Newbie 848 - The Bunny Mafia Family - over finally!

[Nachomamma8]

Haylen, who ought to know better,

How do you base a case against someone using this kind of logic?

Are you an experienced player? The reasoning above is jibberish!

I'll explain it if you still don't see the similarities.

Uhm... it was you who wanted to draw conclusions based on who bandwagon. If you're referring to bandwagons in the past, why wait until tomorrow to analyse those?

We wait because I'm still waiting for Jase's analysis.

It seems to me you're using two standards. You vouch for talking about who is scum and yet try to make me look bad for suggesting the same thing in the post you're replying to.

We've been having a lot of arguments based on misunderstandings. I read your post as going against a no lynch, not refusing to vote for a no lynch. Understand?

Your argument on the cons of the no-lynch is still wrong, however. And you still haven't answered the questions I asked about it.

[Nachomamma8]

Well, for one I didn't say we should no lynch because of a potential cop. I

just think

we should

probably

no lynch

today or tomorrow

, because once we lynch haylen there isn't anyone who really sticks out, so we

should

then narrow our lynch pool.

The bolded is where you're fence-sitting; it's called disclaimer language. If you're suggesting we lynch today and no lynch tomorrow, that defeats the purpose of this no-lynch. The second part of your post has nothing do do with your first; you're saying we should no-lynch, but only after we lynch Haylen. Explain. Lynch Haylen today, or no-lynch today?

Also, Haylen, what happened to that content you promised earlier?

Seriously Haylen, it's been almost 24 hours for a post you said you were writing "at the moment". Where is it?

Also neto, there probably isn't any cop, as he would have claimed today in all likelyhood.

It's unlikely that the people who a cop investigates would all be nightkilled.

Bwain: We don't really gain much from the speculation about power roles. Somebody used the possibility of an additional investigation as a reason for a no lynch today. That being said, I realized if we don't no lynch today we should do it tomorrow. May as well be today.

Well, for one I didn't say we should no lynch because of a potential cop. I just think we should probably no lynch today or tomorrow, because once we lynch haylen there isn't anyone who really sticks out, so we should then narrow our lynch pool.

Those are your last 5 posts before the one you just made. Let me sum them up for you: "Haylen, where are you?" "Haylen, where are you? (There is no cop)." "There is no cop." "There is no cop, and that's final. We should probably no lynch today or tomorrow." "We should probably no lynch today or tomorrow."

Do you find any of these summations incorrect, or do you feel they misrepresent your posts in any way?

Also, I want your scumlist before I give you mine. I asked first, and I have reasons for wanting it from you first.

[Haylen]

Ok. We aren't lynching ANYONE today. It's poor play. If we lynch today, we could lose. We wont have a chance to no lynch tomorrow cause we'll have already lost.

6 players.
4 town. 2 scum.
Mislynch.
We go into night with 3 town. 2 scum.
Scum kill.
2 town. 2 scum.

The mafia win conditions of newbie games and every other game is that scum win when they are equal to the number of town. 2 town + 2 scum = Town Lose.

Hear what i'm saying? WE AREN'T LYNCHING TODAY.

[Nachomamma8]

Ok. We aren't lynching ANYONE today. It's poor play. If we lynch today, we could lose. We wont have a chance to no lynch tomorrow cause we'll have already lost.

6 players.
4 town. 2 scum.
Mislynch.
We go into night with 3 town. 2 scum.
Scum kill.
2 town. 2 scum.

The mafia win conditions of newbie games and every other game is that scum win when they are equal to the number of town. 2 town + 2 scum = Town Lose.

Hear what i'm saying? WE AREN'T LYNCHING TODAY.

Haylen, who is that directed to?

[Haylen]

EVERYONE.

I don't care if who it is being lynched. It could be VRK, who's lynch you know I fully support, but I still wold not lynch him in the present game situation.

[Bwian]

I'll explain it if you still don't see the similarities.

Now that you mention it I can see the similarities but you lost the meaning when you brought it out of context. 561 is in reply to 559.

