Moderator: Community Team
I wanna take a quick informal poll.indiglo wrote:Epignosis wrote:I'm not good at mafia.There, there now Epi. You know good and well that you aren't good at anything. So don't let not being good at mafia get you down, champ! You're just as good at mafia as you are at everything else!
I get youbea wrote:You guys. I'm really sorry.2 missed votes is unheard of from me. I got swamped at work on sat and never did make it back to try to vote day 1 and I honestly forgot that there was a very strong likelyhood that there would be a night poll, so yesterday, I spent the day napping and trying to not brain. I am the suck. I promise I will get better.
RIP wigglcreed and wabbit.
Welcome espers and JJ.
@ quinn - I know I don't have a lot of post history. I am indeed sorry about that. Like others, I'm having a bit of trouble finding my footing yet. This isn't unusual for me at all. Takes me a few cycles to get into the swing of things. I didn't initially answer wigly's question to me because I was at work and quickly phone posting and also because I honestly didn't understand why he singled me out in asking it. It was a weird request to me. My answer may have seemed like a non-answer to you but it is truthful. I do not find myself often an early target. Most people hit the power players with their powers post game. I remember one game where SVS got hit by literally every single power possible on N1. In this game she got a curse and wabbit got a NK. I'm not a power player, so I don't ever really think of myself as someone who would get targeted early in the game.
I think that JJ is reading like JJ - that makes me happy. I think INH definitely comes out looking worse than JJ in their back and forth. If I had a second vote, I'd use it on INH at this point in time.
As it is, I don't want to miss a 3rd vote in a row and be the most lame mafia player in all of existence. I'm voting leetic. I doubt that will change but I promise to do a much better job of following along and providing what little insite I can than I did last cycle.
I'm in the same position when it comes to finding my feet, which is actually abnormal for me. When you did respond to Wilgy I didn't perceive it as a non-answer, I just thought it was odd that you answered with information that I perceived as irrelevant to the question, when you mentioned things like who you thought would be targeted and your history as a baddie. I don't particularly feel pinged by you doing that but it was concerning at the time. 
1) The back and forth with Wilgy and INH was hard for me to follow in part by formating, in part from it falling down to what I refer to the "he said/she said semmantic Bea is tuning out now" thing and in part by the fact that wigly and INH share a "zaniness" to their playstyle that made it difficult for me to try to determine motivations. INH however seemed to be doing the same thing as you and after refusing to see why you suspected him went into the No U line of arguing. I didn't think it came off as genuine.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:bea, when you get a chance could you talk to me about these two things:bea wrote:I think that JJ is reading like JJ - that makes me happy. I think INH definitely comes out looking worse than JJ in their back and forth. If I had a second vote, I'd use it on INH at this point in time.
As it is, I don't want to miss a 3rd vote in a row and be the most lame mafia player in all of existence. I'm voting leetic. I doubt that will change but I promise to do a much better job of following along and providing what little insite I can than I did last cycle.
1. What about my exchange with INH makes you feel he emerges looking worse than I do?
2. What inspires your vote for leetic beyond just ensuring you don't miss the vote?
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
bea -- goodJaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'll GTH read everyone alive and see where that leaves me.
I know this is crazy - but I actually think this isn't a half bad idea. Keeping track of the peeps that missed votes and how their vote ends up being might prove fruitful. If not this cycle, then down the road.insertnamehere wrote:moving on from defending myself to actual analysis, I wanted to categorize the people Meredith used her vote manipulation on, and see what comes out of that
bea: leetic
enrique: ???
fingersplints: leetic
lorab: BWT
serge: ???
sorsha: ???
spacedaisy: 3J
Quin implied that his vote was coerced even though he didn't miss the last vote.
And 3J and Esper both replaced in for players who did miss the last vote.
I'd like to ask both of them if their votes are preassigned today if Dom will allow me.
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
Epignosis wrote:Bitch, my identity is my identity theft protection!
