Re: Mafia Championship Scrimmage
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:45 pm
VOTE A2THEZEBRA
I'm smacking zebra on the head with the red shell.
I'm smacking zebra on the head with the red shell.
Murder, Mayhem, and Mafia
https://www.mafiathesyndicate.com/
Yay! \o/Golden wrote:VOTE A2THEZEBRA
I'm smacking zebra on the head with the red shell.
Right, because a simple read is so much to ask that if given, it might as well be public knowledge as encyclopedic fact.Golden wrote:Oh, ok.a2thezebra wrote:I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
I'll expect all of your rainbow lists to be 'confirmed town' or 'confirmed scum' from now on.
No, no, I gave simple reads.a2thezebra wrote:Right, because a simple read is so much to ask that if given, it might as well be public knowledge as encyclopedic fact.Golden wrote:Oh, ok.a2thezebra wrote:I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
I'll expect all of your rainbow lists to be 'confirmed town' or 'confirmed scum' from now on.
No, you just wish that was the case because then you can give a justified reason to vote me. :PGolden wrote:No, no, I gave simple reads.a2thezebra wrote:Right, because a simple read is so much to ask that if given, it might as well be public knowledge as encyclopedic fact.Golden wrote:Oh, ok.a2thezebra wrote:I had a feeling you would use this tactic at some point. Does your read look a little bit fabricated folks? Claim it as "nuance" and make known your disapproval of such outdated terms as "good" or "bad" in regards to reading other players.Golden wrote: Trying to remove all nuance and force me to term my thoughts on sloonei across the game as either 'good' or 'bad' and not shades of grey on a sliding scale don't sit well with me.
I'll expect all of your rainbow lists to be 'confirmed town' or 'confirmed scum' from now on.
You just don't like that 'slight scum' and 'strong scum' are different.
Golden wrote:After MM's case, sloonei.
After sloonei jumped off the Frog vote, sloonei.
It's not that hard to follow.
a2thezebra wrote:Golden wrote:After MM's case, sloonei.
After sloonei jumped off the Frog vote, sloonei.
It's not that hard to follow.![]()
![]()
You're sure it wasn't the extra work he put in after his initial case? Because we agreed that his initial case was rubbish, remember?
That is an entirely different situation, and I fail to see how the kills would be designed to frame you here. The sign up thread is irrelevant imo. And considering the fact that both Silver and Epig seems to be considered a popular N1 kill target on this side anyway, it just makes it even less likely. Plus, you are assuming Epig was in fact a mafia kill, which I see no reason for you to assume unless you know. All this makes me more suspicious of you, not less.Golden wrote:Recruitment Mafia was a game, in which I was not bad but Epi was convinced I was bad, so my by conduct in the thread I tried to induce the mafia to NK epi to frame me, just so I'd have him out of my hair. They did kill him. They also successfully framed me lol, I never really escaped from the suspicion for it.
Let's just say... you couldn't pick two more perfect people to choose to frame me then the two who died. But, otherwise, I don't see great reasons for choosing the pair of them.
And what do you think of her alignment?Golden wrote:Go after me hard and lynch me today and you will be looking real bad tomorrow.
Where did I ask for a justified reason? I know your reason, you made it clear already. You have no convincing argument in your alignment's favor so you're resorting to voting me in the hopes that...that will change my mind? I guess? I don't know. Whatever it is, it's not working.Golden wrote:I have no justified reason to vote you. I don't give a shit. I'm voting for you to wake you up. Lynch me and you lynch a townie. You've decided to see every explanation I make as a point in your favour, despite the fact it is neither inconsistent nor in any way false.
Or, put another way, your posts towards me are basically the same as silverwolf's posts towards MP yesterday. You are just looking for a reason to suspect me, and anything I say furthers your existing perception. Even rational points that you admit should sway you in the other direction swayed you further towards suspecting me, so...
I'll do what I can to wake you up. If I can't, then whatevs.
I said, it's a hunch. I'm not making assumptions. I'm just putting out my current 'theory of the game'. It does only work under some set ups, but that's hardly the biggest logical flaw in my hunch. But, hunches aren't based on a logical analysis of the game state to begin with.Dyslexicon wrote:That is an entirely different situation, and I fail to see how the kills would be designed to frame you here. The sign up thread is irrelevant imo. And considering the fact that both Silver and Epig seems to be considered a popular N1 kill target on this side anyway, it just makes it even less likely. Plus, you are assuming Epig was in fact a mafia kill, which I see no reason for you to assume unless you know. All this makes me more suspicious of you, not less.Golden wrote:Recruitment Mafia was a game, in which I was not bad but Epi was convinced I was bad, so my by conduct in the thread I tried to induce the mafia to NK epi to frame me, just so I'd have him out of my hair. They did kill him. They also successfully framed me lol, I never really escaped from the suspicion for it.
