+- Eagle Time (https://eagle-time.org)
+-- Forum: Archive (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Forum: Adventures and Games (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=30)
+---- Forum: Forum Games (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Thread: Murder By The Book - Ender's Game (/showthread.php?tid=812)
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 1: Murder on the Disoriented Express - seedy - 03-30-2014
(03-30-2014, 07:04 PM)Akumu Wrote: »I don't like that you're focusing on me, because you seem to be judging me by your standards of play, instead of any sort of analysis dealing with whether or not I am scum. Conversely, I'm not going to turn around and vote for you based on your style of play.
Uh, vaguely throwing suspicion and not backing up things with votes or solid accusations of players is a scumtell? I'm not saying you're scum because you're not driving hard after people, I'm saying you're scum because you're barely driving anywhere. You're pretty much active lurking.
You don't need to be uber-suspicious of someone to back it up with a vote. But if you can't find anyone scummy enough to kill yet then you should actually, y'know, pressure the people you find scummy.
My 'standards of play' happen to involve actually lynching people...which you seemed to be sooo into yesterday? 'Math' isn't a good enough reason to flip-flop from "I will kill literally anyone" to "I don't want to kill anyone right now." Also the reasons you'd have to vote me aren't my playstyle, it's the fact that I helped no lynch/save someone you wanted dead. Both of these should be incredibly scummy actions from your perspective and based on what you've said! But you're completely uninterested in going after I or anyone else who did similar things. Your words and actions aren't matching up. That's scummy.
I'm voting you because (with the exception of voting eberron) your words are vague and your actions are non-existent. If that happens to be your playstyle then it's an incredibly scummy one that does little to further the game. I have never played with you to my recollection so uh...I can't really take your claim of that for granted.
-Huh, I don't think a janitor-kill'd be that weird? granola, I think your point about where Slorange chose to nexus things to only makes sense if you can prove that there was a target Slorange logically should have preferred. I mean, if he didn't think eberron was town, then yeah...but if he did then he doesn't really seem the type to nexus some poor bugger just for info? Hmm, I don't honestly remember Slorange strongly voicing suspicions of much of anyone yesterday, but that might just be because he wasn't voting so it's less noticeable. Besides, if he's scum then you pretty much have to assume eberron is scum. Because making a contentious player completely disappear so that we have no idea what the fuck happened with that wagon and then claiming it was the work of an uninformed townie so that we get zilch out of it would be too delicious to pass up in favor of killing a decent mislynch candidate. (Before any objections: there'd be better kill choices but not many that'd let Slorange claim he was town doing town things)
Anyways I was feeling weird about Sotek but his explanation of his actions makes some sense...we really need more people voting in here. On the other hand, you've played in multiple mafias with 8 people here and only talked about a few of us, so I'm not sure that aspect of what you said holds water. But I respect being busy.
(03-29-2014, 10:43 PM)Garuru Wrote: »Still really annoyed by people pushing very hard for an eberron lynch, but I will admit he does look kind of scummy right now, from kind of flip-flopping between convictions. My vibe is telling me that he's town, trying his best to cover for his early mistakes. I feel like everyone pushing for eberron is trying too hard to have a lynch today, though whether it's a mislynch or an information lynch probably depends on the person voting. Honestly, eberron is the ULTRA PRIME #1 info lynch, because of the ridiculous number of people attacking or supporting him, so even then, there's not much to go on, at least until Eberron flips, if he does get lynched/killed.
(03-30-2014, 07:22 PM)Dragon Fogel Wrote: »eberron - 2 (Sotek, Granolaman)
'everyone'
I mean, I'm sure that there are/were people advocating it who aren't voting...but the only people you've actually mentioned is a crowd of 2.
