Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grujah]

Where did I use that logic?

[Galzria]

@Grujah:

Not much to say, but need to clarify that I did NOT say "Vote Pops: Let's see what happens". I said "I'M going to vote Pops, and see what happens", AND, this is 1 post after I laid out my reasons for that vote.

[Dsell]

@Grujah I am agreeing with your last paragraph, basically.

[Galzria]

VOTE: POPSOFCTOWN

I'm interested in seeing where this leads, with my above suspicions as my reasonings.

The "above" reasons were two posts prior (someone snuck in between).

[Axxle]

I do not like the mentality of not wanting to lynch early.  That completely invalidates any pressure we put on people since they'll just know we won't go through with the lynch.

[Axxle]

well, not completely, but significantly.

[Grujah]

@Galz
I don't get the big difference, that's what I mean, maybe it came out wrong but it seems to me both of our "paraphrasings" have the same meaning.
And of course you gave reasons.

[Galzria]

@Galz
I don't get the big difference, that's what I mean, maybe it came out wrong but it seems to me both of our "paraphrasings" have the same meaning.
And of course you gave reasons.

It's substantially different! In the first (not accurate) case, I sound like I'm encouraging others to join in. In the second (accurate) case, I'm stating why I, and I alone am choosing to do something. To look back and say "Well, Galz said to, and his ideas sounded good" is hugely misleading. I absolutely did not say you should as well. Thinking my ideas are good, that's all fine and dandy. Saying I encouraged something I didn't, I take issue with.

[Galzria]

Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you paraphrased me as meaning. It sounds like you're suggesting I gave a command, or encouraged people to follow suit. If that's not what you meant, fine. But if it is, I wanted to clarify, since it's how your paraphrasing SOUNDED to me.

[Grujah]

O yeah, I get it now. I wrote, exactly:
"Vote pops; I'd like to see what happen".

Yeah, it sounds like it is in grammatical imperative. And it is, but wasn't meant as one.
My intention was for it to mean "I vote pops; I'd like to see what happens" or "Voting pops; I'd like to see what happens", and not a command.

[Galzria]

I would like some opinions if people don't mind:

Early on, I was asking most everyone for their thoughts on an early lynch D1 vs stringing it out to draw out more potential information. Everybody I asked was happy and content to give me their feelings, and I can now refer back to that given the situation that we're in. There was, however, one person who have off the feeling of distinctly not liking my question, and disregarded it as useless theory chatter: Axxle.

Now here we are. Axxle has been #5, and #4 on two different bandwagons. This second one is close to critical, but stalling, and we get this gem from him:

"I do not like the mentality of not wanting to lynch early." (post #754).

I'm not happy with my vote on J. The play has been too terrible to be Mafia. But I've had my eye on Axxle ever since he appeared jumpy early, and refused to be scum hunted (actively discouraged the gathering of information).

So, to reduce mass on J, and because this honestly feels better, UNVOTE - VOTE:AXXLE

[O]

There really is no such thing as "too terrible to be mafia".

[theorel]

This post is only in reference to the topic of the moment: jotheonah.

This is in reference to Axxle's question: why not wanting the day to end early?  Because I don't believe a full 8 town members will agree to lynch someone in quick order.  That's 2/3 of the town agreeing to lynch someone on flimsy evidence and poor defense.  I don't think a bandwagon full of townies will naturally develop over the course of two days.  If it's developed its unnatural, which means that there's mafia in there somewhere.  A lynch composed of townies will develop slowly a vote here or there, after another day it may pick up another vote, etc.  That's my opinion, you may disagree that's fine.  I disagree with a lot of your opinions and a lot of pops' opinions.

So, I think jotheonah is innocent because mafia is voting for him.  He could be witch...since mafia has no way of knowing who that is.  Could also explain his survivalist tendencies.  But Witch will be much harder to detect, I'm not really interested in a witch-hunt especially when one may not even exist.  I'm much more interested in mafia, because they're going to give us information we can actually use, like trying to pull together bandwagons of town.