Let's just say... you couldn't pick two more perfect people to choose to frame me then the two who died. But, otherwise, I don't see great reasons for choosing the pair of them.
Misguided town. If I thought she were bad, I wouldn't be putting in the effort to wake her up.Dyslexicon wrote:And what do you think of her alignment?Golden wrote:Go after me hard and lynch me today and you will be looking real bad tomorrow.
Yeah I really can't deny these persuasive arguments you're throwing back at me, I'm totally tunneling you by pretending that such reason as this is working against you rather than for you. Silly me.Golden wrote:a2thezebra wrote:Golden wrote:After MM's case, sloonei.
After sloonei jumped off the Frog vote, sloonei.
It's not that hard to follow.![]()
![]()
You're sure it wasn't the extra work he put in after his initial case? Because we agreed that his initial case was rubbish, remember?
I doubt anything will work.a2thezebra wrote:Where did I ask for a justified reason? I know your reason, you made it clear already. You have no convincing argument in your alignment's favor so you're resorting to voting me in the hopes that...that will change my mind? I guess? I don't know. Whatever it is, it's not working.Golden wrote:I have no justified reason to vote you. I don't give a shit. I'm voting for you to wake you up. Lynch me and you lynch a townie. You've decided to see every explanation I make as a point in your favour, despite the fact it is neither inconsistent nor in any way false.
Or, put another way, your posts towards me are basically the same as silverwolf's posts towards MP yesterday. You are just looking for a reason to suspect me, and anything I say furthers your existing perception. Even rational points that you admit should sway you in the other direction swayed you further towards suspecting me, so...
I'll do what I can to wake you up. If I can't, then whatevs.
You mean the effort like the eye-roll in the last response? You're not putting any fucking effort whatsoever, you're just emulating the town Golden stubbornness that I accused you of lacking earlier to make up for lost time.Golden wrote:Misguided town. If I thought she were bad, I wouldn't be putting in the effort to wake her up.Dyslexicon wrote:And what do you think of her alignment?Golden wrote:Go after me hard and lynch me today and you will be looking real bad tomorrow.
That's kind of how opinions work, yeah. I think something is this or that so I think something is this or that. Sometimes I might even dare to say it.Golden wrote:I doubt anything will work.a2thezebra wrote:Where did I ask for a justified reason? I know your reason, you made it clear already. You have no convincing argument in your alignment's favor so you're resorting to voting me in the hopes that...that will change my mind? I guess? I don't know. Whatever it is, it's not working.Golden wrote:I have no justified reason to vote you. I don't give a shit. I'm voting for you to wake you up. Lynch me and you lynch a townie. You've decided to see every explanation I make as a point in your favour, despite the fact it is neither inconsistent nor in any way false.
Or, put another way, your posts towards me are basically the same as silverwolf's posts towards MP yesterday. You are just looking for a reason to suspect me, and anything I say furthers your existing perception. Even rational points that you admit should sway you in the other direction swayed you further towards suspecting me, so...
I'll do what I can to wake you up. If I can't, then whatevs.
Doesn't make you any more correct.
You've got yourself caught up in your own semantic arguments and the only reason you are calling my responses to you inconsistent and illogical is because you've deemed them so, not because they actually are.
Stubbornness and hurricane of self-assurance are not the same thing, and if you think they are you don't know what canuck was referring to. She was referring to, like, Turf Wars me. Roger Rabbit me. Calling out an entire team on day zero me.a2thezebra wrote:You mean the effort like the eye-roll in the last response? You're not putting any fucking effort whatsoever, you're just emulating the town Golden stubbornness that I accused you of lacking earlier to make up for lost time.Golden wrote:Misguided town. If I thought she were bad, I wouldn't be putting in the effort to wake her up.Dyslexicon wrote:And what do you think of her alignment?Golden wrote:Go after me hard and lynch me today and you will be looking real bad tomorrow.
MovingPicturesDyslexicon wrote:Who is going to keep me sane this game?