Hmm, I thought I didn't like Pala, but on re-glance he's actually alright. Truegreen and bigro both seem town. Eberron keeps Requesting Death but how I feel about people's reactions to them keeps absolving them. Schazer feels iffy to me. Dalm could do with posting a little more because right now where they are and what they're doing feels off.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - eberron - 03-30-2014
Keeps requesting death hm? Can't blame your thought there really seedy. I really did not do myself well D1 with all my flipping without any real reasons behind them. I feel safe though with Unvoting Green right now. He was abit suspect early but alot of the debate between then and now no longer makes that so. I dont really feel like I can lean a vote towards someone at the moment. Granola's posts about the workings of a janitor does put a dent is Slorange's story, unless theres a janitor-like role beyond commuter(sp) that I'm not aware of, and Akumu seems to be flirting the line between being honest and not feeling that going into deeper detail for his D1 plans will help any and hiding info that only scum would know.
@Donut: Since I think you voted for him first and I missed your reason, why Nova? Just curious ftm.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - icanhasdonut - 03-30-2014
Nova's interactions with you d1 made me suspicious, and i think it's safe to say if he flips scum i would put you as scum.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - SleepingOrange - 03-30-2014
(03-30-2014, 08:28 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »you pushed crazy hard for a no lynch yesterday
Haha, okay.
I didn't strongly voice suspicions yesterday, seedy. I didn't have any that I was really sold on. At the moment I'm almost tempted to hit granola for his... weird reactions to things. Methinks the lady doth protest too much and et-cetera. I'm not sure that'd be productive or helpful, though. Instead I'll prodvote: AgentBlue.
I'm genuinely pretty baffled at anyone who keeps trying to separate a kill and a janitoring, as though they're separate actions. It's almost always a case of the janitor having their own kill and automatically janitoring it, or the janitor getting to choose "tonight I will hide the mafia's kill". It's not like you say "I'm going to hide this person's body tonight, should they so happen to die" or anything like that. What's with the resistance to the notion that a redirected janitoring kill wouldn't just be redirected?
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-30-2014
I can think of a better info lynch, Granola.
Vote: Granolaman
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - icanhasdonut - 03-30-2014
(03-30-2014, 06:48 PM)icanhasdonut Wrote: »Also Slorange what are your thoughts re:Novawatts?
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - SleepingOrange - 03-30-2014
Oh, right. Eh? Watts is always cagey. Nothing he's done or said has made me feel any particular way about him.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Nova - 03-30-2014
(03-30-2014, 11:07 PM)SleepingOrange Wrote: »Watts is always cagey.
Goddamnit everyone always says this about me
I'm trying my best ; A;
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
Slorange is a disingenuous lynch option if you've played enough games to not get bogged down in mechanics-guessing. If we were to lynch Eberron today and one of the town leadertypes gets killed N2, we're going to have even more of an uphill battle trying to drag any of:
-Dini
-Crowslot
-Sotek
-AgentBlue
-Dalm
-Bigro (if he'll only respond reactively rather than adding a new perspective on proceedings)
Chwoka (who's no longer AFK and was active D1, but needs to contribute thoughts)
-Solaris
out and into some semblance of active contribution. I acknowledge the hypocrisy of declaring "let's lynch lurkers" and "no wait Granola needs to die" in the same breath, but I'm trying to encourage inactives to get into the game as a matter of principle, and I'm pretty sure Slorange is a sympathiser in that regard. I'd much rather lynch lurkers and make sure whichever townies don't get nightkilled have a lively and enjoyable D4-onwards.
Your behaviour's reached the point where it's throwing my naive ass off, though, so unless you want to help me lynch some lurkers you'd be a valid target.
You seem to acknowledge Slorange's claimed ability as a thing that is real-
Quote:I'll bet I nailed it on the head with your power being a scum one.-but are ignoring the circumstances which revealed that claim in the first place. Slorange was not a target for suspicion; he revealed this information in response to my Headology. I think if he were mafia, he would've just "psssshaw"ed at me and taken the secret of the redirect to his grave.
Also backtracking a bit, because I multi-quoted you to figure out if I was just seeing things:
(03-19-2014, 01:35 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »Garuru's posts are great, and also definitely super filler. I don't want to see him dead, but I'd rather not let scum accidentally slip through solely on entertainment value. If we have some sort of jailer or roleblocker role I wouldn't mind seeing him locked down for a few nights.
(03-21-2014, 12:47 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »I could go for a no lynch or a Chwoka Lynch at this point. Looking back, there's actually a decent set of relations data we can mine from Anona's flip.
