Not realising that the one above it is zebra...a2thezebra wrote:I'm voting marmota because marmot, hellooooooo
Day 12 ~ 2015 Game of Champions
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
For those wondering, the poll says...
Choose your favorite
Linki: sob...
Choose your favorite
- Brown spider monkey
Domestic cow
Plains zebra
Yellow-bellied marmot
Brown bear
Linki: sob...
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
It's not a polar bear???
- MacDougall
- Out of my scumrange
- Posts in topic: 960
- Posts: 39786
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:37 am
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Nah I actually wanted to say fuck off to you and my text doesn't indicate how loud I would have said it if you were sitting next to me.a2thezebra wrote:I didn't say you were outright faking it, only that you were compensating. A kind of flanderization of yourself; your genuine reaction, yet amplified up to eleven.MacDougall wrote:You have literally angered me to the point where I am swearing at you but you're going to just say I am faking it. You are baiting the shit out of me right now and you know it.a2thezebra wrote:I disagree that it would be deserved in either case, and either way I still think you would be compensating.
linki -
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I'm even happier voting for Brown Bear, tbh.
Brown spider monkey would be the obvious second favourite.
I'm not sucking up to the hosts at all.
I guess "domestic cow" best stands for HamburgerBoy?
Brown spider monkey would be the obvious second favourite.
I'm not sucking up to the hosts at all.
I guess "domestic cow" best stands for HamburgerBoy?
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Nope.Golden wrote:It's not a polar bear???
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- JaggedJimmyJay
- The Brassiere of The Syndicate
- Posts in topic: 429
- Posts: 39907
- Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 11:42 pm
- Location: United States
- Gender: Man
- Preferred Pronouns: He/him/his/himself
- Aka: Jay | JJJ | J3 | 3J | jagged | Jimmy | KOFM
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Hey llama, you were almost certainly aware of my beef with you on Night 0 (you acknowledged other posts in the same vicinity), but never even acknowledged my existence. Then on Day 1 I made it as clear as possible under the circumstances that I wanted your attention and you still ignored me. Why?
Spoiler: show
- MacDougall
- Out of my scumrange
- Posts in topic: 960
- Posts: 39786
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:37 am
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I smell an impending vote for Bos Tauros.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey llama, you were almost certainly aware of my beef with you on Night 0 (you acknowledged other posts in the same vicinity), but never even acknowledged my existence. Then on Day 1 I made it as clear as possible under the circumstances that I wanted your attention and you still ignored me. Why?
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I realized, simply because I'm the only user that starts with "a". Marmot is an international hero.Golden wrote:Not realising that the one above it is zebra...a2thezebra wrote:I'm voting marmota because marmot, hellooooooo
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- JaggedJimmyJay
- The Brassiere of The Syndicate
- Posts in topic: 429
- Posts: 39907
- Joined: Tue May 12, 2015 11:42 pm
- Location: United States
- Gender: Man
- Preferred Pronouns: He/him/his/himself
- Aka: Jay | JJJ | J3 | 3J | jagged | Jimmy | KOFM
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
no idea what any of that is. I might vote for the Equus one because Equus is a good ass player on RYM.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I smell an impending vote for Bos Tauros.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey llama, you were almost certainly aware of my beef with you on Night 0 (you acknowledged other posts in the same vicinity), but never even acknowledged my existence. Then on Day 1 I made it as clear as possible under the circumstances that I wanted your attention and you still ignored me. Why?
Spoiler: show
- HamburgerBoy
- The Mark
- Posts in topic: 201
- Posts: 448
- Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:28 pm
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Being a mafia hero is hard work. Not that I would know.
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Well, two folks have posted the English translations for the poll options. So feel free to educate yourself.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:no idea what any of that is. I might vote for the Equus one because Equus is a good ass player on RYM.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I smell an impending vote for Bos Tauros.JaggedJimmyJay wrote:Hey llama, you were almost certainly aware of my beef with you on Night 0 (you acknowledged other posts in the same vicinity), but never even acknowledged my existence. Then on Day 1 I made it as clear as possible under the circumstances that I wanted your attention and you still ignored me. Why?