Sometimes the boring lynches are the best ones.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I have a feeling this day phase is dragging slowly toward a very boring leetic lynch. If that's to be the lynch, fine okay -- I could see him being bad. But he has six posts, and that leaves us with very little to discuss. So I want to hear a broader scope of suspicions from y'all.
This is the first time this game you have used "DERP". Before it was "Hrmmm".Matt wrote:Lol. So I had a few windows open, and the following was supposed to be in the previous post...DEEERP...
***
RIP Wilgy
RIPifywg Rabbit
Bye Goldy and Bullz...oh Bullz...
Welcome Espers and 3J! Especially 3J, my knight in shining armor!
Sorry town (and Dom) for not voting in the night poll, that's lame, it won't happen again.
***
I didn't say that. I said playing with a very low degree of effort is often a civilian trait rather than a baddie trait. I didn't say anything about his vote until you brought it up in response to that prior assertion.Scotty wrote:JJJ I'm just curious, because you brought this up before: you said that leetic' behavior of placing a vote without talking about it is inherently a civ thing to do. What evidence do you have behind that?
Based on what I have seen, without laying out all of the data in front of me and thoroughly assessing it, I would say most baddies trend below the mean in post count and in total content. However, they don't trend at the bottom. I'd say the typical zone of contribution where I most frequently find baddies on The Syndicate is in the 3rd quadrant. I'll draw it on a line for the sake of clarity.Scotty wrote:I'm also curious- I respect you as a player because you always pack a mouthful of glorious opinions to your posts, so I'm wondering your opinion: would you say more Mafia members are bound to be more talkative or less talkative on this site? I know there are exceptions in both cases (MP as Mafia and Bubbles as civ come to mind) but on however many games you've played, what is the case?
Seeing as bea was one of the people who would supposedly be forced to vote, and she posted her approval of my tracking of the inact votes, I think it's safe to assume so. Plus SD and Lorab's fly-by votes for 3J and BWT respectively seem to help that assumption.Scotty wrote:Linki: hey INH can we really be sure that Merideth forced anyone for today's polls?
My greatest Mafia strength is probably also my greatest weakness -- the ability change my mind on a whim.insertnamehere wrote:3J - Some of his interactions back when we were doing the 'ol super-long back-and-forth that nobody reads, struck me as him wanting to push an agenda and not keeping an open mind. But then I show up, post the thesis of what I was saying the whole time, albeit in a much less frazzled way, and he does a 180 on me. My read-through will entirely concentrate on his interactions with people other than myself, in order to try and eliminate the "No U" bias from my mind.
With Elohcin I think I might be breaking one of my cardinal rules -- seeing a team mate relationship without any flips to facilitate it. When I look at leetic's attack on Elohcin's "fluff", it strikes me as very arbitrary and very forced, to the point that I wonder if he was overzealous in his desire to distance from Elohcin. This is something I've seen a lot of lately around here from baddies in multiple games and that might be influencing my perspective. Elohcin herself seemed concerned about this:bea wrote:I don't get why you GTH epi or eloh as bad.
Like I said, still struggling to find my feet and I usually work more from who do I trust backwards than who do I suspect, but I'd not seen anything weird out of them that gave me any bad feelings or anything.
Otherwise, Elohcin's posts on their own power don't perturb me, but they don't inspire me either. They make me feel nothing, really. That might not sound damning, but I am getting a solid number of town vibes from this player roster right now, and that means the people not making me feel that way are inherently suspicious by process of elimination. It's not a confident matter on Day 2 with so many people alive, but it's where my head is.Elohcin wrote:fluffy, non- game related stuff? What are you talking about? I don't think I've posted anything non-game related except that I would be back to vote after my show last night and even that was semi-game related. I don't know what you're talking about. Also, looking back at all your posts, you have only made ONE semi-on topic post. The rest have been "fluffy, non-game related" posts.leetic wrote:Why are you posting such fluffy, non-game-related stuff this late in? Surely you have something else to talk about?Elohcin wrote:I am going to go with Customer Service tonight.