Pressure is totally irrelevant.  We have gotten no information out of jotheonah in this bandwagon, bandwagons will never give you information about the person being attacked.  What it does is give us information about is everybody else.  So, whatever you think jo's shown you you should disregard.  You should look around at everyone else, just as the push on pops got us nothing from pops (except that he's smart enough to keep quiet until it blows over).  So suggesting the possibility of an early lynch for pressure is IMO poor town play.  It reads to me like you didn't understand the strategy articles you linked to before.

Finally, we could kill jo to find out he's town, or we could just accept that townie bandwagons are slower than this, and recognize he's town before we kill him.  Then we can look at the 6(or 7 if you like) votes he's gotten say "there's probably 2 mafia there", and have a 1/3 chance of hitting a mafia.  That's way better than the 1/14 chance that jo's mafia, and the astronomically small chance that 7 townies have all of their own accord said "that's the mafia right there yessir".  So, if you're mafia voting for jo, well your being suspicious.  If you're townie voting for jo, you should be saying "who's pulling my strings."  "Who am I listening to" and "Why am I not being skeptical of all these voices, when I know some of them are mafia".  Keep in mind that for the mafia, there is no chance that jo is one of them.  They already know he's town, and they already know they want to lynch him.  They're just trying to convince you.

[O]

This post is only in reference to the topic of the moment: jotheonah.

This is in reference to Axxle's question: why not wanting the day to end early?  Because I don't believe a full 8 town members will agree to lynch someone in quick order.  That's 2/3 of the town agreeing to lynch someone on flimsy evidence and poor defense.  I don't think a bandwagon full of townies will naturally develop over the course of two days.  If it's developed its unnatural, which means that there's mafia in there somewhere.  A lynch composed of townies will develop slowly a vote here or there, after another day it may pick up another vote, etc.  That's my opinion, you may disagree that's fine.  I disagree with a lot of your opinions and a lot of pops' opinions.

So, I think jotheonah is innocent because mafia is voting for him.  He could be witch...since mafia has no way of knowing who that is.  Could also explain his survivalist tendencies.  But Witch will be much harder to detect, I'm not really interested in a witch-hunt especially when one may not even exist.  I'm much more interested in mafia, because they're going to give us information we can actually use, like trying to pull together bandwagons of town.

Pressure is totally irrelevant.  We have gotten no information out of jotheonah in this bandwagon, bandwagons will never give you information about the person being attacked.  What it does is give us information about is everybody else.  So, whatever you think jo's shown you you should disregard.  You should look around at everyone else, just as the push on pops got us nothing from pops (except that he's smart enough to keep quiet until it blows over).  So suggesting the possibility of an early lynch for pressure is IMO poor town play.  It reads to me like you didn't understand the strategy articles you linked to before.

Finally, we could kill jo to find out he's town, or we could just accept that townie bandwagons are slower than this, and recognize he's town before we kill him.  Then we can look at the 6(or 7 if you like) votes he's gotten say "there's probably 2 mafia there", and have a 1/3 chance of hitting a mafia.  That's way better than the 1/14 chance that jo's mafia, and the astronomically small chance that 7 townies have all of their own accord said "that's the mafia right there yessir".  So, if you're mafia voting for jo, well your being suspicious.  If you're townie voting for jo, you should be saying "who's pulling my strings."  "Who am I listening to" and "Why am I not being skeptical of all these voices, when I know some of them are mafia".  Keep in mind that for the mafia, there is no chance that jo is one of them.  They already know he's town, and they already know they want to lynch him.  They're just trying to convince you.

Yea, lets wait until we get solid evidence and even poorer defense..

Owait, it's day one.

note I actually haven't voted for J though; I don't believe he's mafia, I just don't like your logic either.

[theorel]

Yea, lets wait until we get solid evidence and even poorer defense..

Owait, it's day one.

note I actually haven't voted for J though; I don't believe he's mafia, I just don't like your logic either.

