860 replies to this topic

[Ali bin Turban]

I've not time to read your posts just now (going to work in a moment) so let me write quickly (again) why voting on inactive is not optimal choice for us:

 

1. We don't have anything on him. Not a single suspicion.

2. If he turns out townie no one that voted on him will be suspected because there was really no discussion there and everyone can say "oh, but he's made just 2 posts". There's no chance we filter scum out of this.

3. If he turns out scum he does not really confirm anyone either since there are multiple scenarios where scum would bandwagon in to trade their useless companion for townie points. Even the ones that voted on him first could be scums doing it just to make noise (not only d3mon was voted today because of inactivity). Now when it connected (due to KevinH dropping Avater vote) they'd be forced to stay on the vote - but that's small price considering they'd be able to come in and say "hey I've voted on him first, I have to be townie".

 

I could write more but have no time - point is we won't get much out of this. Most probably we'll kill townie, If we get lucky we hit a scum. But that's all.

1. Finster has suspicion on him so I believe there's bigger chance he's a scum than it's for D3mon.

2. Finster has interaction history so we'll be able to draw additional conclusions when he's lynched - ideally when he turns scum we'll be able to confirm more townies and that's huge.

 

It's all logic, just think which action will be more beneficial to the town as a whole.

[Lyner]

Also i didn't come to the same conclusion. Im not shit talking you as a person based on a game. Im stating that engaging with a known scum no longer accomplishes anything.
I hope that's honest because that's in no way how it came across

 

I used analogy to make my point, in this case it means "You're obviously a scum that's trying to confuse the town, arguing with you will only make town get more confused, I will let the town judges instead.". Come on

 

[ooc]yes I picked that specific one to bait some reactions but that's all in game, wrong choice, my bad[/ooc]

 

It's never personal in mafia

 

 

You say i didn't address your point and yet that wasnt a point i ever read. Perhaps I'm mistaken but that's the first time I've seen it. As far as i saw you dodged my argument and addressed Imran and Caniks instead since their reasons were relatively weak at first.

 

You never once commented on why Rhizo is scum besides that he might be the vanilla scum.

 

AbT, Imran, and Canik all pointed to Rhizo's scummy behaviour and just citing VT as another justification to lynch him, but you didn't. You used the uncertain fact that "the only vanilla must be a scum!" as your sole reason to lynch Rhizo.

[Chaplain of death]

 

You say i didn't address your point and yet that wasnt a point i ever read. Perhaps I'm mistaken but that's the first time I've seen it. As far as i saw you dodged my argument and addressed Imran and Caniks instead since their reasons were relatively weak at first.

 

You never once commented on why Rhizo is scum besides that he might be the vanilla scum.

 

AbT, Imran, and Canik all pointed to Rhizo's scummy behaviour and just citing VT as another justification to lynch him, but you didn't. You used the uncertain fact that "the only vanilla must be a scum!" as your sole reason to lynch Rhizo.

 

 

Given the amount of information the town has it was still our best choice at the time until your behavior indicated that you are both scum. Other than that our choices were very vague gameplay reads? Nothing solid, nothing even remotely incriminating, just "oh this person said this one thing and I disagree so OMGUS". This at least had the evidence of the setup backing it up. 

 

You're right, there could still be a VT. Being role madness doesn't rule it out. But considering the theme as well (CN), I think TW will have given most everyone a role of some sort. Also, Role madness can also have no VT's. Its up to the Mod, but even if there are VTs there arent likely to be very many. So chances are Vanilla scum (or an investigation proof Godfather) outnumber our VTs. Therefore its more likely that he is scum. Saying "he could be a VT therefore we should lynch an inactive, or this random person" makes no sense. We're more likely to hit town than not if we are lynching at random, so why not lynch Rhizo. If he is town its just a VT, not a potential power role. 

 

I don't get how we're still debating this to be honest. If we were going to take shots in the  dark why did we no lynch day 1 instead of lynching an inactive?

[Mandarijn]

All this discussion is going over my head.