I do hope you aren't lumping me with this Leetic person by asking us both about our reads at the same time. At the moment I am most concerned with Quin for his/her "I'm a civ and you'll be sorry" post before EoD 1. As I've said before and as most people are probably tired of hearing...big games are difficult for me. I am trying to keep up, take notes, and participate as much as possible. I will have more things to say as time goes on, promise.DrumBeats wrote:@ Leetic and Eloh - What are your current reads?
Ah good call. I wonder how many will miss today's poll? I can't tell right now if Merideth spreading votes out like they seem to be is actually advantageous or not. On the surface it doesn't look it unless Merideth puts 2 votes on who she feels is the most suspicious. Some of those vites might as well be bunt cakes- no one eats them, so they rot away.insertnamehere wrote:Seeing as bea was one of the people who would supposedly be forced to vote, and she posted her approval of my tracking of the inact votes, I think it's safe to assume so. Plus SD and Lorab's fly-by votes for 3J and BWT respectively seem to help that assumption.Scotty wrote:Linki: hey INH can we really be sure that Merideth forced anyone for today's polls?
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:I didn't say that. I said playing with a very low degree of effort is often a civilian trait rather than a baddie trait. I didn't say anything about his vote until you brought it up in response to that prior assertion.Scotty wrote:JJJ I'm just curious, because you brought this up before: you said that leetic' behavior of placing a vote without talking about it is inherently a civ thing to do. What evidence do you have behind that?
In nearly every Mafia game I've ever played, there is at least one (usually a lot more than one) town player who does absolutely nothing to help the town cause. I wish it wasn't that way, but it is. So when I see a player who has not applied him or herself whatsoever to the game, I am not going to be automatically inclined to suspect that player. Indeed, I might just roll my eyes and ignore the slot for the time being, because I greatly prefer to operate in an informed realm instead of totally guessing.
Unmentioned votes are not something I have seen as much, because they're impossible on every site I've ever played at except The Syndicate (where the poll makes it possible). Unexplained votes I have seen constantly everywhere I've been, both from townies and from baddies.
i was using leetic as an example of what I mean, as you were. You admit that what leetic is doing is a behavior exhibited by both Mafia and civilians alike. And that there is usually a handful of players that are not helpful as town but are still town. While I agree with this assessment, as INH has pointed out he is playing differently than his own meta exhibited as MVp in AoT Mafia. Chock it up to lack of available time to commit to the game and I can understand. But not explaining votes I will always find suspicious. Especially when they are given ample time to come back and explain it, and proceed to not. I roll my eyes at this kind of behavior too, but it doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug for another Christmas.
Based on what I have seen, without laying out all of the data in front of me and thoroughly assessing it, I would say most baddies trend below the mean in post count and in total content. However, they don't trend at the bottom. I'd say the typical zone of contribution where I most frequently find baddies on The Syndicate is in the 3rd quadrant. I'll draw it on a line for the sake of clarity.Scotty wrote:I'm also curious- I respect you as a player because you always pack a mouthful of glorious opinions to your posts, so I'm wondering your opinion: would you say more Mafia members are bound to be more talkative or less talkative on this site? I know there are exceptions in both cases (MP as Mafia and Bubbles as civ come to mind) but on however many games you've played, what is the case?
This is a very general and vague perspective, and it always depends on each individual player. Certain people when bad will have a lot more posts than others. I definitely don't think all baddies fall into this zone, but it's a "hot spot".
thanks for sharing. I know it's not going to be a catch-all for Mafia typologies. But I suppose I was curious to reaffirm my own suspicions on the matter. The grey matter in the graph is what constitutes the baseline for "average" content? I guess that's purely subjective, and not necessarily a post-count thing?
I can dig it, and I do think there's a reasonable chance that lynching leetic would net a baddie flip. It's not a lynch I am going to vehemently oppose while the guy is giving me no reason to defend him. My only concern is that we broaden the discussion so Day 2 doesn't devolve into this:Scotty wrote:i was using leetic as an example of what I mean, as you were. You admit that what leetic is doing is a behavior exhibited by both Mafia and civilians alike. And that there is usually a handful of players that are not helpful as town but are still town. While I agree with this assessment, as INH has pointed out he is playing differently than his own meta exhibited as MVp in AoT Mafia. Chock it up to lack of available time to commit to the game and I can understand. But not explaining votes I will always find suspicious. Especially when they are given ample time to come back and explain it, and proceed to not. I roll my eyes at this kind of behavior too, but it doesn't mean it should be swept under the rug for another Christmas.