Mafia may or may not have poor defense, as Galz noted previously (in his "non-defense" to my general pops-bandwagon accusation), and I noted there, the defense has no value, regardless of its quality.

So, do you think that a pure townie-driven bandwagon will develop quickly?  Or do you think it's illogical that the assumed mafia involvement indicates a non-mafia target?  I'm just curious what of my logic you dislike.

[Galzria]

@ Theorel:

What are your thoughts ok my post #760?

[Robz888]

Tables, my own thoughts very closely mirror yours.

(Post being made immediately after my last one)

Short analysis on everyone. Don't take my town/scum reads too far, nobody has gotten far enough along either direction I want to condem them or rush to their defence if they were under fire.
Oh, and I'm probably going to use male pronouns for everyone. Apologies if this is incorrect for anyone.

Galzria: Was somewhat distracting early, which was very different from his style (as mafia) in II. I don't have a lot else on him, which suggests there's been nothing I've found really suspicious. I actually have a few notes on him justifying his choices, which is generall good (367, 563). Overall, slight town read.

DSell: All I have on him is that he voted Joth with no reason early in the game. No 'good' or 'bad' posts or the like. No really significant read either way.

Imsomniac: Considering there's been some discussion regarding him lately, I don't have much on him from beyond the start of the game. What I do have doesn't really stick out to me at all. He has one or two good posts I've noted (117). No significant read yet.

Robz: He's playing very similarly to how he did in Mafia II, but also differently. He's made a few good analysis posts, and interestingly ripped apart on of Theorel's posts without being actually suspicious of Theorel (429). Robz, do you have any strong opinion on Theorel now? Slight town read.

Captain Frisk: Frisk's made a few interesting posts, but generally hasn't caught my eye. He made a good post analysing O's behaviour (289), but that's really about it. I know Dominion skill and Mafia skill are two very seperate things, but I've kinda been expecting more from him. No real read yet.

O: Ugh... I stopped taking notes on him around page 10 for a bit, because he was just getting in the way. It's improved now, which is good. The notes I do have a pretty irrelevant in light of everything that's happened (things like, his random votes and stuff). I have yet to see any really good analysis from him.

Axxle: We all saw my scheme regarding Axxle early game, and despite explaining it was only that pretty early, it still somehow managed to generate some discussion about 18 pages later. Go figure. Axxle's been playing a very pro-town game, he linked very quickly to a useful article (97), he's been trying to keep discussion on track and not waste our precious time (133), he even did a very good thing of turning my early statement about him around to generate discussion. After the early game, he's said less, but what he has said I've found was generally useful and on topic. I've noted a few people being suspicious of him, but I haven't seen them really give reasons - which is a shame. Overall, Axxle is still my strongest town read.

Theorel: The main thing that's caught my eye is his defending of Joth (596, 609), which I've already pointed out. His early posts didn't strike me as overly town or overly mafia. Really, it's the defending Joth that's really stuck out to me. Overall I have a slight scum read, but it's going to depend a lot on what/if Joth flips when he's lynched.

Glooble: I have nothing on him at all before post 627. In his posts (especially 663) the main thing I take offence with is the misuse of statistics. In particular, the slippery slope argument he seemed to follow in that there's likely statistically at least one scum in (whichever bandwagon it was I can't remember), therefore, we should try and ferret out the one scum in that bandwagon. As town, we have no way to really know if the four (or whatever) people on that wagon are town or scum, and that wagon existing doesn't really make it more likely there's a scum on it. As mafia of course, he'd know perfectly well there was (no) scum on it, and that'd make it a very good place to divert attention to. He also seems to defend Joth in a deflective sort of way, which I dislike. Overall, a somewhat scum read.

Popsofctown: Ugh. Pops, you're being extremely difficult this game. One part of me thinks you're trying to be 'interesting' so people don't want to kill you, just want you to stick around and see what you do for a while. The other part of me thinks you're playing a deep town game even I don't properly understand. The posts you've actually made I cared to record have been good, and you've defended your opinions well (234, 469, 669). I think I have a slight town read from you... but I honestly don't really know.