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
If you think I'm actually going to listen to that with other people in the room then you're kidding yourself. Also...if you think I'm baiting you just because I've somehow angered you enough to start swearing at me, then again...you're kidding yourself. Does that mean every other player in Star Wars was baiting you all the time as well? Here's a crazy thought...maybe you get angered relatively easily.MacDougall wrote:Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- MacDougall
- Out of my scumrange
- Posts in topic: 960
- Posts: 39786
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:37 am
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I thought I was pretending to be angry.a2thezebra wrote:If you think I'm actually going to listen to that with other people in the room then you're kidding yourself. Also...if you think I'm baiting you just because I've somehow angered you enough to start swearing at me, then again...you're kidding yourself. Does that mean every other player in Star Wars was baiting you all the time as well? Here's a crazy thought...maybe you get angered relatively easily.MacDougall wrote:Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
The vocaroo post is tongue in cheek Zebra lol. Also how am I supposed to know you have other people in the room. Lighten up.
- Marmot
- Marmot
- Posts in topic: 849
- Posts: 30973
- Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 11:21 am
- Location: Oregon
- Gender: Genderfluid
- Preferred Pronouns: they/them
- Aka: Marmot
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
You're angry, but you're telling zebra to 'lighten up'?MacDougall wrote:I thought I was pretending to be angry.a2thezebra wrote:If you think I'm actually going to listen to that with other people in the room then you're kidding yourself. Also...if you think I'm baiting you just because I've somehow angered you enough to start swearing at me, then again...you're kidding yourself. Does that mean every other player in Star Wars was baiting you all the time as well? Here's a crazy thought...maybe you get angered relatively easily.MacDougall wrote:Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
The vocaroo post is tongue in cheek Zebra lol. Also how am I supposed to know you have other people in the room. Lighten up.
Banners and Stuff
Spoiler: show
Dragon D. Luffy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 16, 2020 7:33 pm Just how many days of "let's yeet them tomorrow" can a mafioso survive?
The answer: all of them, if you are a marmot.
- MacDougall
- Out of my scumrange
- Posts in topic: 960
- Posts: 39786
- Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 2:37 am
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
For fucks sake. Let me spell it out.Metalmarsh89 wrote:You're angry, but you're telling zebra to 'lighten up'?MacDougall wrote:I thought I was pretending to be angry.a2thezebra wrote:If you think I'm actually going to listen to that with other people in the room then you're kidding yourself. Also...if you think I'm baiting you just because I've somehow angered you enough to start swearing at me, then again...you're kidding yourself. Does that mean every other player in Star Wars was baiting you all the time as well? Here's a crazy thought...maybe you get angered relatively easily.MacDougall wrote:Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
The vocaroo post is tongue in cheek Zebra lol. Also how am I supposed to know you have other people in the room. Lighten up.
Zebra annoyed me with a post. It manifested in a "fuck you" post. On account of not being a psychopath who sits behind their computer screen seething over forums mafia my frustration dissipated pretty well immediately. I made the vocaroo post to be funny and Zebra replied to it with an annoying amount of seriousness.
Ya dig?
I'm out. It's Saturday and I should take my kid to the park or something.
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
You thought that even after I clarified that you weren't? Interesting.MacDougall wrote:I thought I was pretending to be angry.a2thezebra wrote:If you think I'm actually going to listen to that with other people in the room then you're kidding yourself. Also...if you think I'm baiting you just because I've somehow angered you enough to start swearing at me, then again...you're kidding yourself. Does that mean every other player in Star Wars was baiting you all the time as well? Here's a crazy thought...maybe you get angered relatively easily.MacDougall wrote:Just so you know, this is what it would have sounded like.
The vocaroo post is tongue in cheek Zebra lol. Also how am I supposed to know you have other people in the room. Lighten up.
Also, I love it when angry folk tell others to chill. It makes me feel like I'm in a real-life comedy sketch.
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Doth protest too much methinks... :PMacDougall wrote:On account of not being a psychopath who sits behind their computer screen seething over forums mafia my frustration dissipated pretty well immediately.