Right. It's not purely post-count, because that can be warped pretty easily to a higher number than is truly reflective of a player's contribution. It's a basic visual barometer, but a closer look is needed to really determine how much someone has given to the game.Scotty wrote:thanks for sharing. I know it's not going to be a catch-all for Mafia typologies. But I suppose I was curious to reaffirm my own suspicions on the matter. The grey matter in the graph is what constitutes the baseline for "average" content? I guess that's purely subjective, and not necessarily a post-count thing?
To be honest, the "180 flip" is more of an appearance than a reality. I know I sounded like a very confident individual as I hammered him repeatedly, but that's part of the interrogation. The suspicion was genuine, but there was a reason I allowed that exchange to continue as long as I did (longer than usual) -- there's a universe in which everything suspicious about him really is a direct result of his personality. This would be a similar reality to what was seen with Glorfindel in Battlestar Galactica, though with a different personality being challenged this time. There are some players who play in such a way, or think in such a way, that everything they do in a game thread is going to bear a specific appearance. With Glorfindel it was frequent ultra-earnest self-defense and pleas for people to listen. With INH (if he's town), it'd be frequent ultra-snappy frustration and reflected suspicion.DrumBeats wrote:@ 3J again - I don't see how the INH post warranted a 180 flip honestly. I felt slightly better on it, but I feel like it didn't do anything to negate the four discredit-focussed interactions that preceded it.
This looks like a man who is trying to both understand and also describe how the circumstances of this game and the environment of this thread have put him in a position that is frustrating him. This kind of thing is often difficult to fake for a baddie, because a baddie mindset is typically nowhere near this kind of stuff. A frustrated townie is frequently thinking about this kind of stuff.insertnamehere wrote:Sorry for being absent for the last 24 or so hours. This is the part of the game that really fucking gets to me and stresses me out to frankly completely unreasonable levels. It's also why, over time, I've come to prefer the more "avant-garde" games that take more liberal interpretations of the mafia ruleset. Hell, my favorite game I've ever been in was Llama's Oblique Strategies where I tried to convince the "mafia" to out themselves so that everyone could win. And it almost worked.
I'm gonna keep this simple.
1. I was gone from the site for about a year and a half. I came back about a month ago. There are a lot of new players with new strategies who I don't know, and they don't know me.
Whenever the thread is active and enough people are present, GTH reads are a fine idea. If you see a good opportunity, you should take the lead on that operation and see it through.Scotty wrote:Linki: JJJ why can't we wait to do GTh reads in a pocket of time sometime before EOD? I've never done a true GTH read in real time.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:With Elohcin I think I might be breaking one of my cardinal rules -- seeing a team mate relationship without any flips to facilitate it. When I look at leetic's attack on Elohcin's "fluff", it strikes me as very arbitrary and very forced, to the point that I wonder if he was overzealous in his desire to distance from Elohcin. This is something I've seen a lot of lately around here from baddies in multiple games and that might be influencing my perspective. Elohcin herself seemed concerned about this:bea wrote:I don't get why you GTH epi or eloh as bad.
Like I said, still struggling to find my feet and I usually work more from who do I trust backwards than who do I suspect, but I'd not seen anything weird out of them that gave me any bad feelings or anything.
Otherwise, Elohcin's posts on their own power don't perturb me, but they don't inspire me either. They make me feel nothing, really. That might not sound damning, but I am getting a solid number of town vibes from this player roster right now, and that means the people not making me feel that way are inherently suspicious by process of elimination. It's not a confident matter on Day 2 with so many people alive, but it's where my head is.Elohcin wrote:fluffy, non- game related stuff? What are you talking about? I don't think I've posted anything non-game related except that I would be back to vote after my show last night and even that was semi-game related. I don't know what you're talking about. Also, looking back at all your posts, you have only made ONE semi-on topic post. The rest have been "fluffy, non-game related" posts.leetic wrote:Why are you posting such fluffy, non-game-related stuff this late in? Surely you have something else to talk about?Elohcin wrote:I am going to go with Customer Service tonight.
