It's not cool to ask for replacement just because you can't find any scum. You're in the game, play it; if you don't re-read the thread, your replacement would have to anyway.
Trying to get replaced in the hopes that your replacement might be able to help your side better is not fair to your replacement, and dosn't help your side anyway, as your replacement would then be in the difficult position of trying to defend things you did. Just read the thread, see if anything looks scummy to you, and do your best.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Billy: Lurker hunting is a pro-town thing to do. Prods and replacements can help, but when it comes down to it, if a person wants to activly lurk and just occasioanly post in unhelpful ways, the only way to deal with is is votes and pressure. Besides, when possible, it's better to deal with lurkers through votes and pressure anyway; the reaction to someone who comes back from lurking because of a lurkerwagon on him is much more informative then the reaction of someone who comes back from lurking because of a mod prod.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Billy: If you want to see why lurker hunting is pro-town, go take a look at MAD mafia to see what happens to towns that don't lurker hunt. If you refuse to lynch lurkers, then the scum will post just barely enough to not get replaced, and then they will win.
Letting people get away with lurking hurts the town. Sure, sometimes scum lurker hunt in order to avoid getting into fights with active players, but that argument pretty clearly dosn't apply here as AE has also been going after active players as well.
And I do think is scummy is for you to lurk, to show up and start posting right after AE attacks and votes you for lurking, and then to say that lurker hunting is "scummy" in response to that. The fact that you posted right after AE is a perfect example of how lurker hunting can make lurkers post and is therefore a good thing for the town.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You forgot one:BillyTwilight wrote:You will never, ever convince me that scum are more likely to lurk than town. If that is the case then lurker hunting is a bad scum hunting tactic.
There are mainly two reasons that people lurk:
1.) They get bored with the game. It's just as likely that this occurs as often with vanilla townie as it does with scum. In fact, I'd argue that its less likely for scum to lurk for this reason, as typically players are more excited and "into" a game when they are scum.
2.) RL issues cause problems with ability to post. Not any more likely to happen for scum than anyone else.
3) Sometimes scum lurk, because the only thing scum really care about during the day is to not get lynched, and a person who's not really saying anything isn't giving off scumtells. If the town's not willing to lynch lurkers, then lurking is a smart move for the scum to do.
Any good town has to do both, both go after lurkers and go after active players who look scummy. It's not an either-or choice; they both need to be done.Yos, I agree, lurking can allow scum to hide. However, a town that permits lurker hunting allowsactivescum to attack players without discretion. In fact, a town that participates in lurker hunting effectively picks the scum's target for them and makes their job easier.
That's only a small part of it. Lurking lowers the town's chances of winning, no matter if the lurking player is pro-town or scum, and I still do think that lurking is at least a minor scumtell; sure, anyone could lurk for whatever reason, but from a stratigic point of view there's always more reason for scum to lurk then for town to lurk, so if someone's lurking, and especally if they seem to be activly and intentionally lurking, I consider them more likely to be scum then someone's who's being active, and so all else being equal, I'm always more likely to vote for someone who is, was, or has been lurking.AE and YoS, I think your real problem against lurking is that it makes the game boring and slow for you, and your right in that. But lurking IS NOT a scumtell.
And in any case, if pro-town people lurk, or semi-lurk, they tend to either not vote much at all, or if they do vote, they tend to just follow the crowd; either way, every pro-town lurker makes it that much easier for scum to control the game. So either way, lurking is bad for the town and the town can never afford to allow it.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yes, sometimes scum do pro-town actions like lurker hunting to make themselves look pro-town. That dosn't make lurker hunting any less of a pro-town action, and it means that attacking someone just because they're lurker hunting, the way both Billy and Andrew are doing, is incredibly counter-productive. And every time Billy or Andrew try to tell people that lurekr hunting is bad, lurking becomes something people are that much more likely to do.Mastermind of Sin wrote:With less sarcasm, though, just because getting lurkers to participate helps the town doesn't make it a protown action. Lurker hunting is one of those actions that scum use to look protown without having to hurt their chances of winning too much.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You can say that as often as you want, Billy, it dosn't make it true. I never said lurking was a strong scum tell, but scum do have more motivation then town to lurk, so it is at least a weak scum tell. You just repeating over and over again "LURKING IS NOT A SCUM TELL" is not going to convince anyone of anything.BillyTwilight wrote: Emphasis mine. What makes lurker hunting less of a pro town action is that lurking ISN'T A SCUMTELL.