Also, my response wasn't exactly deathly serious.
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- thellama73
- Supatown
- Posts in topic: 132
- Posts: 12623
- Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:29 pm
- Location: Murder Park
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Spoiler: show
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Rico has already made it more or less clear in the few post-death posts he has made that he's cutting the crap and is going to put in a solid effort, and I look forward to seeing it.
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- thellama73
- Supatown
- Posts in topic: 132
- Posts: 12623
- Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:29 pm
- Location: Murder Park
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Past behavior tends to be a predictor of future behavior. I'll admit that I haven't yet read what he has posted after his death, so perhaps I misjudge him. Anyway, not a great lynch result, I would argue.Golden wrote:Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 686
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I would say its not the best outcome, but it is far from a bad one. Now Rico's energy will (hopefully, otherwise I'll just tune him out) be focused on finding baddies rather than getting himself lynched.thellama73 wrote:Past behavior tends to be a predictor of future behavior. I'll admit that I haven't yet read what he has posted after his death, so perhaps I misjudge him. Anyway, not a great lynch result, I would argue.Golden wrote:Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
our Linkitis is our lives.
- thellama73
- Supatown
- Posts in topic: 132
- Posts: 12623
- Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 8:29 pm
- Location: Murder Park
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Fair enough. I just like lynching baddies on Day 1. Baddies like Sig.DharmaHelper wrote:I would say its not the best outcome, but it is far from a bad one. Now Rico's energy will (hopefully, otherwise I'll just tune him out) be focused on finding baddies rather than getting himself lynched.thellama73 wrote:Past behavior tends to be a predictor of future behavior. I'll admit that I haven't yet read what he has posted after his death, so perhaps I misjudge him. Anyway, not a great lynch result, I would argue.Golden wrote:Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
Epignosis wrote:If llama is good, it means we exist in a universe in which multitasking llama can call out the first of two mafia while simultaneously calling out two civilians.
I don't want to live in that universe.
Spoiler: show
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 686
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
- Sorsha
- Money Launderer
- Posts in topic: 175
- Posts: 2128
- Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:26 pm
- Location: MKE
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I'm happy with the result as long as Rico becomes an upstanding citizen and helps catch baddies.
Not caught up, just came to see the result.
Not caught up, just came to see the result.
- RadicalFuzz
- The Mark
- Posts in topic: 55
- Posts: 387
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Faraday when you say I read civvie so you're not pinged by my "strange alignment comments" what comments are you referring to?
Oh thank god he wasn't just being a giant idiot.
Llama, explain how we "lost a civilian?" His unkillable role from which he literally can't be targeted and will therefore be able to advise as a mod-confirmed civilian for the everlasting future of the game is an unfavorable outcome? I honestly think this went better than lynching scum Day 1, as Rico would surely be lynched later down the line for his actions up to this point.
Oh thank god he wasn't just being a giant idiot.
Llama, explain how we "lost a civilian?" His unkillable role from which he literally can't be targeted and will therefore be able to advise as a mod-confirmed civilian for the everlasting future of the game is an unfavorable outcome? I honestly think this went better than lynching scum Day 1, as Rico would surely be lynched later down the line for his actions up to this point.
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Rico has a clear role related reason for his behaviour on day one that no longer applies, so I see no reason for assuming it is a predictor of future behaviour.thellama73 wrote:Past behavior tends to be a predictor of future behavior. I'll admit that I haven't yet read what he has posted after his death, so perhaps I misjudge him. Anyway, not a great lynch result, I would argue.Golden wrote:Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
I'll admit when I asked I forgot your history with Rico though.