 

But I have to agree on the fact that, even if there's 1 or even 2 VT in the game. Chances are still bigger I would've targetted a scum, than a VT. This combined with the fact that this seems a role madness game, I don't see why we shouldn't lynch Rhizo. I was also going to give him the benefit of the doubt and wait to see if any other VT turn up. But if we can 'save' one of our power roles (if we mislynch someone else) by lynching Rhizo, which would also give us some information (while a lynch on an inactive doesn't), I'm in favor.

 

Vote: Rhizo

 

@TW: You pinged d3mon as well, right? Has he read your PM already?

[Finster Baby]

Good move by AbT
 
 
Finster is a good choice, we only have a few days though so please make your decision, town.
 
Vote: Finster Baby
 
His behaviour the past two days:
1. He clearly picks Shah's side during the Shah/Imran/AbT debacle, shown by this post
2. When Shah is replaced by Canik, however, he said he'd support AbT's accusation on Shah if it is still Shah who's playing(Canik replaced Shah). He later amended his statement that Imran is still scummier than Shah/Canik, so he's not changing his vote.
3. FB joins the Lyner wagon instantly, citing his reason as the same as Canik's. There're 2 scum tells here:
First, he should've done that by himself before Canik said it, if he truly felt that my statement is a sign of scum, the fact that he didn't means he's just following Canik.
Second, this is the same person who still didn't change his vote when he's clearly given a good argument of Shah's wrongdoing(and he even acknowledged that the argument is correct). Yet when it comes to my wagon, he changed his vote so easily?
4. The second day, he completely changed his opinion without any additional information, citing that my night actions are "consistent" as the reason, whatever that could mean.
 
 
Also I encourage the townies to link the relevant posts when you're accusing someone with his past posts, use the search function on the guy's name and search in the Mafia board
 
 
 
@CoD I'm done speaking with you in a logical fashion, I'll let the town decides your sanity

So lemme get this straight. I turn around and exonerate you based on 2 nights of consistent actions and now I'm the bad guy? You were accused of lying about your role, a cardinal sin in this game. That's why I voted for you in the first place. When you came back and reported similar results after the 2nd night, that's the consistency I'm talking about. So you're either a VERY good liar, or you're telling the truth about a role you have. And based on those reports, you're good for the town. I'll change my vote back to you if you really want.

As for Shah/Canik: I was set to vote for Shah the first day. He had scum written all over him based on his posts. Then he quit. I decided to wait and see how Canik developed Shah's role. After Day 2 where your accusations came in, I re-evaluated Shah/Canik, and returned to my determination that he's absolutely scum and I probably should have voted for him all 3 days.

And, if you notice, I haven't moved off my vote, nor do I intend to. Yes I agree that maybe lynching d3mon is a good idea due to inactivity, I think Canik is a better shot. But clearly none of you agree with me. Which is fine.

[KevinH]

[ooc]
I love it when mafia discussion gets "passionate"!
[/ooc]

[The Warrior]

Vote Count

d3mon (5): Rafay, KevinH, Roquentin, Rhizoctonia, Yehom

Rhizoctonia (4): Chaplain of Death, Canik, Imran Ehsan, Mandarijn

Finster Baby (2): Ali bin Turban, Lyner

Canik (1): Finster Baby

Imran Ehsan (1): iSocialism

Ali bin Turban (0):

Avater (0):

Chaplain of Death (0):

iSocialism (0):

KevinH (0):

Lyner (0):

Mandarijn (0):

Rafay (0):
Robert2424 (0):

Roquentin (0):

Yehom (0):

No Lynch (0):

Not voting: Avater, d3mon, Robert2424

With 16 alive it takes 9 to lynch or 5 at deadline.
Deadline is Saturday, May 14th, at 9:00am CN Server Time.

 

@TW: You pinged d3mon as well, right? Has he read your PM already?

Yes on both accounts.

[Ali bin Turban]

[ooc]
I love it when mafia discussion gets "passionate"!
[/ooc]

[ooc] Why don't you join the discussion instead of picking on those that cant defend themselves [/ooc]

[Ali bin Turban]

I honestly think that it is too soon to lynch Rhizo just yet. All we have on him is that Manda found out he's VT. That's something he himself can never actually prove, because he can do nothing during night, he can't contribute in discussions with information that isn't new to anybody else and as long as the game has yet to confirm that there are VT in the game, he can't prove it that way either. I would debate it would be more beneficial to wait out on Rhizo and leave him on the side. He's an easy lynch (or no lynch) once we find out more. I'd think for the time being d3mon for inactivity is either way a good play. If he's scum that's a win, if he town, that's too bad, but he wasn't going to contribute either way. Plus we get another night, meaning more night actions to work with. Like Canik said we have enough townies at this point in time to afford a mistake. 

 

Vote: d3mon

You're wrong. Math is clear: we can afford 4 missed lynches (I'm assuming 5 scum case) in the ENTIRE game before we we loose. We've already wasted one try on shooting in the dark at the inactive guy. We're going to repeat that again and there's roughly 70% chances we'll miss ending up with just 2 more possible fails. I don't know what you or Canik think but for me it's not that comforting and I wouldn't really like to spend our chances on lucky guessing.

 

It was good on the first day, but now we're long past that time and we do need BOTH night actions and analyzing connections and interactions of lynched people in order to succeed. Even if we miss a lynch and suspected scum will turn out to be a town it's still better because we can look at his history of interactions. We rob ourselves out of that chance when we go after someone that has no history, because it's like entering dead end - no matter what we find there will be no clues on what to do next.

 

And that's exactly what scums want us to do.

[KevinH]

Except the scum could be inactive, too.  An inactive scum doesn't really hurt the scum side until he's the last one standing.  An inactive townie doesn't do his power role or vote which hurts the townie side immediately.

[Ali bin Turban]

Except the scum could be inactive, too.  An inactive scum doesn't really hurt the scum side until he's the last one standing.  An inactive townie doesn't do his power role or vote which hurts the townie side immediately.

But I've said that already - you should read my posts again.

 

Thing is, when you hit inactive you get the result: townie/scum dead and no further clues.

When you hit someone with posting history you get the result: townie/scum dead + a lot of possible clues on who's who.

 

I don't really follow you stream of thoughts. "Inactive townie is hurting us, so let's hurt ourselves even more by killing him instead of looking for scum"... is that what you mean?

[Yehom]

You just contradicted yourself.

 

Please do tell me where I'm contradicting

[Chaplain of death]

I honestly think that it is too soon to lynch Rhizo just yet. All we have on him is that Manda found out he's VT. That's something he himself can never actually prove, because he can do nothing during night, he can't contribute in discussions with information that isn't new to anybody else and as long as the game has yet to confirm that there are VT in the game, he can't prove it that way either. I would debate it would be more beneficial to wait out on Rhizo and leave him on the side. He's an easy lynch (or no lynch) once we find out more. I'd think for the time being d3mon for inactivity is either way a good play. If he's scum that's a win, if he town, that's too bad, but he wasn't going to contribute either way. Plus we get another night, meaning more night actions to work with. Like Canik said we have enough townies at this point in time to afford a mistake. 
 
Vote: d3mon

I suppose its just my opinion that you contradicted yourself. Saying its too soon to lynch Rhizo because he could still possibly be a VT (i still find highly unlikely), therefore we should lynch an inactive.

If we can afford a few mistakes why aren't we starting with Rhizo? We get far more information out of it and at most the town loses a VT?

The risk versus reward is so much further in the towns favor than any of our other options that its ridiculous. I get that d3mon is inactive and therefore losing him doesn't technically hurt us too bad, but he could still be replaced if necessary, so long as TW finds someone. If he continues lurking then i will vote for him along with you guys, but not while we have a IMO a better option available to us in Rhizo. If Rhizo comes up scum it pretty much confirms Lyner as scum. If he comes up town then i was wrong and you guys can start the lynch wagon on me tomorrow. Ill try to prove my innocence but if you remain unconvinced then so be it

[Yehom]

Wouldn't you agree that Rhizo an easy lynch or no lynch once we actually find out more about him or the possibility of a VT? As I see it now is that lynching d3mon, or any other inactive, could potentially prove Rhizo's innocence (because someone else is a VT as well), or we find out via night actions that he is or is not scum. Best case scenario is we do lynch inactive scum. Worst case scenario is we do lynch someone with a power role, but that person wasn't going to use that power to benefit the town anyway, especially if d3mon is already on so many votes, so close to deadline. Putting Rhizo to the side just for now is in my book the right play, maybe it's because I'm more leaning towards him being innocent.