And, like I've said, lurker hunting also helps the town by encouraging people to participate more, which helps us find the scum. Besides which, as games go on, they tend to get more and more lurky (even games that start out as active as this one) and I've seen way too many games where the town lose just because the game ground to a horribly painfull halt due to the number of lurkers and the low activity rate. I can link you to some if you want.
So that's three ways in which lurker hunting is a pro-town action; lurkers are more likely to be scum then active players, forcing people to generate real content (which a mod prod will never do, btw) helps us figure out their alignment, and making it clear that being less active then average is a dangerous thing to do helps keep everyone more active which helps the town's chances of winning in the long run. Pro-town people NEED TO POINT OUT WHEN PEOPLE ARE LURKING, and they NEED to put pressure on people to stop lurking. Mods replace people who stop posting completly, but those people aren't really "lurkers"; the traditional definition of lurkers are people who are around and watching but don't say much, and that is a scum tell, and the only way to prevent that is to lurkerhunt.
(shrug) You did call it a "scum tactic", which I would take as at least an indirect attack against the people doing it. By trying to undermine lurker hunting as a legitimate tactic, you make it much easier for people to get away with lurking, which is bad.I kind of take offense to the way you word this as well. I didn't attack anyone for lurker hunting.
No, not directly. That was more aimed at Albert, who I already found suspicious and who is now attacking two people for doing something that I have always considered to be a postive pro-town action.I pointed out that AE was doing it and put her down a point in my book because I don't like lurker hunting and think its a scum tactic, but I never called her scum for it, mostly because I realize that misguided town will lurker hunt as well as scum. I never attacked you over it either.
Perhaps you didn't really want to argue about it, but I can't just let a comment like that go, because if you say that and no one disagrees with you now it makes it easier for people to get away with lurking later. It's important for the town to establish as a whole early in the game that we will not tolerate lurking, with an actual threat tied to that.In fact, I didn't really want to get into this discussion anyway because it's more distraction than anything, thus my post #651, where I said we could talk about if if you really wanted to, but I wasn't going to push the issue at the time.
Well, mod prods can't force people to provide real content though; usually, you see someone get a mod prod, then they show up say "Hey, I'm here, I'm still playing" and then go back to lurking. Or else they semi-lurk for days and thus avoid risk, and then start participating more late-game when scum can manipulate the town more safely and easily. Either way, it dosn't really do the job of the town which is to make people provide real content.Plus, I don't feel that this conversation encourages lurking. On your side, your willing to throw a few votes on a lurker. On my side, I'm willing to have the mod replace or otherwise deal with them. I don't think either of those threats "encourages" lurking.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug) Well, all right. I just get annoyed by the way everyone's been doing that all game, just vaugely stating "BM's being dumb" and then not actually giving any good reasons, when in my opinion BM's making a lot of sense. It just dosn't seem to fit with what's actually been going on this game to me; I tend to think that at least some of the people who were pushing that point of view were scum looking for an easy target, and the reat were making it easy by just going along with it without even asking for any specific examples.Mastermind of Sin wrote: First off, I am flabbergasted that you are calling me scummy for that post. It was not meant to present cases, and I made that perfectly clear. I rarely gave examples for my suspicions of anyone. All I did was copy and paste my notes that I took while reading it, so that you all could see that I had read the thread and was up to date.
You are right, though, everything in your post was general. I was more stating that that vauge "BM is being dumb so let's just lynch him/ignore him" behavior, which I've seen from a lot of people, is unhelpful and scummy, then actually attacking you in specific becasue of that post. I didn't FOS you or anything because of it, it mostly just frustrated me.
