Is...Swearing new for you or something?In post 97, Nauci wrote:Updated reads
-Can't really read Irrelephant tbh. Too polite. I don't do well with that kinda nice. Freaks me out.
-Shit lookin' worse for Meji but that's from just 1 post so who the fuck knows
-Thor looks townier to me but I am clouded by the constant I'M AN IC AND I DON'T LIE stuff
shit fuck fuck been bleeding this whole fucking time analysis post tomorrow
zoraster wrote:Discussion of Ongoing Mafia Games is Not Allowed
Recently we have had a spate of people discussing ongoing games. Though this has led to a record number of ongoing game bans, there may be a perception that there is some wiggle room when it comes to discussing ongoing games. This post is to tell you that there is not.
It does not matter if you are dead.
It does not matter if you don't think it will affect a game.
It does not matter if you aren't in the game.
It does not matter if you are posting about a game taking place on another forum or posting about an MS game on another forum.
It does not matter if you are moderating the game in question.
Discussing ongoing games by quoting or otherwise referring to an ongoing game is forbidden. There is no clever way around this rule. Don't try.
If you are unsure whether something violates the rule against discussing ongoing games, please don't hesitate to contact a listmod.
THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOU
Discussing ongoing games may result in a full game ban. This will mean that you are force replaced out of all your games, and you will not be allowed to replace back into them at the end of your ban. Further bans will be far harsher, including and up to a permanent ban from the site.
Game Moderators: Take IMMEDIATE action.
Game moderators are expected to step in and take immediate action when players discuss ongoing games in the game thread -- at least a public warning in the thread not to discuss ongoing games. This is not optional for the game moderator. You may not, as a game moderator, allow people to discuss ongoing games in your thread unless the other game allows for it explicitly in the rules.
Exceptions
There are three primary exceptions.
Communications with authorities
You may PM, IM or otherwise contact the game mod(s), listmods who aren't involved in the game, and admins who aren't in the game. Likewise, listmods and admins will sometimes discuss ongoing games for administrative purposes.
The Game Allows Outside Communication
Where a game allows communication, it may be allowed. This must be EXPLICITLY stated in the rules (and as a listmod, we'd appreciate it if game mods would give us a heads up when this is the case).
Please note that a game mod may allow communications about his or her OWN game to be discussed elsewhere, but he or she mayNOTallow discussion of other ongoing games in their thread.
Discussions about Activity
Players may discuss activity in other games in a general sense, including counting how many games a player is alive in. However, this may not mention ANYTHING of substance.
---
This isn't a hard rule to stay on the right side of the line on. The listmods would like to never have to take action again. Please don't try and toe the line on ongoing games.
Soooo "I lied again" is really not a great start for a defense? Especially since Thor said in his first IC post that lying is strongly discouraged for town players. Feels like maybe you feel caught. I'm also not clear on what your other point is here. . Areyou saying that if you were mafia, someone would have come to your defense by now? Another explanation could be you're mafia, told your partner "don't defend me", and then tried to use that as your alibi.In post 84, teacher wrote:I lied again (not a great thing to do as town, I know). I will make one more post defending myself. It's short: You will note at least 5 players have questioned me (Irrelephant 64; James 50; Flickr 45, 57, 81; Nauci 44, 65; Meji 40). Nobody else has defended. I personally would find that comforting if it were a different player. But you make of it what you will.... Im going to be offline for a few hours. Please dont wagon me before I can respond to anything more if needed.
Sorry, I really don't know what you're saying here? The typo is making the sentence structure unclear.In post 95, Meji Fan wrote:Elephant - I may be the kg ew Cedrick, but even I cant derive much meaning from the two posts he left. People replace out, it happens.
lol I guess I'll take the compliment?In post 97, Nauci wrote:Updated reads
-Can't really read Irrelephant tbh. Too polite. I don't do well with that kinda nice. Freaks me out.
-Shit lookin' worse for Meji but that's from just 1 post so who the fuck knows
Great! when you do, can you make sure to comment on Teacher, JB, and Thor? Pretty sure among te three of them there is at least one Mafioso.In post 102, DirtyDishSoap wrote: I'll be sure to update sometime today/tonight when I get the chance.
Are you claiming higher odds than the random chance of 1 mafia in any random grouping of three, or no?In post 104, Irrelephant11 wrote:Great! when you do, can you make sure to comment on Teacher, JB, and Thor? Pretty sure among te three of them there is at least one Mafioso.