So, irrespective of whether Chwoka's alive or not: who to pursue if Chwoka flips town? What if they flip mafia?
(03-22-2014, 01:29 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »*Sigh* you guys better promise to help me seriously analyze the fluff posters tomorrow.
Unvote. Vote: eberron
Slorange isn't a fluff poster? He's about the exact opposite?
(03-27-2014, 10:49 PM)Akumu Wrote: »Sotek, could you explain your convictions a bit more? You voted for Granola after he replied to me with something that, while technically true, missed the point of my argument. Is that sufficient to say that he is scum? Especially that we are now in a situation, with an even number of players, where we've lost the low-information lynch advantage.
Akumu's defense here of you was kinda strange as well, I could see the two of you being scumbuddies.
(03-27-2014, 11:37 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »@Schazer: [...] I jumped onto the wagon because I wanted more information on Akumu, and there wasn't enough time left in the day to move the lynch over.
What information, in your opinion, would an Eberron flip have provided about Akumu?
(03-28-2014, 01:07 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »Anyways I agree that this looks like a politeness killing which implicates a lot of the early people on the "no lynch" wagon.
Again, your unwillingness to name names makes this really damning. It's impossible the entire scumteam was voting to No Lynch, so who on it was the likeliest candidate?
(03-29-2014, 04:24 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »I'm gonna hop back over to Vote: eberron for now just because dayum he's a talking point. If he's town, Schazer and Akumu look worse. If he's scum I could see Solaris being his scummate. Last time I saw them they were idly condemning everyone on the eberron wagon. You still think we're all terrible Sol?
Ok, I'm tunnelling on you right now, so here's a question to try redeem yourself. You keep throwing suspicions on all sorts of people; who are your town reads?
Mine would be Slorange, mechanically speaking, and possibly Seedy (pending). Maybe Eberron.
Quote:I keep getting weird vibes about Slorange and his ability. Targeting cyber checks out, and if it was just a straight janitor kill Slorange couldn't've known how many other potential kills there'd be tonight. (my money's on 2.5 highest btw: 1 scum, 1 cautious vig, maybe 1 partial-SK) Still, that seems like a "use when threatened" kind of ability, not a "use immediately" one. I want to say that it's actually more likely a scum power.
But then there's Truegreen.
I don't even know anymore. Most likely lying-style scenario is that both Slorange and Green are scum with no day-chat. I'll probably get around to lynching one/both of you after the eberron debate and also bothering Chwoka when he gets back from vacation.
I can attest to town!Slorange's habit of using his one-shots at the earliest convenience. I've only got Quarantine from personal memory in terms of his habits as scum, but he sat on that ability until he got a chance to use it? The "save for emergencies" angle works if he's mafia worried about a vig kill, but in that case isn't it advantageous to wait to see how many kills are flying around, before deciding one one N2-onward night or another that now your risk of being vig'd is higher?
Finally, concurring with Seedy's
about your last post.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - ☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ - 03-31-2014
(03-31-2014, 12:29 AM)Schazer Wrote: »(03-22-2014, 01:29 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »*Sigh* you guys better promise to help me seriously analyze the fluff posters tomorrow.
Unvote. Vote: eberron
Slorange isn't a fluff poster? He's about the exact opposite?
I believe that in this post he is referring to me, Garuru during their Book Covers phase (their Blue Period if you will,) Dalm, etc.
I think Granola really has a really damn solid point on complaining about a dearth of information and telling us we just can't rush to decisions in this environment as a janitor-or-whatever whose entire role is to hide information from the town. Nobody's bothered to address this — hell, you even quoted around it! That all really rubs me the wrong way and I'm going to place a vote on Slorange until this contradiction is resolved or at least overcomplicated to the point of bamboozling my tiny forebrain.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
What I was pointing out with that quote was that: Granola said at the end of D1 that the fluff posters needed to be looked at, so yeah, you. I'm calling him out on the fact he's all-but abandoned that line of inquiry.
