Mafia Round 3

Post new topic   Reply to topic

Page 4 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by KevinSafeSpacey on Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:08 am

Ghosty- time and content length doesn't matter much to me. I guess I should have specified that I expected more depth from your post than what you initially delivered. I get that people are busy (I work 2nd shift). We were merely pointing out that it's rather odd you did so because that's just not how you usually roll.

GM, yeah, bro. This has been an exciting opener but we're consistently not hearing from a few individuals. Frustrating to say the least and we currently have nothing concrete to go on.

I think what we need is a little more feedback from other people. We do have a surprising amount of what I would consider "Active" participants. I think this may be worth noting too. Maybe the quiet ones are scum? But to be frank, I don't think that's the case. In my opinion, they are more likely the irrelevant roles either reading posts and completely lost in which direction to turn or they haven't been checking this out. It's a shame because I think this is the fastest a game has taken off in my experiences.
avatar
KevinSafeSpacey

Join date : 2017-07-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hans Gruber on Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:02 am

First of all, my vote no longer has any right to be on Ralphie. Vote to Lynch: Hugh_Jorgan. Refusing to answer my question is very brazen, but what I find even more suspect is your attempted mudslinging of me via avatar choice. If you think I'm scum, why aren't you voting for me? And if you don't think I'm scum, why didn't you at least attempt to answer my question? Now, we're not Best Friends Forever (tm) or anything- I only just met you- but even so, you don't seem to be a man who would shy away from open conflict, unless you were Mafia trying to stay out of the fray.
Now, a brief bit of autistic screeching.

Ghosty, the exact phrase that gets my goat is this:
Ghosty wrote:It's fine though, if Green Machine really is scum I'm sure we'll accidentally lynch him a few day phases down the line despite being fooled into thinking he's town, on account of the actual town aggressively trying to throw the game away. /s
The /s tag is all well and good, but I still don't follow what mindset you could be in where you assume the town would fail this horrifically, even as a joke. And you can't blame last game for this, because every lynch last game was very justifiable. KSS should never have been lynched, but it was inevitable with his refusal to mount even a basic defense. I also found it odd you referred to "the actual town", seemingly excluding yourself. Now, I didn't see anything in your dictionary of a post that I really disagreed with or found scummy, so for now I won't be gunning for you. But don't worry. You're still in my top 3 scum suspects <3.
avatar
Hans Gruber

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hugh Jorgan on Tue Sep 19, 2017 12:18 pm

Hans, i am not one to throw names out without somthing to back it up but if you instst......

Initialy i would rank ghosty at the top of the scum list. His most recent post and led me away from thinking scum. For now ghosty remains on the top of my list.

Sisco would be my number 2 suspect. No post......nothing to go on.... scum all the way.

Top 2 townies
#1 Hugh Jorgan i have commited no crimes other than still trying to identify myself and play style.

#2 Hans
Believe it or not i think you are town even though you have singled me out. I dont believe you are as scummy as your post tend to read.


Others on my watch list
Dsilv. Quiet and not alot to go on. I will watch and analyze closely

Mack coffins. Interesting behavior could swing either way.
avatar
Hugh Jorgan

Join date : 2017-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hugh Jorgan on Tue Sep 19, 2017 12:21 pm

Forgot the most important part.

Vote to lynch Sisco
avatar
Hugh Jorgan

Join date : 2017-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:49 pm

What in the name of the dragonballs is this latest nonsense by Hugh Jorgan? His top two town are himself and the guy he suggested had a scummy avatar in his previous post? He votes to lynch his second scum suspect instead of the one at the top of his list? He singles out Sisco for not posting when THR has also not posted? I'm already voting to lynch this guy, so now I am putting forward a motion to lynch him using barbed wire.

Speaking of THR, he still has no avatar and hasn't logged on since his confirmation post. Someone who knows him should make sure he's still on board for playing.
avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:13 pm

Hans Gruber wrote: Ghosty, the exact phrase that gets my goat is this:
Ghosty wrote:It's fine though, if Green Machine really is scum I'm sure we'll accidentally lynch him a few day phases down the line despite being fooled into thinking he's town, on account of the actual town aggressively trying to throw the game away. /s
The /s tag is all well and good, but I still don't follow what mindset you could be in where you assume the town would fail this horrifically, even as a joke. And you can't blame last game for this, because every lynch last game was very justifiable. KSS should never have been lynched, but it was inevitable with his refusal to mount even a basic defense. I also found it odd you referred to "the actual town", seemingly excluding yourself.