Haha, do your worst. Very pro-town of you to go after me and anyone else that suspects you just so you can practice.Golden wrote:Here's the thing, zebra. Full seriousness.
I am town, but I'd sooner mislynch you and leave my vote on you than be lynched myself. I'm playing this game for practice for champs. I don't actually care if you go down. I don't actually WHO goes down. I'm going to do my best to try to solve the game and thats all there is to it.
I'll do what I have to do to survive in this game. If that means lynching the people who think I'm bad, even if they are town, then so be it. Means I get longer to practice.
I don't have any teammates to come to my rescue and help. If I do get lynched today, I'll call it a failed endeavour. Certainly, I'll give up, because I don't have time for this shit. I'm playing because JJJ was nice enough to give me a chance to practice, even though I really don't have time for it.
If all I wanted from you was to concede then I wouldn't have bothered holding my vote until you responded. Strong defenses have swayed me before, I wanted you to defend yourself convincingly. Instead, you pulled the condescension/disrespect card. Not smart.Golden wrote: Anyway, what do you want me to do? Say 'oh, zebra, you're right, I'm scum, well done'? I AM TOWN, what else do you think I'll be but stubborn in the face of accusations I'm not?
Well, I wouldn't know if it would be a mislynch or not. I just know why my vote is there right now, and its not because I'm scum reading you.a2thezebra wrote:Word of advice though; it might be a bit more difficult to mislynch me when you've outright stated that my lynch would be a mislynch.
I defended myself with the truth. You didn't buy it. I am not then going to make up shit to be more persuasive. If you don't buy the truth, there is nothing more I can do.a2thezebra wrote:If all I wanted from you was to concede then I wouldn't have bothered holding my vote until you responded. Strong defenses have swayed me before, I wanted you to defend yourself convincingly. Instead, you pulled the condescension/disrespect card. Not smart.Golden wrote: Anyway, what do you want me to do? Say 'oh, zebra, you're right, I'm scum, well done'? I AM TOWN, what else do you think I'll be but stubborn in the face of accusations I'm not?
If you're not voting me because you're scum-reading me then my point still stands. If you want me mislynched for reading you as bad then failing to pretend that you think I'm a baddie myself isn't going to help much.Golden wrote:Well, I wouldn't know if it would be a mislynch or not. I just know why my vote is there right now, and its not because I'm scum reading you.a2thezebra wrote:Word of advice though; it might be a bit more difficult to mislynch me when you've outright stated that my lynch would be a mislynch.
The truth? What a cop out. You defended yourself with cheap semantics and then accused me of attacking you with them. If you were speaking the truth then you did a shit job of going about it.Golden wrote:I defended myself with the truth. You didn't buy it. I am not then going to make up shit to be more persuasive. If you don't buy the truth, there is nothing more I can do.a2thezebra wrote:If all I wanted from you was to concede then I wouldn't have bothered holding my vote until you responded. Strong defenses have swayed me before, I wanted you to defend yourself convincingly. Instead, you pulled the condescension/disrespect card. Not smart.Golden wrote: Anyway, what do you want me to do? Say 'oh, zebra, you're right, I'm scum, well done'? I AM TOWN, what else do you think I'll be but stubborn in the face of accusations I'm not?
Yeah, that is pretty much what I was thinking.Golden wrote:MovingPictures![]()
But I don't trust him. Gets some townish reads on him and disappears. Nurrrrrr.Zexy seems pretty sane though.
Is this still happening?Dyslexicon wrote:Alright, I'll just do you then. Going to catch up on everything first.a2thezebra wrote:Plus I already did during my initial responses to you so I would just be repeating myself.
Like, he didn't say that. Just like Ika didn't claim scum when he said that if he was scum he'd kill Silver. This may just be your playstyle, but it is seriously making me go squinty squinty squinta2thezebra wrote:Word of advice though; it might be a bit more difficult to mislynch me when you've outright stated that my lynch would be a mislynch.
Maybe. I'm catching up (it's a lot that was only skimmed or skipped). Finding other stuff I want to bring up too. Let it be a surprise. \o/a2thezebra wrote:Is this still happening?
He didn't?Dyslexicon wrote:Like, he didn't say that.a2thezebra wrote:Word of advice though; it might be a bit more difficult to mislynch me when you've outright stated that my lynch would be a mislynch.
Golden wrote:I am town, but I'd sooner mislynch you and leave my vote on you than be lynched myself.