Why is that suspicious? Because the mafia will point out people who look suspicious (because that's a thing a good townie should do), but they rarely want to stick their neck out and champion someone's lynch (because they'll then come under fire when the person flips town). It gives them plausible deniability if a town player starts yelling "Hey let's lynch Slorange!" and they join the wagon.
I'm finding Granola's habit of glaring at nebulous groups of people ("the fluff posters"; "the No Lynchers"), but only committing to the (comparatively) well-established wagons (Eberron and Slorange) really suspect. I'd be less inclined to suspect him if he showed some thought beyond those lynches - i.e. I want him to tell me who we'd pursue next if Slorange/Eberron flipped scum (and also if they flipped town! Mistakes happen!)
Plus plus plus, I still think that this justification is coming from a really anti-town mindset?
Quote: but you want to pursue a "lurker lynch" on yet another person who's nowhere near the middle of things?!Like, ok, we've got twenty players alive; 7/8 who are officially fuckwhere, and nearly as many again who aren't doing much more than peripherally existing. If we lynched Slorange today and one of TrueGreen/Eberron/Akumu/Granola tomorrow, that's two active players killed, plus two more ganked in the night. This puts the game in a position where the only active players will be scum, who can draw all the lurkers into mislynch after mislynch because nobody's got the wherewithal to argue back.
The lurkers won't magically emerge from their cocoons D5 and lead town once the presently-active players finish ripping each other apart. Thanks to the No Lynch and janitoring, we're back to a situation kind of like D1 with no extrapolatable information about people's alignments. From the standpoint of wanting a fun game, I figure if we're going to pseudo-random lynch we should target a lurker.
I mean, best case scenario, they show up and start contributing! Worst case, we lynch someone who was barely even playing the game!
Quote:I think Granola really has a really damn solid point on complaining about a dearth of information and telling us we just can't rush to decisions in this environment as a janitor-or-whatever whose entire role is to hide information from the town. Nobody's bothered to address this — hell, you even quoted around it!
The usual format for a Janitor is they get a one-shot ability. Once per game, they say "I'll do the nightkill tonight". If said nightkill is successful, then the target is "vanished" rather than revealing their identity in daystart. If this game's Janitor is an "average" Janitor, they've done their deal and are now vanilla.
Janitors who can janitor multiple times do exist, but they're extremely powerful for the mafia and town would need a fair bit of firepower, roleswise, to balance out the game. Trying to game the setup is rarely ideal, but Fogel said it'd be "Pretty straightforward" so I'm assuming that if there is a Janitor, it's a one-shot. Whoever dies during N2 will almost certainly have their identity revealed, if that's what you're worried about.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Truegreen - 03-31-2014
Hmm, Shazer makes an interesting point. Though I believe it might be more prudent to target people we actually know about, I believe it was mentioned earlier that town tend to lurk more often. In my opinion it would be a good idea to target those active members that are acting suspiciously. Logically that should lead to fewer mis-lynches which I see as the greater threat. If we can kill a couple mafia members it will reduce their effectiveness, if we solely target lurkers it will likely only hurt us. Admittedly it would be less damaging than an active mis-lynch but I see it as a death by a thousand cuts scenario.
It seems Slorange is gathering votes now despite my expectations. I must say I am quite tempted to jump back to my previous vote. Though I am a bit confused. Granola, another of my top suspects is targeting Slorange as well. It could be a bus, but I can't be sure. Granola's argument does seem a bit...half baked?
I shall refrain for now, though if more support rises to lynch Slorange I will probably join in.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - SleepingOrange - 03-31-2014
I just
I genuinely don't even see how I have votes on me
To the extent that if I'm lynched in the next day or two I will laugh and laugh
But! The best thing to do in this situation (since I know a Slorange lynch is a mislynch) is to counter it with a lynch I think is better. Rather than continuing to prod lurkers, I guess I'll put my money where my mouth is and vote: granolaman. Easily the wonkiest play and the most doublespeak so far.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Granolaman - 03-31-2014
Mmm I love the smell of chainsaw defense in the morning.