I do hope you aren't lumping me with this Leetic person by asking us both about our reads at the same time. At the moment I am most concerned with Quin for his/her "I'm a civ and you'll be sorry" post before EoD 1. As I've said before and as most people are probably tired of hearing...big games are difficult for me. I am trying to keep up, take notes, and participate as much as possible. I will have more things to say as time goes on, promise.DrumBeats wrote:@ Leetic and Eloh - What are your current reads?
I'll look over Epignosis and talk about him separately. I think I can be less vague there.
I called LoRab "good" GTH, but there was a little cognitive dissonance about it. She's a tough one to peg right now. I think her beefs with Quin appeared genuine, but there's not much else to talk about with her and that's not ideal.DrumBeats wrote:@ 3J linki - Makes enough sense. How do you feel about LoRab and the possibility of a Matt/Scotty scumteam?
I am not as solidly sold on this case, but I still like what you're doing and where you're going. I think I may have an inherent bias with Epi - when some of his logic and reasoning agrees with mine, I tend to correlate that to him also being civ. He posted a couple things (or at least 1, I should really do an ISO to double check) that were exactly where my head was at at that time, so it made me lean slightly civ on him.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Beefs with Epignosis:
I don't know why Epi asked this question. Matt's assertion was rather ordinary -- that two people (Scotty and fingersplints) shouldn't know the alignment of S~V~S yet and thus should have no reason to interfere with his methods. I don't think there's any implication here that Matt knows more than he should know, which is where Epi's question seems to lead.Spoiler: show
This strikes me as a very small reason to regard Matt as the number one suspect, and there's an air of opportunism too given the crap Matt got throughout Day 1.Spoiler: show
This is fun in that Epignosis is accusing Wilgy of providing fake content, when Epi's post itself looks to me like fake content. Moreover, the Wilgy post being criticized looks a lot like the Epignosis post in the previous spoiler. Saying something for the sake of saying something. Taking a stance for the sake of taking a stance.Spoiler: show
The "soft accusation" thing looks fake too. Wilgy suggested a bad INH might suggest a good Matt, which makes perfect sense given the treatment INH gave Matt on Day 1. There's no reason for this to be perceived as "soft". There's no "couching". Wilgy voiced suspicion of INH independent of Matt and then made an assertion about how a baddie flip by INH might reflect on Matt. That's reasonable.Spoiler: show
Then all those numeral grades are just pointless. Epignosis is not the type to waste thread space on nonsense.
Epignosis ended up supporting the Wilgy lynch. The only supporting content for this vote is in the preceding spoiler, which I've already griped about. He seemed very relaxed and content to go with the flow on this one. I get the impression given the language of his posts that he suspected Matt more than Wilgy, but he didn't bother to press the issue. I'd expect a civilian Epignosis to be a little more invested in getting his suspect lynched.Spoiler: show
Separately from all this, I count 14 of Epi's 33 posts that add nothing to the discussion. This number can be disputed to be slightly higher or slightly lower depending upon interpretation. Regardless I see potential post count inflation.
1) In Matt's Day 0 stuff, he keyed in on Scotty/Splints but was quick to shift that to mostly Splints. At one point in Scotty's ISO, he states that Matt wasn't pushing Splints over him because the vote ended up on him. Just feels like distancing imoJaggedJimmyJay wrote:I called LoRab "good" GTH, but there was a little cognitive dissonance about it. She's a tough one to peg right now. I think her beefs with Quin appeared genuine, but there's not much else to talk about with her and that's not ideal.DrumBeats wrote:@ 3J linki - Makes enough sense. How do you feel about LoRab and the possibility of a Matt/Scotty scumteam?