Golden wrote:If that means lynching the people who think I'm bad, even if they are town, then so be it.
Golden wrote:I just know why my vote is there right now, and its not because I'm scum reading you.
Which is why I asked him the following instead of accusing him of scum-claiming:Dyslexicon wrote:Just like Ika didn't claim scum when he said that if he was scum he'd kill Silver.
a2thezebra wrote:So are you confessing or are you saying that you were framed?ika wrote:If I was scum, yes that would be the case.a2thezebra wrote:So you did kill her.ika wrote:I'm on break but anyone who thinks I wouldn't kill silver n1 is being redoicolus.
I did not defend myself with anything 'cheap' or 'semantics'. The truth is my read on sloonei did not change based on MM's initial case, and it did change based on his subsequent addition, which only came after I pressured him. My read on sloonei further worsened (ie, I went from 'I see MM's case and it isn't bad' to 'I think sloonei is bad independent from MM's case') when sloonei voted frog.a2thezebra wrote:The truth? What a cop out. You defended yourself with cheap semantics and then accused me of attacking you with them. If you were speaking the truth then you did a shit job of going about it.Golden wrote:I defended myself with the truth. You didn't buy it. I am not then going to make up shit to be more persuasive. If you don't buy the truth, there is nothing more I can do.a2thezebra wrote:If all I wanted from you was to concede then I wouldn't have bothered holding my vote until you responded. Strong defenses have swayed me before, I wanted you to defend yourself convincingly. Instead, you pulled the condescension/disrespect card. Not smart.Golden wrote: Anyway, what do you want me to do? Say 'oh, zebra, you're right, I'm scum, well done'? I AM TOWN, what else do you think I'll be but stubborn in the face of accusations I'm not?
I just noticed this. It couldn't possibly be a more inaccurate statement of how I work as town. I am constantly thinking through scenarios and positing ideas for what might be going on - regardless of how active, hurricane-ish, or stubborn I'm being. It is like a consistent throughline that can be relied upon.a2thezebra wrote:Thinking through scenarios? To me it feels more like Golden didn't want to civ read me too suddenly after voicing initial suspicion, and as a baddie his interest in making sure his reads don't seem unnatural is more of a priority than as a civ. The irony of this is that, if Golden is in fact a baddie, caring more about changing his reads of others is the greatest evidence that they are in fact fabricated reads, because I don't think civ Golden would be "thinking through scenarios" by suggesting that I'm a mafia goon that wants to take out MP tomorrow. That's too specific and at the same time too absurd of a scenario to consider and propose in-thread for a genuine read. Civ Golden, as I understand him, would either tunnel me more without feeling the need to bring up bizarre theories to justify his suspicion of me, or he would be swayed to town-read me more fluidly and less vaguely.
No, I just don't much care if you are lynched because you are reading me as bad. That is a different thing. And, by the way, the highlighted portion is manipulative. Once again, I don't know if your lynch is a mislynch. I don't want you 'mislynched'. I don't want anyone mislynched. I just don't much care if someone who is tunneling on me incorrectly dies. It's like the second best option after a mafia lynch. I never have. It's a distracting waste of my time and doesn't help me solve the game. It's why I angled epi to get taken out in Recruitment. In fact, if I'm town and having a hard time picking between two people I think are bad, I'm always more likely to land on the one who I think is going to give me the harder time. It makes my life easier in the long run.a2thezebra wrote:If you're not voting me because you're scum-reading me then my point still stands. If you want me mislynched for reading you as bad then failing to pretend that you think I'm a baddie myself isn't going to help much.Golden wrote:Well, I wouldn't know if it would be a mislynch or not. I just know why my vote is there right now, and its not because I'm scum reading you.a2thezebra wrote:Word of advice though; it might be a bit more difficult to mislynch me when you've outright stated that my lynch would be a mislynch.
No, I prodded you because I thought your case would fail, and when you went and looked at the evidence you would find sloonei had stated he trusted Frog and the case wasn't really there. I was expecting it, ultimately, to mean you decided there was nothing to your sloonei case. That's what I was expecting. I thought your case was going to derail with context. I didn't research it to check, but that was my instinct.Metalmarsh89 wrote:I think you give yourself too much credit here. I don't believe you intentionally prodded me to "build up" my case.Golden wrote:Because you then added to the case, after I prompted you to do so. You were quite content to make a flawed case to begin with.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Bullshit.Golden wrote:I wasn't wrong at all, MM. Your case on sloonei was shit, because you hadn't demonstrated any context. I don't have to do your research for you.Metalmarsh89 wrote:Golden: I didn't like his attitude wert me yesterday. He, like you, was very hesitant to vote for Sloonei, despite acknowledging that Sloonei was a decent candidate for Day 1. Also, responses like this just give me the shivers. An "Oh, of course I meant to do that" instead of an "Aye, good call there, I was wrong".