The fact that VRK is an experienced player and should know this, but is pushing for a lynch does not escape me.

My use of the word experienced is to quip Haylen.




I didn't leave any question unanswered intentionally. Will have another look at the past posts.

Without comparing the pros and cons or taking a stand which alternative is better, can you admit that there are cons with not lynching?

[Bwian]

EVERYONE.

I don't care if who it is being lynched. It could be VRK, who's lynch you know I fully support, but I still wold not lynch him in the present game situation.

If you want to compare not lynching with lynching a person you must be aware that you're the one closest to being lynched at the moment.

[Haylen]

The only con I can see in not lynching is that we lose a player during the night. However, this means that we have one more confirmed townie and one less person to worry about tomorrow. We also get another day.

NEVER even consider lynching in MyLo without a guilty cop verdict. It's poor player and is likely to cost town the game.

I don't care that I'm the closest to being lynched. At the moment, I see it as my job to teach you how to play in this situation. I'm an IC, I've been in this game situation many times and each time we've no lynched. I'm not going to let this game be the first where we dont.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Spent yesterday traveling to FL. I'll get caught up tonight I hope. Need to go over 23 and 24.

[Nachomamma8]

The only con I can see in not lynching is that we lose a player during the night. However, this means that we have one more confirmed townie and one less person to worry about tomorrow. We also get another day.

NEVER even consider lynching in MyLo without a guilty cop verdict. It's poor player and is likely to cost town the game.

I don't care that I'm the closest to being lynched. At the moment, I see it as my job to teach you how to play in this situation. I'm an IC, I've been in this game situation many times and each time we've no lynched. I'm not going to let this game be the first where we dont.

Now that's been established, who are your top three suspects?

[Haylen]

VRK. Obv.

But I have to finish my analysis to find the others.

Without doing that. Right now I would say, Neto and possibly Jase. But VRK and Neto a lot before Jase.

It would look like this:


VRK-----------------------Neto------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Jase.

[Incognito]

Vote Count #4 of Day 3

Haylen (1) <-~ Netopalis
No lynch (1) <-~ Haylen

Not voting (4) <-~ Bwian, Jase, Vel-Rahn Koon, Nachomamma8

With 6 alive, 4 votes will do it.

Monday, December 7th at 4 P.M. EST.

[Bwian]

Ok. We aren't lynching ANYONE today. It's poor play. If we lynch today, we could lose. We wont have a chance to no lynch tomorrow cause we'll have already lost.

6 players.
4 town. 2 scum.
Mislynch.
We go into night with 3 town. 2 scum.
Scum kill.
2 town. 2 scum.

The mafia win conditions of newbie games and every other game is that scum win when they are equal to the number of town. 2 town + 2 scum = Town Lose.

Hear what i'm saying? WE AREN'T LYNCHING TODAY.

A little feedback on your teaching. Your example doesn't bring differences between today and tomorrow into light. All your examples shows is that the town loses if we mislynch in a MyLo situation.

You don't need to yell. It's enough if one town player doesn't want to lynch today and we won't be lynching scum.

If you've got any good arguments to why not lynching is a better idea please put those forward. This newbie right here that already is rather keen on not lynching but is thinking out of the box trying on alternatives for consideration. If we're all convinced a player is mafia, why not lynch that person today? That would give us a 3 vs 1 scenario and more time saved for finding the second scum. Just thinking out loud here.

[Nachomamma8]

Ok. We aren't lynching ANYONE today. It's poor play. If we lynch today, we could lose. We wont have a chance to no lynch tomorrow cause we'll have already lost.

6 players.
4 town. 2 scum.
Mislynch.
We go into night with 3 town. 2 scum.
Scum kill.
2 town. 2 scum.

The mafia win conditions of newbie games and every other game is that scum win when they are equal to the number of town. 2 town + 2 scum = Town Lose.

Hear what i'm saying? WE AREN'T LYNCHING TODAY.