Tables: Hi.

Grujah: Early on, I have that Grujah was making a lot of 'information, not analysis' type posts (330 especially). Since then he picked up on one part of Joth's behaviour, but that's about all I have that he did. Also voting with no reason, on a bandwagon no less (383). No strong read, but I have my eye on him. Which I guess means a slight Scum read?

Joth: I've already laid down my views on him. It's the flip-flopping behavior after Grujah's accusation, and the mafia viewpoint things that disturbed me to start, and this recent behaviour hasn't helped much. Scum read.

SwitchedFromStarcraft: The posts I have highlighted from him seem... erratic. Some are for strange voting reasons (599), some for making a long information not analysis post (506), and some for... actually, that's all the posts of his I have recorded. Which isn't particularly good. He hasn't really stood out to me, but I've also noted how often he reminds us he's a newbie. Which means I-don't-even-know-what.

Green Opal: I have basically nothing noted about him. Only that he was the first one to vote Joth recently, although the 2nd and 3rd votes (Galzria and me respectively) were given for totally different reasons. The 4th was Axxle for his vanilla claim. No real read.


And that's everything I've thought so far. Now to reread the probably 50 new posts which occured while I was typing.
(Pre post edit: Oh it's 'only' 16)

As you know, Theorel had a post that was scummy to me (in the way I define scummy), and the Jo defending is a little odd now. But since then he hasn't come across more scummy, at least not in a way I noticed. I could have missed something. I sort of lost track of Theorel, as I realized how badly I was ignoring Green Opal and Glooble. I find Glooble slightly scummy for the same reasons as you. Nothing on Green Opal. Grujah is also a bit of a headache here, with the bandwagoning without explanation and the "impressionable" comment. I HATE statements like that.

SFS really threw me for a loop with his early naivety, and then it developed into this much more robust yet erratic posting. SO, that put me on my guard.

Insomniac seems EXACTLY the same as MII to me (which would slightly acquit him). Galzria I can never tell about. He just always reads town to me, even when I know better.

I wasn't quote so bothered by Pops--I'm still willing to bet there is a method to his madness, and it will pay off later if he is still alive. I couldn't see him behaving this way if he were mafia. I wouldn't want to lynch him for now.

I want to make sure I keep track of CF and Dsell, who have both posted on the somewhat more substantial side of mafia-middleground, without being quite as vocal or meaningful as a few others.

Who does that leave? Oh, Axxle and you. Both of whom I am inclined to trust for now, though my feelings about Axxle went really up and down in MI (and eventually all the way down, as he was indeed mafia). Your thoughts seem to be so much on the same page as me that I can't help but think you're town.

Oh, and Jo. Who I voted for, for the reasons I gave. I have an easier time believing he said those couple things as a mafia rather than as a townie. Thus my vote.

Pre-post edit: And, I don't agree with Thoerel's latest at all. We got a lot of info out of Jo. He came out as VT and asked--asked, mind you--if he should kill himself. A mounting bandwagon caused him to crack, for better or worse.

[Axxle]

@Theorel: We did get information out of him with the bandwagon:

A similar philosophy applies to being the victim of a lynch.  While it does hurt to be the victim of a lynch, you can easily have an overall positive impact on the game as a lynch victim. 

This is something I've been thinking a lot about. I went into this game thinking "I'm not just town but VT, I'm totally expendable, so I'm just gonna say whatever cause I don't care about being lynched. But then when people started voting for me I defaulted to my OMG don't kill me mindset, which I guess is a pretty natural way to feel? Only, that mindset made more people think I was scum than anything else I'd done. So now that I've taken my cooldown time, I think I'm OK with being lynched if that's the way things are going to go.  After all, I already survived a whole game of Mafia and I'm currently playing in another one. All other things equal, I'd rather give the newer players a longer game.