-
- Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
- Posts in topic: 1472
- Posts: 11660
- Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I'm having doubts you read the D1 outcome itself in great detail, or else you saying "we lost" (past tense) a civilian (have we, yet, lost anyone in fact?) and "after my death" (which, in a way, yes, happened, but what defines me as dead, now that I can still post?) is confusing. And suspecting me or analyzing me the way you said it (past behavious predicator of future behaviour lolwut) feels like you'd keep barking at a confirmed civilian. Why do that?thellama73 wrote:Past behavior tends to be a predictor of future behavior. I'll admit that I haven't yet read what he has posted after his death, so perhaps I misjudge him. Anyway, not a great lynch result, I would argue.Golden wrote:Why would you assume rico would still post nonsense? I guess we have lost a civilian but on the flip side we've gained a useful resource. Rico is, I think, one of the best analysts of the game and from his position he could definitely help the town win. I think that is a good outcome.thellama73 wrote:I am annoyed that there is no Latin llama option on the poll. I am also annoyed that we both lost a civilian and still have to put up with Rico's nonsense.
-
- Uomini D'onore (Man of Honor)
- Posts in topic: 1472
- Posts: 11660
- Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2014 11:12 pm
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Also, to whoever RIPd my vote priviledge, it's easily discardable based on past performances. 9 times out of 10 my vote wouldn't be on a lynched baddie, if a lynch goes well; 5 out of 10 it could be on a mislynched civ, if the lynch goes bad. So there's no reason it should affect the civ's hunting at this stage.
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I'm three pages behind. Rico, please shut the fuck up sometimes.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
Re: Day 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
It is implicitly demanding when a player is viewed as bad if they don't explain their deviation from the wagons to the satisfaction of the interrogator. My broader issue is with a recent trend in games where players adopt certain tactics (eg. the above, GTH, rainbow lists), then suspect other players if they refuse to use those methods.Golden wrote:I don't think explaining why you voted in a way that you know will make no impact is either 'an arbitrary command' or particularly demanding.DFaraday wrote:I'm still not caught up, because this thread is longer than a Tolstoy novel, but this caught my attention.
I strongly disagree with this line of thinking. The point of Mafia, if one is civ, is to find and vote for baddies. If you have reason to believe another player is bad, you should vote for them, and owe nothing to the bandwagons, as if you need approval from the majority opinion to dissent. If you don't think a wagon is legitimate, that should be enough. I really don't like Mafia tactics which try to force anything out of players, then insisting that they are suspicious if they don't comply with these arbitrary commands from other players. It comes across as demanding and trying to force other players to fit a particular paradigm, and as a libertarian, I'm against that.Golden wrote:I'd expect anyone who does not join on the main two wagons to be able to put into words why they didn't vote for either of those people. If they can't, I don't care how good the reason is that they voted someone off the wagon, it is effective scum hiding. Nothing easier when scum than tunnelling on someone who isn't getting lynched.RadicalFuzz wrote:The issue with declaring which of these hypothetical two main wagons you would vote for, Golden, is that it rarely helps the one declaring intent to vote. If they get lynched and flip scum then it was "free credit" because they didn't vote for the scum. If they get lynched and flip civ then it was "distancing from a mislynch" because they appeared flip-floppy. If that player isn't lynched it's almost worse, since there's no conclusion to this "I'd rather X be dead than Y" preference. My experiences show that scum hiding on a main wagon usually have worse reasoning than scum hiding on off wagons, as they can bandwagon and literally say "I agree with X's statements" without risking genuine interaction.
The advantage of forcing them to say IS that it rarely helps them. It means they aren't doing it for themselves, they are doing it for the record. Scum then can't avoid making some form of statement about teammates when they have heat. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to how genuine you believe someone to be in their reads, regardless of what those reads actually are.
Having said that, I agree with DH that Rico's behavior is not helpful to the civ cause at all, so he is most likely bad or un-civvie-friendly Indy.
I find people who choose to vote off-wagon inherently suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so, and yes if they don't give that reason I may find them suspicious and ask them what their reasons were. If they choose not to answer my question thats up to them, but it isn't going to make me feel good about them.
Do you find people who vote on-wagon equally suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so? I'm more inclined to feel the reverse, and think better of players who think for themselves rather than parroting the prevailing groupthink. I honestly can't comprehend how conformity with bandwagons is supposed to be a good thing now.
Spoiler: show
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Alignment was a poor word choice on my part. I was referring to your early game comments about how you're playing differently from your usual style. I thought those were weird at the time, but you've come across as legitimate since then.RadicalFuzz wrote:Faraday when you say I read civvie so you're not pinged by my "strange alignment comments" what comments are you referring to?