I'll defend Ghosty here. The town did really poorly last game. The tracker got lynched day one. Days two and three went well, but that's because I got lucky with my one-shot of cop and then one of the scum botched a roleclaim. I have been criticized for calling for a mass roleclaim on day 4, but I did so because I had roleblocked someone night 3, and since the kill still happened that person was basically confirmable as town. I knew there would likely be either one too many power role claims or one too many vanilla town claims, and I was right. Unfortunately the only person confirmable as town from the mass roleclaim is the same person I had confirmed by my roleblock, so my strategy didn't pay off. But - inexplicably - the town continued to treat that guy as a major scum suspect even with that double confirmation. So I see "the town aggressively trying to throw the game away" as a perfectly defensible statement. Also "the actual town" is excluding me, not himself, since that whole joke was predicated on my being scum.
avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:43 pm



avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Like9Orphans on Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:45 pm

Glad you picked up on that GM. You should look over my profile as well. Edits have been made. I decidedthat my birthday will be every day now since I can do that. WORSHIP MY DAY PF BORTH AS IF I WERE A GOD!!! Please...

On a serious note I am now going to put more pressure on the man who I suspect because not only was his post not addressing most of the accusation he had been given but also the points that GM made about him voting to lynch sisco instead of his "suspect". I don't get the feeling he is reading the posts. thats either a newb move or a scummy move, and I don't think that there is any real difference currently until he addresses the concerns that we have about him.

Vote to lynch: Hugh Jorgan
avatar
Like9Orphans

Join date : 2017-06-29
Age : 99
Location : Outer space

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by LiteralGrill on Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:47 pm

Now especially for you GreenMachine:

Green Machine wrote:We still haven't heard word one from THR or Sisco. LiteralGrill... continued silence will quickly shoot these three to the top of my scum list.

It never hurts to be calm and calculated, waiting to notice moments where something of actual note happened because as was said quite well just a bit earlier:

KevinSafeSpacey wrote:Frustrating to say the least and we currently have nothing concrete to go on.

Most everyone talking thusfar has simply thrown around small and random accusations based on personalities and knowledge of players previously. I'm new, and lacking that it doesn't hurt to sit around and watch a bit does it?

Though I must admit, I'm not a big fan of how erratic it seems Hugh Jorgan is in general, even without knowing you all as well being a bit new to the group he's rubbing me the wrong way.

Vote: Hugh Jorgan
avatar
LiteralGrill

Join date : 2017-09-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hugh Jorgan on Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:59 pm

Green that is an awfully agressive response to an innocent post.

Those of you that are following the scums lead. I feel sorry for you. You have all been duped.

FREE HUGH!!!!!
avatar
Hugh Jorgan

Join date : 2017-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by KevinSafeSpacey on Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:22 pm

Hugh- nothing personal here but you've managed to climb my ladder of suspects fast. You haven't been defending yourself and you claim we are following the scums lead. We need evidence, Mr. Jorgan and until we get any I'm going to have to hop off my no vote train. It's time I vote without screeching.

Vote To Lynch: Hugh Jorgan

Literalgrill- I don't think it's bad you've been sitting back and analyzing the game. I was sort of referring to our silent players.

Mack- you've gone quiet, too quiet. I'm growing suspicious because you started rather adamant and then backed off like we are all lepors. Are you in cahoots with Jorgan?
avatar
KevinSafeSpacey

Join date : 2017-07-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hans Gruber on Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:38 pm

I feel pretty good about where I have my vote, but there remain at least 3 more Mafiosos for us to track down. With that in mind, I need some help in filling out my gradient, so I will be asking some questions to everyone.

First of all, there are obviously the two players that haven't posted yet. I want to hear something out of them. I particularly want Sisco's opinion of having a non-RVS vote cast on him before he has even posted.

Hugh, in the time between your most recent post and my writing of this one, three more players have voted to lynch you. If you had to choose between those three players (Literal Grill, Like9orphans, and KevinSafeSpacey), which would you say are the most suspicious to you?

LiteralGrill and Ghosty, if you would be so kind, post the two players you think are most likely to be town and the two most likely to be scum. Or three, preferably.

L9O, I'll pose you two demands polite requests, but the second one will be easy. The first is the same thing I asked of LG and Ghosty: your top two reads of each category. The second may well be answered in your response to the first. How do you feel about Otaku's play this game compared to the last? As his former scum partner, you should have some good insights into any differences in his play from last game to this one.

GM- I don't want to get sidetracked into a three-way screechfest, so I won't contest your defense. That being said, are you convinced that Ghosty is town, or are you merely defending him against that particular claim?

KevinSafeSpacey- You mentioned that you thought Otaku was shady due to backing off after posting. Well, he's posted several times now. Did his posts change your opinion about him?