So the first thing I'm noticing is an awful lot of this defense riding on Slorange's meta.
tl;dr "It's absolutely ridiculous for scum to be so upfront about the kill so Slorange must be town"
That's a defense based entirely off of meta and WIFOM (Wine in Front of Me for all you newbies ("I know you know that I know" kind of bullshittery))
The rest of your quote deluge at me does a very poor job of establishing why I'd be a good info-lynch in your eyes.
Schazer Wrote:What I was pointing out with that quote was that: Granola said at the end of D1 that the fluff posters needed to be looked at, so yeah, you. I'm calling him out on the fact he's all-but abandoned that line of inquiry.
Less like I abandoned my inquiry more like A) Chwoka was on vacation and not a fair target. B) Eberron was still a thing. C) Interesting things happened with last night's kills that warranted a lot stronger discussion than my lurker stuff. I'll get back to my Chwoka poking once we've cleared this debacle up but the fact that he's stopped fluffing already is already helping my reads on him.
Here the two of you are throwing the lynch around like a menacing whip to get the lurkers in gear. (Thus hopefully avoiding too much scrutiny/backlash generated by threatening active players.) The reason we don't have many people talking is because we're still dry on information right now. Lynching literally any of the active players today will net way more information than a 'pseudo-random lynch' on the lurkers, and will likely draw them out to talk about it too.
Schazer Wrote:This puts the game in a position where the only active players will be scum, who can draw all the lurkers into mislynch after mislynch because nobody's got the wherewithal to argue back.
You are literally trying to do this to me right now by wailing on me, then giving me an easy out with admission to tunneling, access to easy lurker lynches, and a lone question. Speaking of:
Schazer Wrote:Ok, I'm tunnelling on you right now, so here's a question to try redeem yourself. You keep throwing suspicions on all sorts of people; who are your town reads?
In no particular order:
Nova
Akumu (if Eberron flips scum)
donut
Seedy (kinda)
If Eberron flipped town or scum, I would pursue Akumu or Solaris/Schazer respectively.
If Slorange flipped town or scum, I would pursue [data not yet generated] or Schazer/Truegreen respectively.
Finally I still maintain that Slorange's ability (even without the janitoring) feels more like a scum role than a town one. I'm glad Quarantine was brought up because it reminded me of that one "definitely town" scumpower of yours where you could one-shot autoblock all the kills in the night. Feels aaaawfully familiar right about now...
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
(03-31-2014, 02:33 AM)Truegreen Wrote: »I believe it was mentioned earlier that town tend to lurk more often. In my opinion it would be a good idea to target those active members that are acting suspiciously. Logically that should lead to fewer mis-lynches which I see as the greater threat. If we can kill a couple mafia members it will reduce their effectiveness, if we solely target lurkers it will likely only hurt us. Admittedly it would be less damaging than an active mis-lynch but I see it as a death by a thousand cuts scenario.
Nononononono.
No.
The majority of the playerlist are lurking/inactive. They outnumber the active players. Inactive players are wary of saying the wrong thing and ending up in the spotlight, though for fundamentally different reasons.
Inactive town who are new to Mafia don't want to get lynched, which makes sense from their standpoint because they only know one player who's town, right? That, or they have a night action and don't want to draw attention to themselves. However, they are passively working against the town with this philosophy.
Inactive town who are experienced with mafia need to a) go set themselves on fire and b) stop joining games they can't be fucked properly playing.
Lurky/inactive scum want to coast through the game without having to defend themselves, until a point is reached where there's no active town leaders to drag them out into the open. They can sit with their thumbs up their butts all damn game and let No Lynches keep happening, because they'll still win. Town don't have that luxury.
And guess what you need to drag said inactives kicking and screaming into the discussion? Active players. If the active players end up lynching each other, and the mafia kills the rest, the endgame is going to be a fucking chore.
From a utilitarian standpoint where we want to maximise fun (because this is a game oh jesus fucking christ someone kill me I'm being serious about how to have fun), we're better off killing lurkers early, so people actually playing the game get to stay in longer. Having active town and scum alive at endgame makes for more entertaining discussion, too!
Lurking/inactivity stifles discussion. Stifling discussion is anti-town.
By extrapolation, espousing a philosophy which encourages lurking/inactivity (like Granola has done, and I suspect you (Truegreen) of doing now) is anti-town.