One thing I'll say, being honest, is that I think the thing in this game I'm best at (or at least feel the most confident about) is defending myself, so I tend to jump into that. It's easy for me to pick apart other people's arguments. I did that all the time in high school debate and college philosophy courses and really loved doing it. But I'm just not as good at scumhunting or at constructing a good argument in the first place.  So I play to my strengths and it inevitably makes me look scummy.

Question for pops:

Given how hilariously I've blundered everything up, is a self-vote for me at this point a pro-town move in your eyes?

for starters.

refused to be scum hunted (actively discouraged the gathering of information).

When did that happen? I refuse to be accused of actively discouraging information gathering.  But if you're referring to the whole "Theory not game" talk then I have nothing more to say except that I don't consider it useful information.

[theorel]

@Galz:
I agree.  I think Axxle is suspicious...he was the most suspicious to me of Pops' voters in the first read-through (as noted in my immediate post). but went down in suspicion on a reread. 

Obviously from my previous post I take issue with Axxle's desire to lynch early, and his desire to apply pressure in general.  But I won't lynch him for disagreeing with me on how to play.  I do disagree that jo's play is "too terrible to be mafia".  As noted, I think all defensive posts are essentially null when hunting for mafia, so jo's posts are as well. 

In fact given the above: I would like to hear from O and Axxle, since you guys seem to be all for an early end to Day 1.  Why the rush?  I've explained why I think early lynch is bad: (i.e. it's very probably mafia-driven (i'd say like 90%), so why not stop before we lynch a townie, and just pretend like it already happened?)  Why do you think an early lynch is good.  Do you really think that 8 townies will hit mafia in 10 hours?  Do you really think that defensive posts have merit as scum-tells?

Pre-edit: directed at Galz's post to me from 2-back at this point.

[Galzria]

I do not like the mentality of not wanting to lynch early.  That completely invalidates any pressure we put on people since they'll just know we won't go through with the lynch.

Apparently those "theory" issues that you discouraged people taking a stance on DID matter to you. Just not until a time arose that it benefited you to talk about them. From post  #100 to #200, those were exactly the feelings and stances that I was asking about, that you wrote off as irrelevant.

[theorel]

given the two replies between...I think something should be said re: jotheonah cracked which gave us info:

I disagree...and I will site: Day 1 pressure recipients: TINAS cracked (town), Morgrim cracked (town), Galz cracked (town).  jo cracked...really, you really think that's mafia?

I guess that must be the main difference between us, I see value in the discussion around jo (it's value-rich), you see value in the mad ravings of a nearly dead-man (jo).  Now, he cracked pretty easy, but so did morgrim.  IMO This is EXACTLY what mafia wants. 

So, for all the jo voters, IMO either you're mafia, or you're listening to what they want you to hear.

[Galzria]

@Insomniac

"It seems to me that the longer day 1 is drawn out, the more it helps the town"

Could you elaborate? I'm inclined to disagree to an extent. I don't think we should lynch quickly, but confusion is the tool Mafia use best, and the longer the have to burrow their holes, make friends, and divide, confuse, and separate townies the better it'll be for them. People can be blind to their beliefs, and it becomes increasingly easy for Mafia to exploit that.

An example of exactly that question that you then wrote off as useless theory talk.

[theorel]

And I really have to go to bed.  I'll review this all tomorrow...as pops noted earlier, jo's bandwagon is much richer with info than his was (mostly because jo gave the mafia an excuse to jump all over him).

[Dsell]

The play has been too terrible to be Mafia.

The problem with this is that I don't think jotheonah is actually a terrible player. It's definitely looked like a series of blunders, but the more I read things like this...

Also, incidentally joth has a very informative wagon that depends on his flip.

That's by design.

...the more I believe he thinks he is in control of his game. So on that front I agree with Robz and, I guess, O.

[Galzria]

Anyway Axxle, not much benefit debating you, I'll never convince you. I am interested inn other  people's thoughts on my post #760. The "early discouragement", as I mentioned, is between posts #100 and #200, for reference.