Mack_Coffins- You haven't posted anything of significance since RVS ended. How do you feel about this burgeoning bandwagon?

Nihil- I think just about everyone has answered your question about how they feel about GM's Miller claim. Are there any responses to this question that stood out to you as particularly forced?

Otaku- Ghosty wrote half a book about you in particular, so there should be plenty of material for you to choose from for this question. I need you to find two things in that text- Something insightful you agree with, and something plausible that you nevertheless disagree with.

DSilv- Last game, you replaced in halfway through and immediately found the scum, being the first and nearly the last one to do so. Ultimately, you let him slip away, but your initial logic was sound. Do it again this game, if you would. Which player would you say is not getting enough suspicion cast upon them?

Ralphie- I'll request your top 2 players of each alignment, but I think you may have already given your top two scum players in Hugh and Otaku. Am I correct in saying that? If not, please let us know.
avatar
Hans Gruber

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:46 pm

I'm not convinced Ghosty is town. I don't have him leaning over way or the other currently. I was defending him from that particular argument because I don't think it is sound.
avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by LiteralGrill on Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:18 pm

Hans Gruber wrote:LiteralGrill and Ghosty, if you would be so kind, post the two players you think are most likely to be town and the two most likely to be scum. Or three, preferably.

Sure, that seems reasonable. I'll say right now that honestly, there's little tangible evidence to go about with either way so these aren't exactly wonderful but:

Town:
- Green Machine. I mean, if we all DO think he's the miller, shouldn't this be basically everyone's number one? ;P

Scum:
- Hugh Jorgan. Like I said earlier, it's not much to work with but there's just erratic behavior there honestly. Not much to make a read on, but not great to have around in general.

But wait, didn't he ask for two you all ask? Of course he did I'm not blind I'd say back. But truly, there's not enough to go on personally for me to even attempt to name more. All that happens if I do is some more random accusations thrown at my way, or speculation as to why I already like someone. We have such paltry evidence as is, though I'll say Hans, it seems you're trying to manufacture some.
avatar
LiteralGrill

Join date : 2017-09-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hugh Jorgan on Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:41 pm

Cant get this to quote anyone from my phone. But hans of thos 3 i would say L90 is the most suspicious.

I havent counted up the votes but i know im close to being lynched Thanks for having me this round whatever happens. Learned alot and had fun.

avatar
Hugh Jorgan

Join date : 2017-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Arc on Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:31 pm

OFFICAL VOTE COUNT: 8 TO LYNCH
Hugh Jorgan: 4-Green Machine, Hans Gruber, Like9Orphans, KevinSafeSpacey
Ghosty: 1-Nihil
Mack_Coffins: 1-Like9Orphan
Sisco: 1-Hugh Jorgan
avatar
Arc

Join date : 2017-06-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Nihil on Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:49 pm

Alright, I figure there's probably enough information out there for me to try to start piecing the puzzle together.

First, regarding Hans' question in response to my question: Obviously, the most suspicious answers to my question were the non-answers. We still have two people who haven't posted. None of the answers seem particularly forced; the problem is that many of the later answers may well be parroted, however. Some of the earlier posters were analytical enough that anyone with a basic understanding of reason could mimic the line of thought well enough to fool someone not intimately familiar with the personalities of those involved. I will incorporate any information I think can be gleaned from the answers in my overall analysis.

Now I will proceed to go character by character, in the order they are listed no the first page:

Hans Gruber:
Hans:
Hans has generally been forthcoming with information, and has been attempting to solicit more information. Either that, or he has been playing a very skillful scum game. Given that he is among the upper echelon of experienced players, I'm not willing to completely clear him without an uncontested claim and evidence behind it, essentially. Not that I am at all suggesting a role claim at this point. Just saying that the more experienced the player, the less you should take on face value.
That said, his posts have been very informative, and he has been very good at pressuring others into defending themselves.

Ghosty:
Ghosty:
Much of what I stated regarding Hans can likewise be applied to Ghosty, as an experienced player with a very information-heavy playstyle. While I do think the brevity of his earlier posts is a bit suspicious, he has since begun his long post style again, and I believe his excuse of being busy. Generally, I don't think that he is scummy at the moment, although I'm still keeping my eye on him as an experienced player.

Like9Orphans:
Like9:
So, Like9Orphans is someone I very much have my eye on at the moment. He seems a bit too fond of the "autistic screeching" style of play this game, which was fine during the RVS, but has continued for a bit too long. He has at least been generally responsive to posts addressing him, and to the game as a whole. But I would like to see more from him in the way of analysis.