A little feedback on your teaching. Your example doesn't bring differences between today and tomorrow into light. All your examples shows is that the town loses if we mislynch in a MyLo situation.

You don't need to yell. It's enough if one town player doesn't want to lynch today and we won't be lynching scum.

If you've got any good arguments to why not lynching is a better idea please put those forward. This newbie right here that already is rather keen on not lynching but is thinking out of the box trying on alternatives for consideration. If we're all convinced a player is mafia, why not lynch that person today? That would give us a 3 vs 1 scenario and more time saved for finding the second scum. Just thinking out loud here.

If everyone is confident in one person's scumminess, we might as well. It's not like the death of our most protown will point directly to scum.

[Haylen]

Ok. How to put this. Sorry, it's one of those things where I know that we shouldn't do something, but have difficulty explaining why.

Today is mylo. If we mislynch today, we lose because the the scum will kill tonight making the ratio of scum to town 50:50.

If, however, we no lynch today, the scum will most likely kill and we will only be in LyLo tomorrow. This is better for us because we get another day to talk and more information from the night kill.

It creates a much better situation for us.

The only time you should lynch in MyLo is if there is a guilty cop result, making the person confirmed scum. (Please note, this is presuming the game is a newbie game, and you are sure the cop is sane and there are no framers or anything). Just being convinced a person is scum, does not make them confirmed scum. Thus you should not lynch them.

[Jase]

In Response to Nachos 576

The disclaimer language is just how I talk. Though I suppose it makes it rather ambiguous weather I'm sure of myself or not. I should probably work to correct that, eh? I was not suggesting that we lynch haylen today, and no lynch tomorrow. I previously said that we should do it today as a matter of fact. I didn't say that we should lynch haylen today. Where did you pull that from?

Those summations are mostly accurate, but the fourth should read "There is no cop, and that's final. We should probably no lynch today or tomorrow, and I think I want it today." Also, I wasn't just shouting those posts out, most if not all where in response to somebody talking/asking about the subject. I haven't done much scum hunting today, but hopefully that'll change when I have a secondary suspect.

On an unrelated note. Notice that haylens top three are the three who suspect her most.

Now then, on to my haylen analysis. Expect it in a couple hours.

[Nachomamma8]

I was not suggesting that we lynch haylen today, and no lynch tomorrow. I previously said that we should do it today as a matter of fact. I didn't say that we should lynch haylen today. Where did you pull that from?

You said "May as well be today." That doesn't show any dedication whatsoever, and basically says to me that you wouldn't care if the no-lynch happened today or tomorrow.

When you brought up the possibilty of no lynching tomorrow, I assumed you wanted to lynch someone today because it would be all too perfect if you tried to make us no-lynch both today and tomorrow. And since you've only said Haylen for all of yesterday, it wasn't that hard to determine that you would want to lynch Haylen. After all, who else would you lynch today, Jase?

[Nachomamma8]

Also, everyone here has posted a Haylen analysis. I'm much more interested to hear about your secondary and tertiary suspects, actually. That is, unless your Haylen analysis provides something worth reading...

[Nachomamma8]

EBWOP2:

On an unrelated note. Notice that haylens top three are the three who suspect her most.

Invalid point. Everyone suspects Haylen except for Haylen herself, thus, all of her point against anyone will seem like they're OMGUS.

[Jase]

You're right, it doesn't make a huge difference to me if we no lynch today or tomorrow, because I fully expect halyen to be lynched, and that she'll flip scum. That being said if I thought there would be no benefit at all from having haylen around an extra day I'd be advocating her lynch right now. If by "all to perfect" you mean "hilariously retarded" then I agree.

Also, it's noted that you'd rather see my other suspects before m haylen analysis but I've started writing it already, so tough cookies.

[Jase]

EBWOP2:

On an unrelated note. Notice that haylens top three are the three who suspect her most.

Invalid point. Everyone suspects Haylen except for Haylen herself, thus, all of her point against anyone will seem like they're OMGUS.

But you and Bwain have both been very quiet about it. Thus "the three that suspect her

most

".