Oh thank god he wasn't just being a giant idiot.
Llama, explain how we "lost a civilian?" His unkillable role from which he literally can't be targeted and will therefore be able to advise as a mod-confirmed civilian for the everlasting future of the game is an unfavorable outcome? I honestly think this went better than lynching scum Day 1, as Rico would surely be lynched later down the line for his actions up to this point.
Spoiler: show
- RadicalFuzz
- The Mark
- Posts in topic: 55
- Posts: 387
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Sorry if it feels like I'm harassing you, but when you say I've come across as legitimate since then that means you feel my "playing differently" were not legitimate?
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 686
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Epi was too kind using the word "sometimes" confirmed mafia.Epignosis wrote:I'm three pages behind. Rico, please shut the fuck up sometimes.
our Linkitis is our lives.
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Please kill me.DharmaHelper wrote:Epi was too kind using the word "sometimes" confirmed mafia.Epignosis wrote:I'm three pages behind. Rico, please shut the fuck up sometimes.
Stream my music for free: https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/
- Golden
- The Coward
- Posts in topic: 353
- Posts: 20125
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:27 am
- Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Re: Day 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I'm not talking about gth, rainbow lists or any 'method', DF. I'm talking about EXPLAINING YOUR VOTE. It's a basic, normal and fundamental part of playing the game, not a newfangled device. If you aren't willing to do it (not you specifically, but anyone), you deserve all attention you get for it.DFaraday wrote:It is implicitly demanding when a player is viewed as bad if they don't explain their deviation from the wagons to the satisfaction of the interrogator. My broader issue is with a recent trend in games where players adopt certain tactics (eg. the above, GTH, rainbow lists), then suspect other players if they refuse to use those methods.Golden wrote:I don't think explaining why you voted in a way that you know will make no impact is either 'an arbitrary command' or particularly demanding.DFaraday wrote:I'm still not caught up, because this thread is longer than a Tolstoy novel, but this caught my attention.
I strongly disagree with this line of thinking. The point of Mafia, if one is civ, is to find and vote for baddies. If you have reason to believe another player is bad, you should vote for them, and owe nothing to the bandwagons, as if you need approval from the majority opinion to dissent. If you don't think a wagon is legitimate, that should be enough. I really don't like Mafia tactics which try to force anything out of players, then insisting that they are suspicious if they don't comply with these arbitrary commands from other players. It comes across as demanding and trying to force other players to fit a particular paradigm, and as a libertarian, I'm against that.Golden wrote:I'd expect anyone who does not join on the main two wagons to be able to put into words why they didn't vote for either of those people. If they can't, I don't care how good the reason is that they voted someone off the wagon, it is effective scum hiding. Nothing easier when scum than tunnelling on someone who isn't getting lynched.RadicalFuzz wrote:The issue with declaring which of these hypothetical two main wagons you would vote for, Golden, is that it rarely helps the one declaring intent to vote. If they get lynched and flip scum then it was "free credit" because they didn't vote for the scum. If they get lynched and flip civ then it was "distancing from a mislynch" because they appeared flip-floppy. If that player isn't lynched it's almost worse, since there's no conclusion to this "I'd rather X be dead than Y" preference. My experiences show that scum hiding on a main wagon usually have worse reasoning than scum hiding on off wagons, as they can bandwagon and literally say "I agree with X's statements" without risking genuine interaction.
The advantage of forcing them to say IS that it rarely helps them. It means they aren't doing it for themselves, they are doing it for the record. Scum then can't avoid making some form of statement about teammates when they have heat. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to how genuine you believe someone to be in their reads, regardless of what those reads actually are.
Having said that, I agree with DH that Rico's behavior is not helpful to the civ cause at all, so he is most likely bad or un-civvie-friendly Indy.
I find people who choose to vote off-wagon inherently suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so, and yes if they don't give that reason I may find them suspicious and ask them what their reasons were. If they choose not to answer my question thats up to them, but it isn't going to make me feel good about them.