GreenMachine:
Green:
GreenMachine is probably my first pick for town at the moment. His claim of Miller is pretty much exactly how I would expect him to act upon being assigned Miller. He has generally continued acting like a town, just like he acted in the last game. Ironically, he is the player about whose role I am most certain, but also about whom I have the least to say.

LiteralGrill:
Grill:
Grill is pinging REALLY heavy on my scumdar at the moment. His first post of the game came multiple pages in, and straight admitted to lurking. This seems to me to be a noobish mistake, but a noobish SCUM mistake. Lurking is advantageous to scum, and either Grill doesn't understand that, or understands that perfectly but is too noobish to come up with a good excuse for it. His grand total of three posts have contained nothing to convince me that he is town, and have contained plenty to lead me to think he's scum.
Regardless, a message to him from me in case he really is town: One does not learn mafia play by lurking IN A GAME IN WHICH ONE PARTICIPATES. The town of mafia wins by prevalence of information. You need to provide it. You need to solicit it. You need to parse it and analyze it. You cannot simply sit back and wait for it, or you'll find yourself picked off one by one by silent scum, no wiser as to friend or foe.

Nihil:
Nihil:
I'm town. I'm not about to give a detailed analysis of myself.

Otaku1998:
Otaku:
Otaku has been a bit of a mixed bag this game, but I don't find him as suspicious as Ghosty seems to. Most of his information that he has provided is indeed rather obvious, but I will attribute that to lack of time at the moment, as I do know for a fact that he has been rather busy. What he has provided all seems at least a genuine attempt to give something. So for now I'm leaning slightly town on him.

KevinSafeSpacey:
KSS:
I will say, the lack of autistic screeching is refreshing. I see you have at least somewhat learned from your mistakes of last game. Perhaps this time if you're accused you'll attempt to defend yourself, especially if you're a goddamned power role. An investigative power role. Basically, keep up the good work.

Sisco:
Sisco:
Complete lack of posts. Either scum or useless. Either way, I advocate for lynch if it doesn't change.

Dsilv87:
Dsilv:
Dsilv has generally been pretty helpful this game, and is acting a good bit like he did last game after he replaced in. I'm leaning town for him, despite his paucity of posts. At least what he has posted has been forthcoming. I expect him to become more active, and if he doesn't I'll start casting a more suspicious eye on him.

THR:
THR:
See Sisco, supra

Mack_Coffins:
Mack:
I find this one to be slightly suspicious, mostly in terms of a sudden change of attitude within the thread, followed by silence. His first posts were nothing but jokes, which is perfectly acceptable in the RVS. He then posted one post of any content at all, and nothing since. It pings my scumdar, but only slightly.

Hugh Jorgans:
Hugh:
Oh dear, where do I start with this one. I suppose I'll begin by saying that unless he changes his ways very, very soon, I'm in favor of lynching him regardless of his alignment. He is either a terrible scum or a terrible town. He throws around accusations, while urging that we not throw around accusations. He posts nothing and acts like he has cleared his name. He implies that we can't post until we have concrete things to go on, seemingly without realizing that we can't have concrete things to go on until we post. Defend yourself. Now.

ralphie27:
ralphie:
Other than the debacle about real identities, ralphie hasn't really done anything to tip my scales either way. He doesn't seem like the most experienced player by far, but I think he's trying. I await more from him.

So yeah, some of these reads are more detailed than others. I put that towards lack of information having been put forth, and the impropriety of analyzing myself.

We all need to keep talking and putting forth information.

For my last bit, I think I'll get around to taking my joke vote off now.

Vote to lynch: No one.

I'm not casting my vote yet, because I want Hugh Jorgan to give some real attempt to defend himself. Get to it.
avatar
Nihil

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Otaku1889 on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:41 pm

I’ll go ahead and post some stuff addressing concerns that have been brought up in regards to me (specifically GM and Ghosty’s), as well as my top two town and scum players.
Defense:
-Nonsense question and the RVS portion: I feel my nonsense question was justifiable in both timing and content. Ask yourselves this: has that question distracted at all from GM’s claim? I would say no. The question is innocuous enough that it never halted serious discussion. My primary goal in posing that question was to incite any form of discussion, however small. It helps find out who’s invested enough to post, but either doesn’t know what to say (understandable for new players) or else wants to keep their head down (scum).

-As for my statements on Hugh and how that relates to the above, context is key. Calling for serious discussion is admirable, but said call was immediately dismissed in the same post by essentially saying “Let’s not talk about nonsense; instead let’s talk about nonsense!” Contradictions are a good indicator towards scumminess, and I wanted to point that out. I do see your (GM’s) point in how my calling that out might seem hypocritical given that I posted a relatively nonsensical question after, but I never said that non-serious questioning should’ve ended at that point, merely that it would’ve been a respectable thing to call for.