[Jase]

HAYLEN ANALYSIS

D1 was full of fluff. With an unexplained vote for nacho, and the infamous unvote before deadline.

D2 Accuses michel of trying to lead the town. WIFOM in iso 12 (Why wouldn't I have lynched nacho if I was scum?). Iso 14 "Do you really trust the mod?". Posts an analysis in iso 17 but of the three suspects she pulls from it only sposh is well reasoned. Iso 26 apparently is where she realized that she shouldn't have unvoted D1, and apparently she needed the wiki to know that, difficult to believe for an experienced player. Her case against VRK seems to be held together by bits of chicken wire and string. Iso 32 dismissive attitude.

D3 Lurking as a defence mechanism, the rest is yet to be seen.

[Jase]

My other two suspects will probably take a good long while to figure out, and I've got things to do. I'll try to get it done later this evening as I don't want to make you wait too long for it, and if I might not be able to do it until Sunday if I don't get around to it today.

[Haylen]

HAYLEN ANALYSIS

D1 was full of fluff. With an unexplained vote for nacho, and the infamous unvote before deadline.

My unexplained vote was clearly a pressure vote. And I've just remembered that I should go back and see who jumped on it!

D2 Accuses michel of trying to lead the town. WIFOM in iso 12 (Why wouldn't I have lynched nacho if I was scum?). Iso 14 "Do you really trust the mod?". Posts an analysis in iso 17 but of the three suspects she pulls from it only sposh is well reasoned. Iso 26 apparently is where she realized that she shouldn't have unvoted D1, and apparently she needed the wiki to know that, difficult to believe for an experienced player. Her case against VRK seems to be held together by bits of chicken wire and string. Iso 32 dismissive attitude.

Yeah, sure...

D3 Lurking as a defence mechanism, the rest is yet to be seen.

Wanna buy a duck?

[Nachomamma8]

HAYLEN ANALYSIS

D1 was full of fluff. With an unexplained vote for nacho, and the infamous unvote before deadline.

D2 Accuses michel of trying to lead the town. WIFOM in iso 12 (Why wouldn't I have lynched nacho if I was scum?). Iso 14 "Do you really trust the mod?". Posts an analysis in iso 17 but of the three suspects she pulls from it only sposh is well reasoned. Iso 26 apparently is where she realized that she shouldn't have unvoted D1, and apparently she needed the wiki to know that, difficult to believe for an experienced player. Her case against VRK seems to be held together by bits of chicken wire and string. Iso 32 dismissive attitude.

D3 Lurking as a defence mechanism, the rest is yet to be seen.

Not very impressive. VRK covered your day 1 analysis in a post of his own:

Haylen, who ought to know better, has dropped votes with no reason (188), continued her predecessor's lurking, and managed to unvote 24 hours before deadline to prevent a quicklynch. Seriously? You're trying to prevent a quicklynch after 20 RL days and 11 pages? What kind of crap is this?

We know your next point, again, from VRK:

No I'm not attacking you. Your attack against Michel, as I stated in this post, was predicated on the fact that you attacked Michel for "using his IC status" to lead the town around. That's not attacking you. That's pointing out the fact that your only points against Michel (see post 364) was that you thought he was trying to lead the town around and that he was forcing others to suspect you, neither of which can be found to be true.

As for your next point, you're taking Iso 14 out of context. She was referring to a quote by our mod about her meta. I took it as a joke, why didn't you?

Iso 17: If you find that action scummy, then why are you doing it yourself? If you don't find it scummy, then why post it?

Iso 26: Why are you holding experienced players to a higher standard? She unvoted me because she had a strong feeling she was town, something she herself stated. Why do you bring the point up without responding to her initial defense? Also, don't attack someone based on their cases when your own is held together with some Walmart glue >.<

D3: You didn't even have to say this. That was NOT an analysis of her day 3 play. You failed to comment on her position on no-lynching, or anything of the sort.

Overall, I'm greatly disappointed by your analysis. Try harder, Jase.