Eh...like I said, i think BM was making a rational point there; the way people blindly follow Glork can be bad for the town, and he didn't like it, not even said in a semi-joking fashion by Guardian. And when Guardian ignored him and continued along the same vain, Battle Mage voted him. Seemed like a fair enough reason for a vote to me on page 2 of day 1.BM made a mountain out of a molehill with the "Follow Glork" issue. Made a horrible assumption that not only was Guardian serious about following Glork, but that he was ALSO intending to set up Glork for a lynch tomorrow. Accuses BillyTwilight with throwing a "poorly thought out vote" at him, even though BT had a pretty good reason to vote him early in the game.
Again, it sounds like BM is making sense here, to me anyway. While Guardian was overstating the case for humorous effect, he was probably quite serious about the underlying message, which was "Glork is a good scumhunter and following him is a good idea", and BM thought that attitude was dangerous for the town. If Guardian was being at least half serious, then BM's vote makes sense, at least considering how early in the game it was.
This quote makes no sense at all. Glork said that Guardian was right that he was good at catching scum, but that he was joking about wanting to completely follow Glork in scumhunting. BM is just flailing around to try and turn other people's comments into something that he can treat with disdain.Battle Mage wrote:@Glork-you are making no sense. Guardian made a comment that you were good at catching scum. you say this is TRUE, yet you also say he was JOKING. Please can you make your mind up about what defence you are going for here?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I tend to think BM was not playing "irresponsibly" here at all, in fact, his play in this game so far has been much better then how I've seen him play in the past. But whatever, I'm not going to second guess the mod in the middle of the game, we can talk about it after the game's over.MrBuddyLee wrote:On D1, BM posted no relevant game posts for a week. That's sufficient cause for removal for me if the mod so chooses... if you know you've gotta afk for a week early in the game, don't sign up!
Plus...BM wrote:now hurry up and kill me. i DO hate a dragged out demise...
combined with his self-hammer in another game recently makes him an excellent candidate for replacement on grounds of wrecking/unbalancing the game intentionally. The absence plus the irresponsibility == yay, replacement.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I think I've spent a lot of time discussing who I think is scummy and such. As for the last time I talked about the game, it was yesterday, when I argued with MOS and Billy and mentioned that I thought Albert's actions looked scummy.AutumnEvenings wrote:I'm Watching You: Yosarian2When was the last time you actually talked about the game instead of theory/replacements/lurking/etc.? It's getting somewhat old. I actually had a pretty pro-town read on you and I'll be annoyed if I have to change my mind since there are so damn few of y'all that don't seem scummy.
I always and will always argue about game theory, I think disucssing what the town should do and such is very useful. And as I think I mentioned, Albert's posts yesterday seemed suspicious to me, where first when I said that lurking is bad he said he wanted to see Billy's response, and then when Billy responded he FOS'd me just because he wanted to agree with Billy's comments. Which is another reason discussing game theory is good; sometimes you can get scum tells off of people's responses to the discussion.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
...how would you know what Billy would have done if he hadn't been attacked?Albert B. Rampage wrote:She keeps bringing back the "Billy posted after I voted for him" argument, ignoring that he would have posted anyway.
Granted, we can't know for sure, but it's very, very common that lurkers of either alignment start posting more right after they get called out for lurking. They always claim "Oh, I would have posted anyway", but I usually don't believe them.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yes, he "adressed the issue". He claimed that he would have posted anyway. I don't see why you would believe him, though, especally considering the timing:Albert B. Rampage wrote:Well he has addressed the issue already, and AE shouldn't continue with this WIFOM crap.
Except for one brief "sorry I've been lurking this game" post, Billy didn't really say anything from May 31'st to June 9th, when he posted at 10:39 pm. On June 9'th, at 9:38 pm, AE attacked Billy for lurking.
So I find it bizzare that the conclusion you draw, when person A lurks for 10 days and then posts exactally 1 hour after someone else attackes him for lurking, is "well he would have posted anyway."I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
So, if there's no way to 100% prove if someone is tellign the truth or not in a mafia game, you just assume they're telling the truth?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Because there's no way to prove whether he would or would not, and since he said he would in a direct reply, we should just leave the matter alone.