As I suggested before, I try not to think about who might be baddie team mates among living players, because those links are incomplete without the confirmation of a flip. At face value, I haven't noticed any compelling reason to associate those two (Matt and Scotty). Have you?
What does this mean?insertnamehere wrote:People I wanna read through tomorrow:
BWT - I think his interactions with me and Quin have all been very bandwagon-y, and his super hyperbolic comments about some of Quin's stuff made me roll my eyes.
SVS - Same sort of weird stuff with Quin, and all that weird possible vote manip stuff.
3J - Some of his interactions back when we were doing the 'ol super-long back-and-forth that nobody reads, struck me as him wanting to push an agenda and not keeping an open mind. But then I show up, post the thesis of what I was saying the whole time, albeit in a much less frazzled way, and he does a 180 on me. My read-through will entirely concentrate on his interactions with people other than myself, in order to try and eliminate the "No U" bias from my mind.
None of these people I'd go so far as to say I suspect, but they've all either done or been involved in some stuff that pings my meter. I'm gonna do some research, and see what I can find.
Why else would I vote now? Do I think Epignosis is s baddie? 
Serge wrote:I am town aligned
I know I definitely am not. We're less than 24 hours away from Day 2 ending, Quin's posts since after the Day 1 lynch have started to make me feel better about him, and I'm currently catching up and have zero suspicions on anyone. Although part of that may be because this is a very large game and most large games take me a bit longer to start to sink in and get more concrete ideas.insertnamehere wrote: I wanna take a quick informal poll.
Who here genuinely thinks that they are good at mafia?
I know I sure as hell don't. But I like playing it anyway.
Good to know. Where is this coming from?Serge wrote:I am town aligned
I completely understand Point #1. I was gone from here for almost 6 months and came back to find quite a few new players from other mafia sites who are used to different cultures and attitudes on certain aspects of the game that seem very antithetical to me. So it takes me some time to get used to something new like that.insertnamehere wrote:Sorry for being absent for the last 24 or so hours. This is the part of the game that really fucking gets to me and stresses me out to frankly completely unreasonable levels. It's also why, over time, I've come to prefer the more "avant-garde" games that take more liberal interpretations of the mafia ruleset. Hell, my favorite game I've ever been in was Llama's Oblique Strategies where I tried to convince the "mafia" to out themselves so that everyone could win. And it almost worked.
I'm gonna keep this simple.
1. I was gone from the site for about a year and a half. I came back about a month ago. There are a lot of new players with new strategies who I don't know, and they don't know me.
2. I learned about a strategy that I haven't really seen widely used and accepted. I didn't have a very high opinion of this strategy, and I thought it was utterly unhelpful to the civilians. Yes, maybe it worked in past games that I didn't play, but that's all anecdotal to me.
3. I made jokes about that strategy and the person who used it. They weren't, in my opinion, mean-spirited or cruel, and were more like me poking fun while communicating my opinion. If I was unreasonably elaborate with my jokes, that's because I'm the type of person who will take a dumb comic premise and run with it. Also, I was bored.
If I think something is unhelpful to the civilian cause, I'm going to say so, and I'm going to advise that we don't play into it.
Once again, I wasn't trying to say that Matt, the person, was unreasonable and shouldn't be listened to, I just thought that some of his strategies were potentially harmful to the civilian cause.
To me at least, this conversation existed outside the context of the game. Maybe it's a conversation that should be better held in a separate thread. I guess I was naive.