-Recapping past behaviors: I elected to not give my opinions on how past behavior might be relevant to current behavior largely because I felt giving a non-opinionated recap would help newcomers come to their own conclusions before being influenced further by theories. A good teacher doesn’t teach you what to think, but how to think for yourself. Side note: Dsilv inspired me to offer a recap when he asked if we could refer to past games. I realized new players would be at a disadvantage in regards to general knowledge, and I’m the kind of guy that prefers everyone be on the same playing field (Hence, recaps as objective as possible).

-Following the leader: I’ll concede that my readings of Ghosty and Hugh were probably too similar to Hans’, but in my defense, I do think that I made enough differences to say that I wasn’t just blindly jumping on a bandwagon. Firstly, in regards the Ghosty read, whereas Hans was more concerned with his “artificial” language, I was more concerned by the lack of questioning to prompt discussion. In regards to Hugh, I made a note of the contradictory nature of his call to action/continued joking, which wasn’t brought up before. While we’re on this subject, I’ve alluded to this before, but I think Ghosty redeemed himself with his novella of a post. Waiting for a bit before publishing an essay is very much part of his play-style, so I guess the lack of quick questioning is excusable.

Readings:
So, before I begin, I’m going to leave out Hugh Jorgan. He’s top of my scum list, but anything I could say about him now would be redundant. Instead, I’ll focus on my second and third choices for scum.
-Green Machine: Town. Just flat out. I’ve outlined before that I don’t think he’s done anything scummy, and that policy-lynching might be a waste of the town’s time and focus. Further, everything he’s done in this game is in-line with the play-style he used last time, where he was pro-town.
-Hans Gruber: Town. He’s been aggressively pursuing leads, particularly with irregularities in Ghosty’s posting, and with Hugh for obvious reasons. While aggressive behavior could be scummy, his most recent posts wherein he poses questions for everyone feels more town to me.
-LiteralGrill: Scummy. Thus far, LiteralGrill seems to fall under the “invested enough to post, but prefers to keep their head down” category, which as I’ve stated before, is either an inexperienced player thing, or a scum thing. I’m leaning towards scum right now due to their most recent post, wherein their town/scum reads are just restating the majority consensus.
-Mack Coffins: Scummy. In a similar situation to LiteralGrill, the main difference being that he hasn’t posted since things became serious. This mostly seems like a joke thing, but it’s pseudo-notable that his last action was pointing a finger at L9O, I guess. Otherwise I’ve got nothing else to work with with him…
Other reads:
-Like9Orphans: The problem with L9O is that he’s really good at hiding his scumminess. He made detailed and insightful, yet not altogether groundbreaking posts last game… Which is what pretty much any townie would do if they weren’t leaders in the discussion. So yeah, it’s going to be interesting trying to keep an eye out for anything unusual from him.
-Sisco and THR: I’m assuming from the lack of posting that these players aren’t scum, and don’t have major roles, elsewise they would’ve been invested enough to make some appearance by now…

Not going to vote on anyone right now. I would vote for Hugh, but I kinda want to keep the day running longer. More time means more info, after all.


Last edited by Otaku1889 on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:43 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Readability)
avatar
Otaku1889

Join date : 2017-07-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Ghosty on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:44 pm

For KevinSafeSpacey:

KevinSafeSpacey wrote:Ghosty- time and content length doesn't matter much to me. I guess I should have specified that I expected more depth from your post than what you initially delivered.

Okay, that's fair and reasonable, I think. Considering my own post history, I understand why I'm taking some fire for those opening posts. That aside though, if time between posts doesn't matter to you much, why did you jump on Otaku1889 for letting a mere day pass since his post near the top of page two without posting again? You claimed he was part of your top two scum reads because he "posted in order to incite conversation and then stepped back and hasn't said jack since". There are reasons to be suspicious of Otaku, certainly, but I don't think a 24-hour lapse in posting is one of them.

KevinSafeSpacey wrote:I get that people are busy (I work 2nd shift). We were merely pointing out that it's rather odd you did so because that's just not how you usually roll.

That's understandable, but the reason for my first post being short was because it was late at night (I didn't want to try to make sense of everything while tired) and the reason for the second one being short is also because it was late at night (less late than before but this time on a work night) when I started typing it up and I couldn't spare enough hours for a full-length post on account of having been busy that day.

On the subject of being busy, I will be preoccupied tomorrow and probably won't be able to post that day.