Besides, that's not really my point. My point is that this post:
Looks to me like you KNOW Billy's telling the truth, when there's no logical way you could possibly know that, unless you're scum and therefore know he's town.Albert B. Rampage wrote:I completely disagree with AE. She keeps bringing back the "Billy posted after I voted for him" argument, ignoring that he would have posted anyway. What is she trying to do ?
Unvote, vote: AEI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No, you said he was telling the truth. The only way I can think of where you would actually know that is if you knew he was town, you can usually assume he's telling the truth, because pro-town people generally don't lie. And the only way you could know if he was town at this point would be if you were scum, as we haven't had a night yet.Albert B. Rampage wrote:I didn't say he is town; what kind of thought process did you undergo ?
Or, alternatly, it's possible you could be trying to defend Billy because he's your scumbuddy, although I don't think that's as likely.
Either way, your post dosn't make sense from a pro-town perspective.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Sometimes I think a person is town. But I would never go so far as to not only assume someone is town based on a gut feeling, and then to teat that gut feeling as it was a fact that everyone should know, and that anyone who dares to question anything that person does is therefore scum. That just dosn't make sense; AE had some rational concerns about Billy, and while Billy's not very high on my list of suspects right now, the "how dare you ask him that question when it's obveous he's telling the truth" reaction from Anthony just seems way, way off.Jack wrote:But mafia can't assume someone is town either. And I said I assumed people are town as town. Don't you?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah, this game has been moving so fast I've not really been able to keep up, espeaclly as every time I try to get caught up the darn mafia site goes down again. I was suspicious of Yogurt, as of 5 pages ago or so. I'll try to get caught up and let you know.AutumnEvenings wrote: Also, it's been nearly a week since you posted,Yosarian2. Given our discussion on lurking and such...well, suffice to say, I'd like to hear from you. In post #551 you said that Yogurt was "perhaps" one of your top suspects (along with Glork, Albert, and Guardian). What do you think of him now? Anything changed your mind about Glork or Albert?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok; actually, now that I re-read, I think I actually did read most of that. I like Billy's case against Yogurt, but I still think Albert is higher on my personal list of suspicion. I especally don't like the last several posts Albert made, like how he first followed Glork to attack Shteven, and his last several posts about Yogurt really sound like scum to me:
Albert B. Rampage wrote:I'm leaning on YogurtBandit, but its all good.
And then he repeated it again that he was "waiting to -1 yogurt". All without actually explaining why he was suspcicios of him or anything useful like that.Albert B. Rampage wrote:
I'll be waiting to -1 you, so I don't put my vote yet.YogurtBandit wrote:
Why?The others have given diffrent reasons, but it sounds like all that you are trying to do is to seem like you arent following anyone while You really are. usually you would say, "I agree" and vote someone, but there it seems like its trying to cover up what you really say. But its all good?? Again seems like a cover up, saying, I wont vote for him yet, I agree, but I wont vote.Its just too contradictory and I really dont like that post.Albert B. Rampage wrote:I'm leaning on YogurtBandit, but its all good.
Yeah,confirm vote:AlbertI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Meh. I kind of expect you to make definitive statements about people without giving your reasons right away. But yeah, him just saying "YB is town" rather then, say, explaining why he dosn't like the YB wagon, just dosn't seem like the kind of thing I'd usually expect to hear from a good guy on day 1.Glork wrote:....why? I say things like that. Do I make your skin crawl, Yos?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
:eyebrow:Glork wrote:
That's probably because you and Guardian are scumbuddies together.Yosarian2 wrote:Well, if it comes down to it, I'd rather lynch Yogurt then Guardian.
You know, Glork, it's comments like that that make me suspect you this game.
Although, of course, just as soon as I made that post, Guardian has to go start looking scummy again, grumble grumble.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hard to explain, but...I'd think you'd know better if you were town then to honestly think that me saying "If it comes down to it, I'd rather see Yogurt lynched then Guardian" actually implies me being scum with Guardian. You've said you'd rather see Guardian be lynched rather then without really explaining it; does that make you scum with Yogurt?
I don;'t know...you could just be a good guy probing for reactions, but it feels more like a scum trying to spread around suspicion.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey