1277 replies to this topic

[Imran Ehsan]

Lurker Watch!

 

*ALERT* ALERT* ALERT*

 

Yehom

Last Active on Forums -> Today

Last Post on this Thread ->  27 January 2016

 

Perez

Last Active on Forums -> Yesterday

Last Post on this Thread ->  29 January 2016

 

Lyner

Last Active on Forums -> Yesterday

Last Post on this Thread ->  28 January 2016

[Finster Baby]

Is that like Storm Watch 2016?

[Electric Mango]

I feel bad for tW. People want active players who actually have something to say, someone who is actually forming educated opinions and now because of that he is 1st on the chopping block. I would much rather play with get rid of the weak and inactive players 1st.

[Finster Baby]

/me listens to EM carefully - sage old Mafia player that he is.

[Samus]

I feel bad for tW. People want active players who actually have something to say, someone who is actually forming educated opinions and now because of that he is 1st on the chopping block. I would much rather play with get rid of the weak and inactive players 1st.

I don't agree with the idea of getting rid of inactives first, because every night mafia is still going to kill us regardless. We need to get rid of who we think are scum. The inactives don't help by not contributing but still the priority should be whoever we think is scum and right now TW has sounded really scummy. But he has suggested he is a town player with an ability, if this is so, help us out bruh!

 

There's no going back from that suggestion. If you can't prove it, then you've accidently just revealed you are not what you say you are and it's only fair for me to assume you are scum.

[The Warrior]

 

The reasoning for TW was already explained on pages 14-16 I think, I got this quote from Samus and I tend to agree with him:

TW seems the most scummy tbh, that timeline of events he posted seems more like a push to pose Robert as scum and get a wagon on him again.

 

Also bare in mind this is his first game of Mafia, he seems to be trying too hard to prove to be the innocent townie bystander, while actively pushing for people to be lynched.

 

First CS for his inactivity, then being part of suspected scum who lynched FF & now his persistent accusations towards Robert. Nobody in this game has flip flopped so much.

 

I see right through you scum.

 

Vote: The Warrior.

 

Also Imran, I greatly agree that D1 lynches are necessary, never thought about it like that before. But we atleast have some form of information now.

Since this still seems to be the basis of the vote against me, let's revisit it again.

 

The day 1 timeline that I posted was not meant to implicate anyone in particular. It was simply a recap of what happened on day 1 followed by my commentary on suspicious activity. Was it a brief summary? Sure, but anyone could have gone back and read the first 12 pages of the thread to fill in the rest of the picture. What I posted was not new information. Everything said there was already said by others.

 

Regarding Robert and CS:

I was not pushing for Robert to be lynched. It was pointed out that he was "trigger happy". It seemed to me that that was probably a bad thing based off of the reactions it drew from Samus, Perez, Rusken, and Yehom. I was the 5th vote against Robert based strictly off of those reactions. Chalk it up to being a "noob" but I was willing to assume that he was acting suspicious based off of that.

 

I then withdrew my vote against Robert on page 6 (post #104) and voted for CS due to inactivity. That was the day after CS left IRON for MI6. I was assuming that replacing a player on the 6th day of the game (Jan 10th) wasn't something that would be easy to do and therefore removing them through a lynch would be the best recourse. You can see that this was my line of thinking by looking at my response in post #116 when I unvoted for CS:

I will rescind my vote of CS for now. But if the options were to have to try and find a replacement vs removing someone who was already less active and left the alliance, option 2 was the easiest. Unvote CS.

I was also unaware that Finster was standing by and could replace someone if necessary. I would have advocated for that first had I known finding and incorporating a replacement would have been that easy. In any case, up to that point CS had only posted one time in the thread. A little while later there was another run on CS because he had not been replaced and he still had not showed back up to post. Several people seemed to agree that there had been adequate time for CS to respond, but he still hadn't.

 

Regarding Fox Fire:

Mandarijn pointed out in post #135 that we still hadn't heard anything from Fox Fire. (Kevin officially replaced CS with Finster in post #145 on Jan 13th, which was three days after we first discussed the possibility of replacing CS.) After seeing that CS had been replaced with a hopefully active Finster, I unvoted for CS/Finster in post #151 and voted for Fox Fire after it had been pointed out that she was almost completely invisible after only posting once in 9 days. Then Mandarijn and several others voted for Fox Fire for the exact same reason that I did - inactivity. We then asked Kevin to try and ping Fox Fire. He did so in post #180 on page 9. Imran then pointed out that Fox Fire had been around the forums but still had not posted in this thread further going on to explain why it was bad for the town.

 

After the discussion about Fox Fire, Robert's name came up again. His "no lynch policy on day 1" was brought up by Imran in post #195 when he voted to lynch Yehom for no apparent reason in post #194. Robert then went on to defend himself in post #196 and a couple other posts after that which caused Samus to comment on Robert's behavior in post #205:

 

bad comeback, sound like a desperate scum trying not to give his identity away now.

