|
In it to win it
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 02:09 |
|
|
make the real game happen
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
hello
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:because it's controversial wait are you actually serious about this or is this a jokeclaim?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
As a general rule Lynch all third parties is a good plan
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
Maybe we should hold off on specific role speculation until we see if he was just kidding or not. If that's his real win condition then he is actively anti town though and realistically is worse than a miller claim
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:Why necessarily? Executing a 3P wastes our only kill opportunity and doesn't advance our goal to eliminate the scum. I know that 3P can go and may often side with the scum, but this early on they're as much a threat if not more so to them than they are to us since we still have a huge numerical advantage. While there are of course exceptions, Lynch All Third Parties is generally a good plan because A) By definition, they don't win with the town. In the case of the win condition Ernie joked about, even if he's scum hunting he's also doc/cop hunting. In that thought experiment, what would you do if he found out who the doc is then outed them in the thread? It's in his best interests obviously, would you want to lynch him then? Then why not lynch him now before that becomes a problem? B) Very often a third party is lies and is actually more anti-town than they claim. C) It's not like the day is wasted, there's still lots of good conversation to scum hunt in. Of course, this is all probably null and void given that ernie claims that isn't his real win condition, so just use this as a ~teaching moment~.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I felt tentative about this earlier. And I still don't know about Cpig, he's the sort of player I have a lot of trouble reading and his voting of Jedit just sort of confirms that for me. But this is a poor defense: This vote is straight scummy vote 101. Handwaving and really bad reach all in one
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:I've already said this so I'll quote myself You should turn avatars on it makes mafia much easier i promise
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
A worthy uhh I really doubt ernie's claim is real and backtracked. That would be an extremely dumb move as a third party, plus the win condition he described would be extraordinarily difficult100YrsofAttitude posted:This is unrelated to the discussion thread and is general meta/experience stuff for me. First you've given accurate advice previously, which I've ignored, and I want to take into consideration this time. 2nd I feel your trustworthy enough, I thought your joke claim was clearly a joke and that we had people tripping all over it is somewhat surprising. 3rd, I still find Cpig's post pretty disingenuous. If you don't want me to listen to you on this case why're you still voting Cpig? Also what're your thoughts on winvirus. How long have you been playing mafia? I'm kinda laughing at the idea that you feel someone is trustworthy like a third of the way through day 1
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Ernie. posted:how long have you been playing? i generally find half the game trustworthy after d1 My first game was in 2008 which tbh still scares me a little bit. I know it's relatively common, but anyone with very strongly felt convictions on day 1 is always silly because there's like 1% enough to go on by this point
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I come and go but I wouldn't call myself completely new at it. I'm a naive optimist by nature and I tend to trust the people I like when playing this game, especially when there's so little to go on such as You hedge your bets by claiming ignorance on CPig before voting, and then jump on a joke comment and include some meta for some reason. It's a very very weak vote that you still felt the need to give yourself a way to backtrack out of. There's nothing inherently wrong with making a vote on a weaker case day 1 given we have less to go on, but giving an unrelated out on your vote is trying to take a stand while not making one simultaneously
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
imgay posted:I don't know who to vote for. ##no hang i like this guy
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
I really do not understand the CPig case he hasn't done a single thing yet but joke around
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Amoeba102 posted:Quandry definitely reads like he believed Ernie's claim. But then he's all about it being faked. He seemed more into exploiting an easy vote than CPig. I'm also inclined to say Ernie is more guilty of exploiting an easy vote than CPig, but less than Quandry is. Please find my post where I believed Ernies claim for me
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Since apparently it's a big point of debate, I was unclear if the ernie claim was real and wanted to wait until he came back before making any real judgements. A few comments about the merits of lynching third parties were more academic than anything
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
AWU's vote on ernie that he made during the fakeclaim and has kept haphazardly defending is really bad.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
What is even going on with this game  Also merk I really disagree with you on glockenapfel. I'd like him to post more but what I've seen feels townie as poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 17:08
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:How does a scum player benefit from clinging to a case that now seems more suspicious than credible? How do you explain his confused posts after Ernie returned to the thread (1), (2)? They read to me as genuine. Amoeba102 posted:Yah, reading AWU is weird. He starts off with a reasonable response - a joke vote. Then he walks himself into it being more of a serious vote, then it's a new reason to vote keep his vote on Ernie (Thinking that Ernie is making a BS case on CPig). It's sounds like weak justification to maintain a joke vote by turning it serious, so as to avoid having to do something else. QPQ, this basically. It's a lot easier to invent weak justification on a vote that already has a bit of momentum both from the thread as a whole and AWU persona;lly than it is to go back into the thread and legitimately scumhunt.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 17:11
|
|
|
Numerik's added win-con actually seems pretty reasonable and, if as described, is not anti-town in any way. He literally only wins if town wins or if he dies killing mafia. Both of those are pro-town TBH I don't feel like any of the people getting really worked up on either side of the numerik poo poo are too scummy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Oh, Jesus loving Christ you are terrible. "It's not fair to say I'm a dumb newbie, I'm a really dumb newbie!" This poo poo though, this poo poo is probably the scummiest post in the whole thread ##Vote Jedit