---
Alternative scenario: We pile onto, say, AgentBlue, until they're at soft lynch. At this point they're either going to say "ok ok jeez I'll participate" and hooray! One less lurker; or, they eat lynch like the sad limp lettuce I'm making them out to be.
We'll be able to continue discussion with one less active player (due to nightkill) instead of two (due to the alternative where we lynched an active player then the mafia nightkilled another one), and either way we get a wagon to analyse. Sounds pretty good by my book!
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Granolaman - 03-31-2014
Frankly I'm super annoyed that you'd even bring up the Chwoka argument. You and I both knew he was on vacation and wouldn't be able to adequately defend himself. Low blow.
(03-31-2014, 02:59 AM)SleepingOrange Wrote: »But! The best thing to do in this situation (since I know a Slorange lynch is a mislynch) is to counter it with a lynch I think is better. Rather than continuing to prod lurkers, I guess I'll put my money where my mouth is and vote: granolaman. Easily the wonkiest play and the most doublespeak so far.
Thank God, your first useful vote in the game. Though I would love to have you point out any of my doublespeak for me (asides my first cuz that's too easy).
Previewedit:
I'm not espousing an anti-lurker lynching philosophy, I'm espousing a scum or info lynching philosophy.
Something both you and Slorange are completely avoiding
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Gnauga - 03-31-2014
Slorange is still townie in my book, just on the mechanics argument. You can consider me with Schazer in that he probably just wouldn't have given any information to anyone at all if he were scum because townies with information make informed lynches. And pulling some elaborate lie suggests Slorange is a much cleverer chessmaster than he's acting. I'm not even considering them for scum at the moment.
I honestly don't know how easy it is to say whether there's scum in lurkers or actives right now. The lurkers are pretty much getting left alone, but I think lurkers hurt more than you realize. The game ends when scum can outvote the town, and there's no scenario in which town can win. If half the townies are just lurking, they're as good as non-existent. Mislynching townie lurkers lowers that hard limit to lose, but having townie lurkers presents the soft limit. And with any luck, we've got at least one mafia hiding amongst the lurkers, who we can flush out into activity to be picked at.
Sorry for the lack of citations in this post. (I don't really have time atm to do another post analysis. Seedy's looks seedy, but it might just need a couple paragraph breaks.) To make up for it, I'll go ahead and bite the bullet on my post and
Vote: AgentBlue
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
(03-31-2014, 03:02 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »Mmm I love the smell of chainsaw defense in the morning.
Just for the newbies and my anti-jargon policy for this game, I'm tossing a link in there. Though by dint of that page, you could also call me scummy for going on and on and fucking on about mechanics and motivations and why it's morally sounder to lynch lurkers....)
(Granola is saying that my counterattack on him going after Slorange is a quintessential scum action. I personally know that this is not the case, but I've gotta prove that to the rest of you)
I'm gonna have a proper read and think over your post (I'll concede the quotewall was not cohesive; I just multi-quoted and had a look at what was there that was interesting, so it's not organised into anything approaching a finished product), but lemme ask you this:
If you were scum and could shut down all but one nightkill on a single night, would you really use it N1 when you didn't have hard numbers on the number of kills flying around? Wouldn't you want the existence of, say, a hypothetical serial killer verified before you blow your load? Wouldn't that look more if that were the only reason you wanted to use it?
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Gnauga - 03-31-2014
okay footnote: I meant to respond to truegreen, but I got distracted, came back ten minutes ago and got ninja'd like four times.
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
(03-31-2014, 03:16 AM)Granolaman Wrote: »Frankly I'm super annoyed that you'd even bring up the Chwoka argument. You and I both knew he was on vacation and wouldn't be able to adequately defend himself. Low blow.
Actually, though I made the mistake of not specifying, I was using your own definition of "fluff posters" in plural; Chwoka wasn't the only valid target (he just happened to quote and ask about it, so I answered him directly. He was intended to be one example, not the example). Erroneous omission, sure, but that still gives us Solaris, donut (who's active-ish but not in a useful way), Dalm, Gnauga, Mirdini, even Garuru and Akumu to some extent!