For Hugh Jorgan:

Hugh Jorgan wrote:Initialy i would rank ghosty at the top of the scum list. His most recent post and led me away from thinking scum. For now ghosty remains on the top of my  list.

Sisco would be my number 2 suspect. No post......nothing to go on.... scum all the way.

Hugh Jorgan wrote:Forgot the most important part.

Vote to lynch Sisco

Okay, so why exactly is it that if I've led you away from thinking I'm scum you still think I'm the scummiest player, except evidently not more scummy than Sisco? I'm not going to place a vote on you yet because I don't want to accelerate a day phase to its end when we still have plenty of IRL days (a week's worth, for anybody not keeping track) to keep discussing things, but as others have mentioned this is really odd behavior. Like, REALLY odd. For the time being, you're at the top of my scum reads and if things don't change you can probably expect a vote from me as we get closer to the deadline.

Now, there are only 4/8 votes on you necessary to trigger a lynch, so you're not out of the game yet. If you can reasonably address some of the issues that have been raised about your behavior, you might yet survive. A good place to start would be by answering the following questions, I think.

1: Why vote for Sisco, instead of me (your supposed top scum read) or THR (another equally absent player)?
2: Was your initial (current?) top scum read of me predicated entirely on the basis of my short posts earlier in the game, and if so, how significantly has my behavior following after that point in time and up to the current point in time change that read?
3: If you were going to list someone besides yourself in your top two town reads, who might it be?

For Hans Gruber:

Hans Gruber wrote:The /s tag is all well and good, but I still don't follow what mindset you could be in where you assume the town would fail this horrifically, even as a joke. And you can't blame last game for this, because every lynch last game was very justifiable. KSS should never have been lynched, but it was inevitable with his refusal to mount even a basic defense. I also found it odd you referred to "the actual town", seemingly excluding yourself. Now, I didn't see anything in your dictionary of a post that I really disagreed with or found scummy, so for now I won't be gunning for you. But don't worry. You're still in my top 3 scum suspects <3.

Green Machine has given pretty much exactly the response to this that I would, and is correct that "the actual town" excludes him because him being scum is the hypothetical the joke is hinged on.

For LiteralGrill:

LiteralGrill wrote:Though I must admit, I'm not a big fan of how erratic it seems Hugh Jorgan is in general, even without knowing you all as well being a bit new to the group he's rubbing me the wrong way.

Vote: Hugh Jorgan

We get very picky about proper format for votes around here, and if you look at Arc's vote count you'll probably notice your vote isn't counted. The proper format for that vote is "Vote to lynch: Hugh Jorgan" and your vote probably won't be counted unless you type is like that.

Also, Vote to lynch: No one, just so it's clear that I was not making a sneaky attempt at placing a stealth vote on Hugh.

For Hans Gruber Again (Lucky You!):

Hans Gruber wrote:LiteralGrill and Ghosty, if you would be so kind, post the two players you think are most likely to be town and the two most likely to be scum. Or three, preferably

Well, as I mentioned earlier in this post, Hugh is currently my #1 scumread, and even if he isn't scum he seems to be spouting nonsense and contradicting himself, which is be bad for the town in its own way. My #2 scum read would be Otaku, for the reasons I outlined in my dissection of his posts. I'll go above and beyond by adding my distant 3rd scumread, who is currently L9O for the reason I mentioned in my previous post:

Ghosty wrote:As an aside, after the last two games I am no longer willing to give L9O the benefit of the doubt as a new or inexperienced player. His initial reply to Green Machine's Miller claim is too vague and he only comes back with a real opinion on the matter after several other people have expressed their belief in the claim. That's not decisively scummy behavior, but I don't like it.

However, L9O has been pretty active and has provided some useful posts such as a list of his reads, so he doesn't crawl up very high on my scum list.

It's also worth mentioning I don't think the change in behavior between this game and the last game from KevinSafeSpacey is particularly scummy, since people were shouting at him about that and I'd like my opinion on the matter to be known. It feels more like someone making an effort to not self-immolate themselves this time around... Though nobody should read that as me saying I necessarily think he's town right now either. I'm currently on the fence with regards to KSS.

For my townie reads, Green Machine is #1, obviously. I shouldn't need to explain this one either, because I and other people already have. But outside of an analysis of his Miller claim, he has also done a good job of pushing the town forward. #2 is probably you, Hans, because of the way you've been consistently posting and consistently including relevant content in your posts, including pointed questions. You've also put your neck out by throwing down your own reads, which is particularly helpful. I'm always pretty wary of the possibility of scum pretending to be town leaders (Green Machine gets something of a pass because of his uncontested Day 1 claim) though, especially as early as Day 1, so you're far from unimpeachable in my mind. I'm not sure who I would put as my #3 townread right now.