If the case was shit, why did you concede that Sloonei was on your list of "players to lynch" as a result of the case?
Having said that, then when you DID do the extra work, I was surprised to discover your case actually had merit. Doesn't change the fact that I do not agree that your initial case had merit. It was half-assed and flawed, and looked to me like a case that you were portraying just to get yourself off the bottom.
I don't know why you'd expect me to say "I was wrong" for forcing you to build a fuller case. I was quite satisfied with my work.
What kind of cover would you like me to be providing for the town power roles? What does that look like to you. Do you think I should be endeavouring to induce a nightkill?a2thezebra wrote:Perhaps you're not always a hurricane of self-assurance as town, but that doesn't explain why your reads, particularly the development of your reads, feel so unnatural. You don't seem like you don't want to stand out, you don't seem like you're providing cover for town power roles, you do seem like you simply want to blend in and nothing more.Golden wrote:Yeah - you've been in games where I've addressed this so you will probably see the wisdom in what I'm about to say - Star Wars, for instance, where bcornett was trying to paint me as bad?a2thezebra wrote:I didn't say anything but throughout yesterday I felt like Golden lacked the "hurricane of self-assurance" factor that he's known for as town.
The hurricane of self-assurance is a guaranteed town setting for me. You won't see it when I'm bad.
But the inverse is not true. I have many different ways of playing as town. It's just that the 'hurricane of self-assurance' is an easy read. It's a style I developed and became known for on RM when I got a few roles that were hard to NK in short order. I didn't play that way in champs either. I did in Dune... why? Because my role allowed me to figure out other players roles. I did in Turf Wars... why? Because I didn't really have time to play and wanted to have a big impact and be nked early.
I'm trying to simulate how I'll play in the champs game here, as closely as I can. I'm thinking about what I'll do stylistically etc. I certainly doubt I'll be playing hurricane of self assurance in that game. Especialyl because I want to set up a meta I can maintain in the finals if, say, I'm town in heats and mafia in finals. If I'm a town power role, I won't want to stand out. If I'm a vanilla town, I'll want to provide cover for town power roles. If I'm mafia, well, I'll want to blend in.
I know, I know. May sound like excuses but I have some unexpected RL stuff to deal with. Only Psi can really confirm this, thoughBut I don't trust him. Gets some townish reads on him and disappears. Nurrrrrr.
Oh, I just realised you are talking about my own 'providing cover for town roles'.a2thezebra wrote:Perhaps you're not always a hurricane of self-assurance as town, but that doesn't explain why your reads, particularly the development of your reads, feel so unnatural. You don't seem like you don't want to stand out, you don't seem like you're providing cover for town power roles, you do seem like you simply want to blend in and nothing more.Golden wrote:Yeah - you've been in games where I've addressed this so you will probably see the wisdom in what I'm about to say - Star Wars, for instance, where bcornett was trying to paint me as bad?a2thezebra wrote:I didn't say anything but throughout yesterday I felt like Golden lacked the "hurricane of self-assurance" factor that he's known for as town.
The hurricane of self-assurance is a guaranteed town setting for me. You won't see it when I'm bad.
But the inverse is not true. I have many different ways of playing as town. It's just that the 'hurricane of self-assurance' is an easy read. It's a style I developed and became known for on RM when I got a few roles that were hard to NK in short order. I didn't play that way in champs either. I did in Dune... why? Because my role allowed me to figure out other players roles. I did in Turf Wars... why? Because I didn't really have time to play and wanted to have a big impact and be nked early.
I'm trying to simulate how I'll play in the champs game here, as closely as I can. I'm thinking about what I'll do stylistically etc. I certainly doubt I'll be playing hurricane of self assurance in that game. Especialyl because I want to set up a meta I can maintain in the finals if, say, I'm town in heats and mafia in finals. If I'm a town power role, I won't want to stand out. If I'm a vanilla town, I'll want to provide cover for town power roles. If I'm mafia, well, I'll want to blend in.