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Actually I stand by that comment and want to lynch Jedit but for real why are we just overlooking the fact that P-mom literally said he wasn't town aligned? That seems super loving relevant. ##Unvote ##Vote P-Mom
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:18
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:Jeez. Again we have to say that 3P doesn't necessarily mean anti-town. You know what is anti-town? Scum like you! 3P does mean anti-town almost always. Even Numerik who has an additional win condition said he was town aligned. P-Mom literally said that he does not win with the town, which means he likely does not have incentive to look for scum, and possibly has incentive to actively avoid looking for scum
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:i win when scum all eliminated and my alignment isn't called town
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
ecco probably just has a bunch of town aligned teams that all just have different names
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:And that's "literally sa[ying] that he does not win with the town"? Sorry, you're right in that I got a little bit overboard with my word choice. You did however say definitively that you are not town aligned QuoProQuid posted:can we think for a second about why a person might be casual about that kind of information That's the thing though, is that he didn't just volunteer the information in that post. This is the post where he said he wasn't town first, in an attempt to shed light on Numeriks claim: Pinterest Mom posted:that's not the town alignment name This is not a situation where he willingly outed himself, but rather in an attempt to talk about Numerik's claim accidentally gave the fact that he doesn't know what the town alignment name is. This was an accident, not volunteering information
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Quandary posted:ecco probably just has a bunch of town aligned teams that all just have different names I think there was a breakdown in communication because I intended this post to be sarcastic as gently caress. A bunch of different town aligned teams with different names is silly. I think half the people wanting to vote me was on the basis of not understanding this was sarcastic and thinking it was me contradicting myself
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
merk posted:So, PMom, what's your alignment? Waiting with baited breath for this merk. Since the deadline is tonight and no one wants to lynch P-Mom, I'm gonna go look at other people. From what I've seen I remember AWU, Jedit, and 1000yrs as scummy, though I want to relook at them
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
merk posted:His thing about multiple town-aligned+ win conditions. I highly doubt that is the case. Is this about the post that no one seemed to realize was sarcasm?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Someone direct me to a good somber case
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
merk posted:This is going to sound completely backwards, but I'd vote Jedit solely for the post that sparked Quandary's vote. It was a driveby vote on numerrik that didn't do anything. I'll respond to your case in a min but  at you attacking me partially for calling Jedit scummy based on a single post, and then immediately calling Jedit scummy solely for the exact same post
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
My gut says that Somber is a dumb townie as I really doubt scum would put themselves so much in the spotlight for such a dumb reason D1, but I'm confused by the difference in his mind between Numerik and P-Mom. By far the scummiest thing about Somber in my mind is that he bandwagons so drat hard on Numerrik but essentially ignores P-Mom, when realistically their situations are similar.Somberbrero posted:Hey, so it's not a policy lunch. If Numerrik had claimed third-party and been honest about his role, I wouldn't have lunched him on principle. Numerrik is lying though, and a lying third-party is very different from an open third-party. Hence why I've been paying much less attention to Pinterest. Somber, where did Numerrik lie? As far as I can see he willingly claimed, and was far more open and consistent with his role than P-mom has been. I don't understand why Numerrik is worth 3 pages of rants and raves about lynches but P-Mom is written off. I'm conflicted - my gut says he's town, but my mind says that he's scum who got onto Numerik as an easy case and that explains why he has ignored P-Mom when the situations are similar. I'm not sure if i want to lynch Somber, I'll come back to this later and look at others first
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
I'm doubling down on Jedit as scum. He's posted a reasonable amount, but almost all of it is numerik role related, with the exception of his one scumhunting post:Jedit posted:Lest you think I'm tunnelling: other people on my "shopping list" for today are T9L, Pin Mom and Quandary. I already explained the first, but for the other I'm pretty drat sure that Quandary and Pin Mom are not on the same team. I am phone posting right now and will not be around at deadline because it's 3am here, but there's a window between where I should be able to explain in more detail. The aforementioned TNL reasoning is weak, and the reads on P-Mom and I are 100% unfounded. His very next post he straight up asks someone why they're voting me. I'm not sure if he just forgot he thought I was scummy or was looking for reasons or what, but it's scummy as hell to drive by a vote then immediately ask why someone else voted the same post. Jedit posted:Asiina replaced in last night, no need to appear shocked. ##Unvote, ##Vote Jedit
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:Wait Were they confirmed or unconfirmed?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Somberbrero posted:That's not how masons work. Somber, I genuinely do not see where Numerik lied. Can you find the posts for me?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
This is the weirdest loving D1. The mason thing just confuses me, Anon why did you claim it in the first place?Somberbrero posted:
Genuinely not messing with you. As I read it, everything he said about his role was consistent throughout his drawn out claim? I don't see a lie.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 22:07
|
|
Are you just messing with me?
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:Confirmed, unconfirmed, who cares? We are both town. I don't see this logic at all
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
I'm phone posting from a meeting and haven't had a chance to read recent posts, but I will be back probably 45ish minutes before the dl
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
I'm here, what the hell just happened
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 02:09 |
|
|
QPQ I'm already on jeditPinterest Mom posted:PMom<->Anarc->Merk I'm not comfortable voting any of the three people involved here in the next 30 minutes. Need more time to think about what's actually going on
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 04:01
|
|