(emphasis mine)In post 76, Flicker wrote:Just a quick reply for now while I chew over everything new:
Irrelephant - I doubt that Thor/James is the scumteam. I agree that James' behavior leans scummy, but Thor's rigorous replies draw too much attention to that, whereas a scum!Thor would, I think (based on Newbie 1856 where he was scum with DirtyDishSoap), more subtly shade James while giving him less attention.My inclination is to say James vs. Thor is either scum vs. town or town vs. town, because if Thor is scum I feel like it would make more sense to push James' mislynch rather than keeping his vote on Nauci.
On the other hand, I agree with Nauci that scum IC is scary. :/
In post 85, James Brafin wrote:And I'm going to unvote because really, there is no reason for my vote to be where it is right now.
UNVOTE:
Not comfortable enough to put it somewhere else though.
I'm reading Nauci as town-lean Elephant and Thor as scum-lean, and all else as null atm,
This makes me feel even more weird about JB vs. Thor. Lik eI want Thor to be town because town IC is easier to swallow but this weird vote dance is making me really uncomfortable. I feel like at least 1 of these 2 is likely mafia. Also I kind of feel like JB is just "suspecting" whoever says they suspect him? Which maybe a townie player would do that too but it if it's coming from town, it's not really playing to win (statistically, at least).In post 90, James Brafin wrote:So you ARE misrepping.
C) NO! Just because something "changes the game" doesn't mean we should care as town. Aesthetic "changes the game" but does town care? No. The same is true of multiball (only scum cares then), and I'd argue the same is true of daychat.
Now totally confident this is scum.
VOTE: Thor
Ooooh I feel so warm.In post 103, mhsmith0 wrote:Friendly mod warming
.IC question Thor may have missed (or I missed a response). Im equally curious.In post 80, Irrelephant11 wrote:IC, is there a normal for voting here? Like, should I always be voting the person I most thinkis mafia? Or only when I'm sure?
I mean at least five players had FoSed me (enough for lynch if votes followed), but at that point no other player was actively either defending me or trying to point elsewhere.In post 96, Nauci wrote:-84 teacher what do you mean about 5 players questioning you? What are you speculating/implying?
I was trying to be funny. I wrote a post immediately after saying (in 82) that I wouldnt defend again. As for your point about telling partner not to defend me, its possible, but I think less likely. Plus I have received some halfhearted defense now.In post 104, Irrelephant11 wrote:Soooo "I lied again" is really not a great start for a defense? Especially since Thor said in his first IC post that lying is strongly discouraged for town players
I think he was referring to my 66 (not you), when I suspected some power role of some kind because Cedrik posted then left.In post 104, Irrelephant11 wrote:In post 95, Meji Fan wrote:
Elephant - I may be the kg ew Cedrick, but even I cant derive much meaning from the two posts he left. People replace out, it happens.
Sorry, I really don't know what you're saying here? The typo is making the sentence structure unclear.
So it's a claim of random chance?In post 108, Irrelephant11 wrote:@Thor, I mean I think it's clear that I suspect the three of you the most so far? Randomly, any group of 4 I name will have one mafia in it. After playing for a bit, I do feel like I can name a group of three likely to have one mafia in it. I want to know if DDS sees things similarly.
Agree with who?In post 110, Thor665 wrote:I also agree that you kind of awkwardly connect me to JB for reasons I still don't grok.
You did say it was clouding you town read of me - what about it looks scummy if I'm not using it to avoid stuff?In post 116, Nauci wrote:-Thor I didn't say you're trying to avoid anything, just that the attack he's using on you gives you room to just keep holding up the ICS DONT LIE flag
I'm reserving judgement on that until he answers my question.In post 116, Nauci wrote:-hella sussing TGP for 98. feels like pocketing me plus misusing my point about ic stuff to FOS Thor with made up grounds
In post 116, Nauci wrote:if you have issues w/ JB's logic, why do you tr him? I don't feel like you ever said
1. Has been focused on Thor, sometimes contradicting himself on reasons (I think because just anti-authority). But has also sus'ed/voted you (20), sus'd DDS 31 and Meji 50. Active chatter benefits town.In post 66, teacher wrote:Actively raising suspicions and creating chatter - something that scans as town to me, but only slightly.