Now, I would like to ask you a question. Do you see any of your top three scumpicks as likely/unlikely to be scumbuddies, or is it too soon to say?
avatar
Ghosty
Admin

Join date : 2017-06-19

View user profile http://deathbywifom.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Ghosty on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:48 pm

Bad thing:


Uh, Otaku? This is a problem. You're not suppose to edit your posts, period, readability be damned. Unfortunately I don't have time right now to decide right now whether I think this is an innocent mistake or a scummy cover up because I can't spare more time on Mafia today, but at least I'll have something to think about while I'm away from the game tomorrow.
avatar
Ghosty
Admin

Join date : 2017-06-19

View user profile http://deathbywifom.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:50 pm

LiteralGrill wrote:Vote: Hugh Jorgan

Arc wrote:OFFICAL VOTE COUNT: 8 TO LYNCH
Hugh Jorgan: 4-Green Machine, Hans Gruber, Like9Orphans, KevinSafeSpacey
Ghosty: 1-Nihil
Mack_Coffins: 1-Like9Orphan
Sisco: 1-Hugh Jorgan

I've got a couple of things to direct at LiteralGrill. First is the reason I included the above quotes: Your vote appears to have not counted. I'm guessing it's because you put "Vote:" rather than "Vote to lynch:".

The other is your answer to the prompt given by Hans, or more correctly your lack of an answer. You list me as probable town when the consensus is to believe my claim, and you list the guy with four other votes to lynch as probable scum. Nihil touched on this in his read of you, and I'll reiterate it: We need information. Your posts so far haven't given us any. Make reads based on the information you have now. You can adjust your reads based on new information, and in fact everyone's feelings about who is and isn't scum tend to change many times if they survive long enough. Information about what each player is thinking is crucial to town victory, and when a player dies and their role is revealed that information can be put into the context of trying to help the town (if they were town) or trying to hinder the town (if they were scum). In a hypothetical game where nobody said anything and the town lynched a random person every day, the mafia would win nearly every time. So refusing to give information is something that benefits the scum. We can appreciate that there isn't much to work with on Day 1, but we all have to use what little there is in order to create more.

In short: If you are town then put some thought into making more informative posts. If you are scum then feel free to stay the course, as currently you're on the short list for the noose.
avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Green Machine on Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:04 pm

Ghosty wrote:
Bad thing:


Uh, Otaku? This is a problem. You're not suppose to edit your posts, period, readability be damned. Unfortunately I don't have time right now to decide right now whether I think this is an innocent mistake or a scummy cover up because I can't spare more time on Mafia today, but at least I'll have something to think about while I'm away from the game tomorrow.

Yeah, editing posts is expressly forbidden in the opening post. Everybody has to live with their misspellings, poor grammar, formatting mistakes, and autocorrect fails. We shall see soon enough whether the moderator has a zero-tolerance policy on that infraction. Anyone who isn't sure their post is readable should make use of the Preview button when posting.
avatar
Green Machine

Join date : 2017-06-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Arc on Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:13 pm

I'll accept her vote for now, I missed it because I don't have enough time or the ability to update this every time I see a new post come in, so when I go to do the vote updats, I use Ctrl+f in order to find all of the votes so I can update everything properly.

So, @literal Grill and everyone else, if you don't put your vote in the proper format, don't expect it to be counted from now on.

Otaku, Why did you edit that post?

OFFICAL VOTE COUNT: 8 TO LYNCH
Hugh Jorgan: 5-Green Machine, Hans Gruber, Like9Orphans, KevinSafeSpacey, Literal Grill
Ghosty: 1-Nihil
Mack_Coffins: 1-Like9Orphan
Sisco: 1-Hugh Jorgan
avatar
Arc

Join date : 2017-06-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Hugh Jorgan on Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:28 pm

I will begin by defending one of my posts.....

First off in the post where i stated my top 2 scum i voted for sisco for lack of posts i did not realize THR had also not posted (first timer trying to keep up) since i cannot vote for 2 lynchings due to my vanilla townie role i will

Vote to lynch: no one

2nd ghosty
After i reread my post i agree it did not make sense in how i voted. The post and my train of thought were running together. I posted on a short break in my day. Not alot of time to proofread.
It was meant to read you had dropped to 2nd on my scum list.

3rd
Since i lack the investigative experience of some of ypu i have been "winging it" the last few days.
I am beginning to understand you all more each post.

From this point forward i will begin earning your trust back.