Do you find people who vote on-wagon equally suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so? I'm more inclined to feel the reverse, and think better of players who think for themselves rather than parroting the prevailing groupthink. I honestly can't comprehend how conformity with bandwagons is supposed to be a good thing now.
"Thinking for yourself" is great. "Parroting groupthink" is bad. So we completely agree on those points. Neither of those things is relevant to the point I made though, which is this...
If you do not vote on one of the prevailing wagons, you are voting somewhere it is easy to hide. If you haven't sufficiently explained why you are voting off-wagon, then I will find it suspicious.
That might be an explanation for why you are voting for the person you are voting for, or it might be an explanation for why you are not voting for someone who can actually get lynched.
But either way, voting for someone who will not get lynched is a vote that will have no impact, so the only way it can have any meaning is with words in the thread. Votes on the major bandwagons speak through the result of the lynch. Votes off them do not. That's why they become easy places for baddies to hide. As I noted, in Biblical, it became very apparent that one of the key tactics of the baddie team was basically for all of them to nearly always be off the major lynches. It's such an easy tactic for allowing the civilians to pick each other off.
I'm not a fan of demanding others play a certain way either. But I don't see a lot of demanding that people do rainbow lists or demanding that people to gth reads. I think some people do them by choice.
Putting this in a very easy to understand, logical train of thought
1) Focus is often put on people for their vote when they vote for or against major bandwagons.
2) Focus is rarely put on people for their vote who vote off bandwagon
3) Meaning can often be drawn from votes on the major bandwagons
4) Meaning can rarely be drawn from votes off-wagon
5) Therefore, as a baddie a very easy move is to engage minimally and vote off-bandwagon. It is also a very COMMON move.
6) Also, as a civilian who wants to contribute to a civilian win, it is more likely that they will have thought about and are able to put into words why they are not voting on wagon, since it is more likely to be an active decision that they don't find those people suspicious.
6) I believe, statistically speaking, baddies vote off wagon a lot more commonly than civilians, and for less clear reasons.
7) I believe, therefore, that if a person who votes off wagon isn't giving much of an explanation for why, that is suspicious.
8) Therefore, I believe that it is reasonable to suspect people voting off wagon if they haven't provided a reasonable explanation for why they are voting the way they are.
- RadicalFuzz
- The Mark
- Posts in topic: 55
- Posts: 387
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Glad to see you're all caught up and enthusiastic about the game Timmer.
Re: Day 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I would argue that it is just as easy for baddies to hide their votes on a major bandwagon. You say that meaning can often be drawn from votes on the major bandwagon, which is true, but nearly every bandwagon in history has had several members who are basically going, "Yeah, sure, sounds good." In any instance where all of the endangered parties are civ, baddies would have little to lose by blending in to a wagon. And that is what baddies often do, they blend in. I get lynched for it often (although just as often as a civ to be fair). Most baddies try to avoid drawing attention to themselves, which voting off-wagon does.Golden wrote:I'm not talking about gth, rainbow lists or any 'method', DF. I'm talking about EXPLAINING YOUR VOTE. It's a basic, normal and fundamental part of playing the game, not a newfangled device. If you aren't willing to do it (not you specifically, but anyone), you deserve all attention you get for it.DFaraday wrote:It is implicitly demanding when a player is viewed as bad if they don't explain their deviation from the wagons to the satisfaction of the interrogator. My broader issue is with a recent trend in games where players adopt certain tactics (eg. the above, GTH, rainbow lists), then suspect other players if they refuse to use those methods.Golden wrote:I don't think explaining why you voted in a way that you know will make no impact is either 'an arbitrary command' or particularly demanding.DFaraday wrote:I'm still not caught up, because this thread is longer than a Tolstoy novel, but this caught my attention.