Quote:I'm not espousing an anti-lurker lynching philosophy, I'm espousing a scum or info lynching philosophy.
Something both you and Slorange are completely avoiding
If we get a lurker up to soft lynch and that makes them state some opinions, doesn't that give us at least half a wagon, more info, and net increased potential for more info down the track?
Like, do you think once we resolve the hot mess that is Eberron/Truegreen/Akumu/Slorange/Me/Sotek/You, those lurkers are going to step up and just start interacting for our collective lynchy benefit?
The way things are going, we'd be lucky to not need three more replacements by that point.
Actually, fuck it. Agentblue! You're going to need to poke your face in here sooner or later, so here's a question or two so when you start analysing the game so far, you can focus a bit better:
-What's your take on this debate between Granola and I? Do you think one of us is mafia? Do you think we're both town and being very clueless and silly?
-Look at Garuru's posts, and have a look at who mentions him in turn. Do you see any possible connections there? Who calls attention to their suspicious behaviour? Who tries to drive discussion away from them?
-For extra homework, do the same with Gnauga (I chose Garuru arbitrarily, honestly do it for as many people as you can manage. Heck, everyone try it for as many players as you can manage!)
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Schazer - 03-31-2014
Current votals:
Nova - 3 (icanhasdonut, Palamedes, Dalmationer)
Solaris - 1 (Nova)
eberron - 1 (Sotek)
Akumu - 1 (Seedy)
Sotek - 2 (Garuru, Truegreen)
Agentblue - 1 (Gnauga)
Slorange - 2 (Granolaman, Chwoka)
Granolaman - 2 (Schazer, Slorange)
11 to lynch, 6 to soft. Deadline's less than three days away (could we have deadline by ~hours instead of a date? I can't figure out timezones for shit, but the current one is Midnight April 1).
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - Granolaman - 03-31-2014
Oops, would like to point out that I miswrote my pursuits posteberron lynch. Schazer should be pursued if eberron flipped town, not scum.
(03-31-2014, 03:23 AM)Schazer Wrote: »If you were scum and could shut down all but one nightkill on a single night, would you really use it N1 when you didn't have hard numbers on the number of kills flying around? Wouldn't you want the existence of, say, a hypothetical serial killer verified before you blow your load? Wouldn't that look more if that were the only reason you wanted to use it?
If I were scum with that power and a history of being killed early on, I think I'd try to use it to set up a fake claim early on.
Alternative/additional talking point for people: if you could cop, track or watch anyone, but only twice, who would you target?
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - SleepingOrange - 03-31-2014
I will point out for posterity and anyone who pays more attention to what's being said that to what's already been said that I am in no way defending myself based on my claimed role. From post one, I said there were reasonable(ish) reasons I could have claimed it as scum, although I have more to gain from it as town; I don't think my claim gives anyone any information about my alignment either way. That's why I'm surprised at votes on me based solely on that claim. It doesn't prove anything any which way. My role might not even be what I say it is, and there are plenty of reasons both town and scum for me to lie about it. You don't have anything but my word on anything, which really shouldn't tip the scale in either direction at this point in the game. Votes on me at this stage are anti-scumhunt, and I'm almost as leery of the Schazers and Gnaugas that are taking me so readily at my word because I haven't done anything worth believing me that much yet. This whole conversation is a distraction from any actual attempt to parse out who's who, which is why I feel it's reasonable to vote for the person most interested in keeping it going: any attempt to distract the town from substantive, provable matters is anti-town play.
(I'll also point out that the community from which the term chainsaw defense comes considers the chainsaw defense a null-tell [for newbies, that means an action or post that does not indicate alignment either way], so anyone crying "She's attacking his detractors" or "He's detracting her attackers" is trying to force suspicion based on something meaningless. Which is also anti-town play.)
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - ☆ C.H.W.O.K.A ☆ - 03-31-2014
Why would you lie about anything if you were town?
RE: Murder By The Book - Day 2: The Invisible Man - AgentBlue - 03-31-2014
(ok ok I'll participate)
(I'm reading back, hold on)