) in a large game like this early on makes it much easier for baddies to hide. Especially when the better strategy is to overwhelm them with posts about almost anything and everything. Mountains of discussion are much harder for baddies to hide behind IMO. However, adding in that there are quite a few players here that I haven't ever played with or not played with much makes it harder for me to find my footing as well and start to contribute. So maybe part of that is just how I play the game and get used to it.Nope. Civilian BTSC is immensely popular on this site.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Beefs with Epignosis:
I don't know why Epi asked this question. Matt's assertion was rather ordinary -- that two people (Scotty and fingersplints) shouldn't know the alignment of S~V~S yet and thus should have no reason to interfere with his methods. I don't think there's any implication here that Matt knows more than he should know, which is where Epi's question seems to lead.Spoiler: show
It's Day 1. I don't need anything more than a very small reason to have a number one suspect.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:This strikes me as a very small reason to regard Matt as the number one suspect, and there's an air of opportunism too given the crap Matt got throughout Day 1.Spoiler: show
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:This is fun in that Epignosis is accusing Wilgy of providing fake content, when Epi's post itself looks to me like fake content. Moreover, the Wilgy post being criticized looks a lot like the Epignosis post in the previous spoiler. Saying something for the sake of saying something. Taking a stance for the sake of taking a stance.Spoiler: show
When you lynch me, you can see how fake it was.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:The "soft accusation" thing looks fake too. Wilgy suggested a bad INH might suggest a good Matt, which makes perfect sense given the treatment INH gave Matt on Day 1. There's no reason for this to be perceived as "soft". There's no "couching". Wilgy voiced suspicion of INH independent of Matt and then made an assertion about how a baddie flip by INH might reflect on Matt. That's reasonable.Spoiler: show
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Then all those numeral grades are just pointless. Epignosis is not the type to waste thread space on nonsense.
You don't know what you'd expect a civilian Epignosis to do. Maybe lynching me would be educational for you.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Epignosis ended up supporting the Wilgy lynch. The only supporting content for this vote is in the preceding spoiler, which I've already griped about. He seemed very relaxed and content to go with the flow on this one. I get the impression given the language of his posts that he suspected Matt more than Wilgy, but he didn't bother to press the issue. I'd expect a civilian Epignosis to be a little more invested in getting his suspect lynched.Spoiler: show
I don't give a shit about post count, and I don't think you do either.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Separately from all this, I count 14 of Epi's 33 posts that add nothing to the discussion. This number can be disputed to be slightly higher or slightly lower depending upon interpretation. Regardless I see potential post count inflation.
I've been at the receiving end of this kind of accusation in almost every game I've been in for almost a year now. I'm surprised my activity is the basis for you voting me- you were one of the reasons I stopped posting so much and reigned in my aggressive ways. And before anyone objects, "Hey, you were bad in Turf Wars!", I think you can appreciate that someone can be genuine despite alignment, especially if someone else verifies what you said about yourself.S~V~S wrote:Why do you suppose I would vote for Epignosis?
Could it be his low flying ways; very very very odd for him, don't you think? Does anyone think of "low posters" and "Epignosis" in the same sentence?
Would you believe that I have twice as many posts as him, and have posted only minimally during the night, and questioned little during the day?
Will I be busy tonight?
Is it possible I will have time to ask more questions today at work? Will you tune in to the same bat time, same bat channel to find out?
S~V~S wrote: I was out all weekend and had to read Quin in ISO; would it surprise you to hear that his output during the night period made me feel much better about him? Would it surprise you to hear that his vote made me feel even better?
DrumBeats wrote: Also would not surprise me to hear that the night made you feel better about Quin, I feel a bit better about him myself. The vote making you feel better surprises me a bit, but whatever floats your boat
3 of the 4 Quin voters now feel good about him (DB even listed Quin as civ) with basically no reasoning for this shift beyond, "His posts made me feel better about him." BWT's especially strikes me as an easy way to springboard off of what the others said without offering any new thoughts on Quin. I'll be looking at these three for the remainder of the phase to see if anything else stands out to me.birdwithteeth11 wrote: I know I definitely am not. We're less than 24 hours away from Day 2 ending, Quin's posts since after the Day 1 lynch have started to make me feel better about him, and I'm currently catching up and have zero suspicions on anyone. Although part of that may be because this is a very large game and most large games take me a bit longer to start to sink in and get more concrete ideas.