I strongly disagree with this line of thinking. The point of Mafia, if one is civ, is to find and vote for baddies. If you have reason to believe another player is bad, you should vote for them, and owe nothing to the bandwagons, as if you need approval from the majority opinion to dissent. If you don't think a wagon is legitimate, that should be enough. I really don't like Mafia tactics which try to force anything out of players, then insisting that they are suspicious if they don't comply with these arbitrary commands from other players. It comes across as demanding and trying to force other players to fit a particular paradigm, and as a libertarian, I'm against that.Golden wrote:I'd expect anyone who does not join on the main two wagons to be able to put into words why they didn't vote for either of those people. If they can't, I don't care how good the reason is that they voted someone off the wagon, it is effective scum hiding. Nothing easier when scum than tunnelling on someone who isn't getting lynched.RadicalFuzz wrote:The issue with declaring which of these hypothetical two main wagons you would vote for, Golden, is that it rarely helps the one declaring intent to vote. If they get lynched and flip scum then it was "free credit" because they didn't vote for the scum. If they get lynched and flip civ then it was "distancing from a mislynch" because they appeared flip-floppy. If that player isn't lynched it's almost worse, since there's no conclusion to this "I'd rather X be dead than Y" preference. My experiences show that scum hiding on a main wagon usually have worse reasoning than scum hiding on off wagons, as they can bandwagon and literally say "I agree with X's statements" without risking genuine interaction.
The advantage of forcing them to say IS that it rarely helps them. It means they aren't doing it for themselves, they are doing it for the record. Scum then can't avoid making some form of statement about teammates when they have heat. Ultimately, though, it all comes down to how genuine you believe someone to be in their reads, regardless of what those reads actually are.
Having said that, I agree with DH that Rico's behavior is not helpful to the civ cause at all, so he is most likely bad or un-civvie-friendly Indy.
I find people who choose to vote off-wagon inherently suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so, and yes if they don't give that reason I may find them suspicious and ask them what their reasons were. If they choose not to answer my question thats up to them, but it isn't going to make me feel good about them.
Do you find people who vote on-wagon equally suspicious if they don't provide a good explanation for doing so? I'm more inclined to feel the reverse, and think better of players who think for themselves rather than parroting the prevailing groupthink. I honestly can't comprehend how conformity with bandwagons is supposed to be a good thing now.
"Thinking for yourself" is great. "Parroting groupthink" is bad. So we completely agree on those points. Neither of those things is relevant to the point I made though, which is this...
If you do not vote on one of the prevailing wagons, you are voting somewhere it is easy to hide. If you haven't sufficiently explained why you are voting off-wagon, then I will find it suspicious.
That might be an explanation for why you are voting for the person you are voting for, or it might be an explanation for why you are not voting for someone who can actually get lynched.
But either way, voting for someone who will not get lynched is a vote that will have no impact, so the only way it can have any meaning is with words in the thread. Votes on the major bandwagons speak through the result of the lynch. Votes off them do not. That's why they become easy places for baddies to hide. As I noted, in Biblical, it became very apparent that one of the key tactics of the baddie team was basically for all of them to nearly always be off the major lynches. It's such an easy tactic for allowing the civilians to pick each other off.
I'm not a fan of demanding others play a certain way either. But I don't see a lot of demanding that people do rainbow lists or demanding that people to gth reads. I think some people do them by choice.
Putting this in a very easy to understand, logical train of thought
1) Focus is often put on people for their vote when they vote for or against major bandwagons.
2) Focus is rarely put on people for their vote who vote off bandwagon
3) Meaning can often be drawn from votes on the major bandwagons
4) Meaning can rarely be drawn from votes off-wagon
5) Therefore, as a baddie a very easy move is to engage minimally and vote off-bandwagon. It is also a very COMMON move.
6) Also, as a civilian who wants to contribute to a civilian win, it is more likely that they will have thought about and are able to put into words why they are not voting on wagon, since it is more likely to be an active decision that they don't find those people suspicious.
6) I believe, statistically speaking, baddies vote off wagon a lot more commonly than civilians, and for less clear reasons.
7) I believe, therefore, that if a person who votes off wagon isn't giving much of an explanation for why, that is suspicious.
8) Therefore, I believe that it is reasonable to suspect people voting off wagon if they haven't provided a reasonable explanation for why they are voting the way they are.
For these reasons I feel that bandwagon voters have just as much explaining to do as non-wagon voters. In many cases, saying that they have a reason at all besides it being the popular option would be nice.