If any of you have questions or concerns with me lets open up the lines for discussion......


avatar
Hugh Jorgan

Join date : 2017-09-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Otaku1889 on Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:34 pm

For transparency, I'll post my post in it's original format. As an explanation, I wrote out my post in microsoft word, copied it here, then posted without really looking at it. The first section ended up being a giant block of text, and as an English major, giant blocks of text annoy me on a fundamental level. So within the first few seconds of posting, I fixed what I saw as a minor, yet incredibly irksome, annoyance.

"I’ll go ahead and post some stuff addressing concerns that have been brought up in regards to me (specifically GM and Ghosty’s), as well as my top two town and scum players.
Defense:
-Nonsense question and the RVS portion: I feel my nonsense question was justifiable in both timing and content. Ask yourselves this: has that question distracted at all from GM’s claim? I would say no. The question is innocuous enough that it never halted serious discussion. My primary goal in posing that question was to incite any form of discussion, however small. It helps find out who’s invested enough to post, but either doesn’t know what to say (understandable for new players) or else wants to keep their head down (scum).
-As for my statements on Hugh and how that relates to the above, context is key. Calling for serious discussion is admirable, but said call was immediately dismissed in the same post by essentially saying “Let’s not talk about nonsense; instead let’s talk about nonsense!” Contradictions are a good indicator towards scumminess, and I wanted to point that out. I do see your (GM’s) point in how my calling that out might seem hypocritical given that I posted a relatively nonsensical question after, but I never said that non-serious questioning should’ve ended at that point, merely that it would’ve been a respectable thing to call for.
-Recapping past behaviors: I elected to not give my opinions on how past behavior might be relevant to current behavior largely because I felt giving a non-opinionated recap would help newcomers come to their own conclusions before being influenced further by theories. A good teacher doesn’t teach you what to think, but how to think for yourself. Side note: Dsilv inspired me to offer a recap when he asked if we could refer to past games. I realized new players would be at a disadvantage in regards to general knowledge, and I’m the kind of guy that prefers everyone be on the same playing field (Hence, recaps as objective as possible).
-Following the leader: I’ll concede that my readings of Ghosty and Hugh were probably too similar to Hans’, but in my defense, I do think that I made enough differences to say that I wasn’t just blindly jumping on a bandwagon. Firstly, in regards the Ghosty read, whereas Hans was more concerned with his “artificial” language, I was more concerned by the lack of questioning to prompt discussion. In regards to Hugh, I made a note of the contradictory nature of his call to action/continued joking, which wasn’t brought up before. While we’re on this subject, I’ve alluded to this before, but I think Ghosty redeemed himself with his novella of a post. Waiting for a bit before publishing an essay is very much part of his play-style, so I guess the lack of quick questioning is excusable.

Readings:
So, before I begin, I’m going to leave out Hugh Jorgan. He’s top of my scum list, but anything I could say about him now would be redundant. Instead, I’ll focus on my second and third choices for scum.
-Green Machine: Town. Just flat out. I’ve outlined before that I don’t think he’s done anything scummy, and that policy-lynching might be a waste of the town’s time and focus. Further, everything he’s done in this game is in-line with the play-style he used last time, where he was pro-town.
-Hans Gruber: Town. He’s been aggressively pursuing leads, particularly with irregularities in Ghosty’s posting, and with Hugh for obvious reasons. While aggressive behavior could be scummy, his most recent posts wherein he poses questions for everyone feels more town to me.
-LiteralGrill: Scummy. Thus far, LiteralGrill seems to fall under the “invested enough to post, but prefers to keep their head down” category, which as I’ve stated before, is either an inexperienced player thing, or a scum thing. I’m leaning towards scum right now due to their most recent post, wherein their town/scum reads are just restating the majority consensus.
-Mack Coffins: Scummy. In a similar situation to LiteralGrill, the main difference being that he hasn’t posted since things became serious. This mostly seems like a joke thing, but it’s pseudo-notable that his last action was pointing a finger at L9O, I guess. Otherwise I’ve got nothing else to work with with him…
Other reads:
-Like9Orphans: The problem with L9O is that he’s really good at hiding his scumminess. He made detailed and insightful, yet not altogether groundbreaking posts last game… Which is what pretty much any townie would do if they weren’t leaders in the discussion. So yeah, it’s going to be interesting trying to keep an eye out for anything unusual from him.
-Sisco and THR: I’m assuming from the lack of posting that these players aren’t scum, and don’t have major roles, elsewise they would’ve been invested enough to make some appearance by now…

Not going to vote on anyone right now. I would vote for Hugh, but I kinda want to keep the day running longer. More time means more info, afterall."
avatar
Otaku1889

Join date : 2017-07-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Mafia Round 3

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 4 of 8 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You can reply to topics in this forum