Did I say aggressive? Quiet =/= unaggressive and chatty =/= aggressive, does it?Epignosis wrote:I've been at the receiving end of this kind of accusation in almost every game I've been in for almost a year now. I'm surprised my activity is the basis for you voting me- you were one of the reasons I stopped posting so much and reigned in my aggressive ways. And before anyone objects, "Hey, you were bad in Turf Wars!", I think you can appreciate that someone can be genuine despite alignment, especially if someone else verifies what you said about yourself.S~V~S wrote:Why do you suppose I would vote for Epignosis?
Could it be his low flying ways; very very very odd for him, don't you think? Does anyone think of "low posters" and "Epignosis" in the same sentence?
Would you believe that I have twice as many posts as him, and have posted only minimally during the night, and questioned little during the day?
Will I be busy tonight?
Is it possible I will have time to ask more questions today at work? Will you tune in to the same bat time, same bat channel to find out?
Until we had already won, that is.Epignosis wrote:I was a top poster in those because nobody killed me. I ended up being a top poster in Turf Wars too because nobody lynched me.
I didn't say either of those things. I find it odd that 3/4 of the Quin voters had a sudden change of heart with very little in-thread reasoning for that development.S~V~S wrote: @Faraday, why do you think that being bad is the only reason one may change ones mind overnight in a Mafia game? Why do think that people who disagree with you are suspicious?
I made a number of points about Epignosis unrelated to post count. If you feel they were weak, please identify those points and explain your misgivings.DFaraday wrote:I didn't say either of those things. I find it odd that 3/4 of the Quin voters had a sudden change of heart with very little in-thread reasoning for that development.S~V~S wrote: @Faraday, why do you think that being bad is the only reason one may change ones mind overnight in a Mafia game? Why do think that people who disagree with you are suspicious?
I don't find the Epi and leetic suspicions shady because I don't agree with them (although I see how it could come off that way); it's more that their reasons were weak. I fail to see how Epi's post count is indicative of alignment, or even an accurate assessment of his typical play
(his post count in recent months varies quite a bit from game to game). The leetic votes are based on almost nothing, which leads me to wonder whether one or more of them is forced.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Epignosis -- badJaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'll GTH read everyone alive and see where that leaves me.
SVS -- bad
I agree. What's the implication with Matt though? If he's bad he still doesn't know whether those players have civilian BTSC. Where were you going with your question?Epignosis wrote:Nope. Civilian BTSC is immensely popular on this site.
I don't get the impression you were interested in finding anything better. Whether there was anything better to be found on Day 1 is less important to me than the investment you made in your own suspicion -- minimal.Epignosis wrote:It's Day 1. I don't need anything more than a very small reason to have a number one suspect.
Incorrect.Epignosis wrote:You don't know what you'd expect a civilian Epignosis to do. Maybe lynching me would be educational for you.
What is this supposed to mean? Do you suspect me? What purpose does this little highligted bit serve?Epignosis wrote:I don't give a shit about post count, and I don't think you do either.
My GTH reads came before her vote, so I have no idea what your point is.Epignosis wrote:JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Epignosis -- badJaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'll GTH read everyone alive and see where that leaves me.
SVS -- bad
Epignosis
2
JaggedJimmyJay (14), S~V~S (15)
This I agree with. Both in his original suspicion of Quin and now his relaxed stance on Quin, BWT seemed to be following the herd too contently to be genuine.DFaraday wrote:3 of the 4 Quin voters now feel good about him (DB even listed Quin as civ) with basically no reasoning for this shift beyond, "His posts made me feel better about him." BWT's especially strikes me as an easy way to springboard off of what the others said without offering any new thoughts on Quin. I'll be looking at these three for the remainder of the phase to see if anything else stands out to me.
I know. I was waiting to see if you'd come in and address S~V~S's vote for me (over my post count, of all things) in light of you having given her the bad tag. I thought you would have some reaction to that. You didn't. Now I want to know why.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:My GTH reads came before her vote, so I have no idea what your point is.Epignosis wrote:JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Epignosis -- badJaggedJimmyJay wrote:I'll GTH read everyone alive and see where that leaves me.
SVS -- bad
Epignosis
2
JaggedJimmyJay (14), S~V~S (15)
[-Mass Effect Mafia banner-]