Okay, so if I understand you correctly, you think that A) Nobody defended Nauci, which a scum partner would do, so probably Nauci is town, B) nobody changed their vote quickly (either to hop on, which would be a possible scum pushing for mislynch, or hop off, which would be a possible scum partner tell), which yields no info, and C) you didn't want to keep your vote on to prevent a mislynch. This line of reasoning actually seems... fine, if you're town.In post 82, teacher wrote:1. My first vote concealed my reasons. I tried to pass it off as RVS. The truth is I like short wagons (to -2) because I feel like board reactions are telling. You can see if someone defends, or if someone hops on or off the wagon quickly. Nobody did any of those things in the 24 hours (slight defence as noted, but not significant).
2. My unvote provided some of my real reasons. I didnt think I was getting information (again, nobody on or off quickly, and nobody strong defence). I did not say - but it was one of the reasons - that the vote was hurting the town because it was making me doubt me. Bottom line, I changed because I didnt get the reaction I wanted, but also because I knew I would be low activity and unable to change before a wagon lynched Nauci. My reasoning may well have been poor - I was drunk. But looking at it sober I would likely have done it again. IF I had had more time for analysis at that point, I would have voted TGP rather than simply unvoting, but I fixed that with 66.
In post 107, teacher wrote:4.Flicker: From slight town read to nullread. Basis 57 notes who was AFK and asks for participation. But then has only provided 2 contributions in a day, one of which (81) largely repeats hissuspicions of me from 45 and 57, only adding a DDS townread (based on what?).
![:]](./images/smilies/icon_smiling.png "Cheerful Smile"){kind=icon}
Thank you - I appreciate the change (even if others have noted continued issues). I don't want to keep talking about this, so this is going to be my last comment, but I foresaw a long game full of the annoyance of reading your posts, and I figured, at worst, town could afford one early mislynch if it meant a better reading experience going forward.In post 85, James Brafin wrote:Why does changing my playstyle entail policy lynching and potentially throwing the game? In fact, why would town care so much about posting style of this form at all? This is a discussion for outside the game, not something to lynch over, and I don't like the fact that you continue to defend it so vehemently. But for your and other's sakes, I'll just underline my comments on others posts from now on.
A) I think scum are more likely to be confident, regardless of circumstance, because they actually are more confident. It doesn't seem like a great idea to express that confidence, but maybe that was a slip. B) Even if your points were ironclad, my issue was that your confidence was suspect, given the silence from so many slots.In post 85, James Brafin wrote:Going to cover a few things here: A) Scum will be confident in a bad read on a few occasions, but only if they are for sure going to get away with a lynch, imo. Why would scum have such extreme confidence in a read that has literally no chance of getting lynched at that point? B) Argument from probability. Just because something is possible doesn't make any of my points less valid.
It's not that I wanted/needed others to follow me, just that - like Nauci said - I felt my vote was better served to double hers up and put more pressure on teacher rather than being the only one on you. Given teacher's posts after that, I feel like it was worth it.In post 85, James Brafin wrote:You should not be voting just to get others to follow you. Maybe that's not your intention, but it sure is what it reads like.
Looking at the ISO, I don't think it was that severe a progression. It's more, "Hey," to, "Here's some thoughts and questions," to, "Oh! What if..."In post 85, James Brafin wrote:Neither do I in some situations. But the timing of it, the doubt of it, and the lack of hunting before pings me. He went from "Oh, I'm not really doing anything" to "Possible scumteam." It honestly feels like he's trying to set one or both of us up for a fall.
It doesn't, really - in fact, it seems like bad scum play for him to move his vote to James after I pointed how doing so could be scummy.In post 106, Irrelephant11 wrote:How does Thor's new vote for JB change this perspective?In post 76, Flicker wrote:My inclination is to say James vs. Thor is either scum vs. town or town vs. town, because if Thor is scum I feel like it would make more sense to push James' mislynch rather than keeping his vote on Nauci.
Oh shit thank you I actually forgot he voted thereIn post 120, Flicker wrote:teacher's also on TGP and I don't want to be on a wagon with my current strongest scum read.
In post 121, Nauci wrote:Oh shit thank you I actually forgot he voted thereIn post 120, Flicker wrote:teacher's also on TGP and I don't want to be on a wagon with my current strongest scum read.
I mean there are very good reasons to FOS both of them but when TGP's only post was about getting his ass handed to him as scum in the game with me, maybe he set himself up to look like a patsy
I'm conflicted because I want to wagon TGP (or Meji) to discourage lurking, but I don't want to potentially fall for a low hanging fruit distraction from my biggest SR
also wtf people how am i the most active poster while fucking dying
thor you've asked questions but I don't think you expressed an opinion on teacher (in fact I feel like most of your posts are self defense) - what are your thoughts here