I may have been a bit hyperbolic regarding the new strategies, but I do recall incidents in fairly recent games where players were being pressured to do GTHs and ISOs on everyone else in the game. It's 2am so I'm not going to look for it now, but those occasions stuck with me.
Spoiler: show
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
I mean it felt shady to me that you would bring that up without prompting. You haven't done anything to make me suspect you since then.RadicalFuzz wrote:Sorry if it feels like I'm harassing you, but when you say I've come across as legitimate since then that means you feel my "playing differently" were not legitimate?
Spoiler: show
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Wow, cool result peeps.
Draconus, who do you think would curse you to ask questions?
Draconus, who do you think would curse you to ask questions?
- RadicalFuzz
- The Mark
- Posts in topic: 55
- Posts: 387
- Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2015 2:37 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Thanks for reminding me Matt. To whomever is cursing the fine folks of this town: pick me next. I wanna be special.
Thanks for clarifying Faraday. While you're here and I have the ability to talk to humans at this ungodly hour, what is your impression of Wilgy?
Thanks for clarifying Faraday. While you're here and I have the ability to talk to humans at this ungodly hour, what is your impression of Wilgy?
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Wilgy usually seems a little shifty to me for some reason, but in this game he hasn't made a strong impression on me either way. Then again, I had to skim 15 pages or so if I had any hope of ever contributing again.RadicalFuzz wrote:Thanks for reminding me Matt. To whomever is cursing the fine folks of this town: pick me next. I wanna be special.
Thanks for clarifying Faraday. While you're here and I have the ability to talk to humans at this ungodly hour, what is your impression of Wilgy?
Spoiler: show
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Also, voted Bos Taurus because I am a Taurus (even though I don't ascribe to astrology).
Spoiler: show
- juliets
- Dancing Pancake
- Posts in topic: 240
- Posts: 16423
- Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:16 pm
- Location: Moobyworld
- Gender: Female
- Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
- Aka: jules
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Good work Enrique getting yourself lynched. Several people have said it already but I look forward to playing with someone who is as much of an analyst of the game as you are. Please though, less posts so I can better absorb what I am reading, including what you are saying. These last two days went by in kind of a blur.
Metalmarsh, I really don't want to be a pain in the ass but i re-posted my question to you last night and even though you were talking in the thread you didn't answer me. This wasn't supposed to be this big of a deal but it's hard for me to believe you missed it again since I even posted to say it was coming shortly.
Metalmarsh, I really don't want to be a pain in the ass but i re-posted my question to you last night and even though you were talking in the thread you didn't answer me. This wasn't supposed to be this big of a deal but it's hard for me to believe you missed it again since I even posted to say it was coming shortly.
JaggedJimmyJay wrote: ↑Sat Aug 21, 2021 3:24 pm Always good to remember that there is no such thing as a Mafia circumstance that is worth real human emotion. Sometimes it will naturally come out, but it can be contained if we just remember that this is a game on a message board forum that 99.99% of the population of the Earth has never heard of before. No matter how successful anyone is, it means just about nothing.
Spoiler: show
- a2thezebra
- Hitman
- Posts in topic: 275
- Posts: 5772
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 9:18 pm
- Contact:
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
Enrique? You mean Ricochet, lol.
"wifom is best served in gallons" - Diiny
- DharmaHelper
- Capo Regime (Street Boss)
- Posts in topic: 686
- Posts: 16565
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:29 pm
Re: Night 1~ 2015 Game of Champions
And the identity of the people posting, I guess :Pjuliets wrote:Good work Enrique getting yourself lynched. Several people have said it already but I look forward to playing with someone who is as much of an analyst of the game as you are. Please though, less posts so I can better absorb what I am reading, including what you are saying. These last two days went by in kind of a blur.
Metalmarsh, I really don't want to be a pain in the ass but i re-posted my question to you last night and even though you were talking in the thread you didn't answer me. This wasn't supposed to be this big of a deal but it's hard for me to believe you missed it again since I even posted to say it was coming shortly.
our Linkitis is our lives.