 

Finster then also commented that his actions sounded suspicious in post #224.

 

Despite the discussion about Robert again in the last couple days of "day 1", I did not change my vote back to Robert from Fox Fire. For someone who supposedly "had it out" for Robert and was "persistently accusing him" you would have thought that I would have had the opportunity to change my vote back to Robert at that point. Rather, I stayed with my Fox Fire vote because she had only posted once in a 16 day period (day 1) and it did not look like we were going to be getting a replacement for her too. She was on the forums during day 1. Why didn't she post here any more? What legitimate reason did anyone in the "Vote Fox Fire" camp have to vote to lynch anyone else? Not being visible in the thread was suspicious, especially given that she was active on the forums several times. Removing the seemingly inactive members from the game seemed more beneficial than anything. Either: 1) We removed someone who was possibly being scummy by lurking and trying to remain inconspicuous or 2) We removed someone who wasn't going to contribute in any meaningful way anyway and wouldn't help us as a town even if she was active.

[Samus]

Nice summary TW.

 

But.. You've failed to respond to my latest accusation.

 

http://ironcentral.org/community/topic/55574-kh-11-the-force-awakens-mafia-day-2/page-23#entry825806

[Mandarijn]

Very scumlike to write such a wall of text to prove your innocence!

[Rusken]

*Looks up  at TW* I skimmed what you stated, and I've honestly had no reason to suspect you at this time. As I've stated time and time again, let's get rid of the inactives, while having discussions in between. That way we're getting rid of the players that aren't here, while still learning about who is doing what and why.

 

It seems to be a lost concept.

[iSocialism]

Vote Lyner

[Samus]

Vote Lyner

why?

[Rafay]

why?

 

Inactivity.....

 

Vote: Lyner 

[Samus]

 

why?

 

Inactivity.....

 

Vote: Lyner 

 

why vs Perez & Yehom???

[Road2Victory]

why?

Inactivity.....

Vote: Lyner

why vs Perez & Yehom???

Or kazio

why?

Inactivity.....

Vote: Lyner

why vs Perez & Yehom???

Or kazio

[KevinH]

Q: How do Ewoks communicate over long distances?
A: With Ewokie Talkies



Vote Count

The Warrior (3): Samus, Mandarijn, Finster Baby,
Lyner (3): Robert2424, iSocialism, Rafay,
Electric Mango (2): Kaziocore, Perez,
Kaziocore (2): Road2Victory, Rusken,
Perez (1): Electric Mango,
Rafay (0):
iSocialism (0):
Rusken (0): 
Mandarijn (0):
Finster Baby (0):
Imran Ehsan (0):
Yehom (0):
Robert2424 (0):
Samus (0):
Road2Victory (0):

No Lynch (0):

Not voting: Imran Ehsan, The Warrior, Yehom, Lyner,

 
With 15 alive, it takes 8 to lynch or 4 at deadline.
Deadline is Saturday, February 6, at 18:00 EST.
 

[Robert2424]

If tw have solid evidence towards me, he would of presented whatever evidence he would of had. Or at least should of. If a night action would of put me in such category.

I'm going to ask a q here. Might seem a like a silly or unrelated but it dose have merit.

@Yehom. Dose odd or even mean anything to you? Yes or no would suffice.

[iSocialism]

Lyner is normally an active player, but also has a low posting count. However, he can't be trusted.

Lyner

Every time I have been scum in games before, Lyner was with me. Every time I was town before, Lyner was Scum. It's not really every time, but close enough. A low posting lyner is an active Lyner. I feel safer voting for Lyner for the probability of scum vs Rafay or Yehom 

[Imran Ehsan]

Very scumlike to write such a wall of text to prove your innocence!

 

This is a strange reply. Would you rather he not respond and lurk?

[Road2Victory]

Very scumlike to write such a wall of text to prove your innocence!

This is a strange reply. Would you rather he not respond and lurk?

=mandarjn a possible scum then?

[Imran Ehsan]

 

 

Very scumlike to write such a wall of text to prove your innocence!

This is a strange reply. Would you rather he not respond and lurk?

=mandarjn a possible scum then?

 

 

Everyone is a potential scum at this point! I am keeping my mind open for possible options.

 

Its a very strange statement because you basically want everyone to post more. The more people post the easier it is to find out if they are lying/ trying to cover up stuff/ trying to backtrack or of course catch them making contradictory statements. This is why scums will normally try to lay low and post as little as possible or make single sentence wild accusations/ votes before slinking back in the shadows again. So I do not think walls of texts are scum behavior.

 

However there are exceptions of course. Preston used to post walls of texts and he was scum in a game I played. Samus himself is bragging how he had led the town discussions and lynches in his previous game while being a scum. So exceptions are possible but I would say the majority of scum will try to post a lot less.

 

However, I am starting to wonder if Samus and Mandarijn are working as a team or not. I need to go back on D1 and examine their posts again.