[Chaplain of death]

Wouldn't you agree that Rhizo an easy lynch or no lynch once we actually find out more about him or the possibility of a VT? As I see it now is that lynching d3mon, or any other inactive, could potentially prove Rhizo's innocence (because someone else is a VT as well), or we find out via night actions that he is or is not scum. Best case scenario is we do lynch inactive scum. Worst case scenario is we do lynch someone with a power role, but that person wasn't going to use that power to benefit the town anyway, especially if d3mon is already on so many votes, so close to deadline. Putting Rhizo to the side just for now is in my book the right play, maybe it's because I'm more leaning towards him being innocent.

Even if he is indeed a VT chances are that he is the only one or there's maybe one other one? And saying hes an easy lynch is outright wrong when so many people refuse when it shouldn't be a hard choice. If we lynch an inactive we get no information other than their role. Voting record is moot because he was inactive. Discussion is moot because he was inactive. I doubt very much that any information confirming Rhizo one way or the other will come up. If there is a standard cop he could very well be inactive, or one of the people who refuse to acknowledge the legitamacy of the argument that Rhizo is likely scum. Also why would a cop claim just to confirm a VT? He shouldn't.

Therefore the chances of us catching him preforming an action are very low, especially since if hes scum then someone else will perform the kill so that nobody catches him doing it. Even if we find another VT it doesn't clear him. To be quite honest if we find a VT i think it makes him look more like scum because as i said there's likely 1 to 2 VTs if any.

I think in all aspects its in the towns best interest to lynch him because if he shows up scum we have our next lynch target in Lyner regardless of night actions which could lead to more. If he isn't scum, then the spot light comes down on me for pushing for the lynch so hard (though to be honest, would scum really put themselves in this position front and center knowingly killing themself just to kill 1 townie? I don't think so.)

[Rhizoctonia]

 

Wouldn't you agree that Rhizo an easy lynch or no lynch once we actually find out more about him or the possibility of a VT? As I see it now is that lynching d3mon, or any other inactive, could potentially prove Rhizo's innocence (because someone else is a VT as well), or we find out via night actions that he is or is not scum. Best case scenario is we do lynch inactive scum. Worst case scenario is we do lynch someone with a power role, but that person wasn't going to use that power to benefit the town anyway, especially if d3mon is already on so many votes, so close to deadline. Putting Rhizo to the side just for now is in my book the right play, maybe it's because I'm more leaning towards him being innocent.

Even if he is indeed a VT chances are that he is the only one or there's maybe one other one? And saying hes an easy lynch is outright wrong when so many people refuse when it shouldn't be a hard choice. If we lynch an inactive we get no information other than their role. Voting record is moot because he was inactive. Discussion is moot because he was inactive. I doubt very much that any information confirming Rhizo one way or the other will come up. If there is a standard cop he could very well be inactive, or one of the people who refuse to acknowledge the legitamacy of the argument that Rhizo is likely scum. Also why would a cop claim just to confirm a VT? He shouldn't.

Therefore the chances of us catching him preforming an action are very low, especially since if hes scum then someone else will perform the kill so that nobody catches him doing it. Even if we find another VT it doesn't clear him. To be quite honest if we find a VT i think it makes him look more like scum because as i said there's likely 1 to 2 VTs if any.

I think in all aspects its in the towns best interest to lynch him because if he shows up scum we have our next lynch target in Lyner regardless of night actions which could lead to more. If he isn't scum, then the spot light comes down on me for pushing for the lynch so hard (though to be honest, would scum really put themselves in this position front and center knowingly killing themself just to kill 1 townie? I don't think so.)

 

 

 

At least I don't have to worry about replying to COD anymore.

 

 

This is the exact reasoning I have to put up with.

 

Reason for people trying to push a lynch on me: This seems to be a crazy role madness game, and there's no proof that it's not or that anyone else is a VT, so Rhizo must be scum because there isn't a VT

 

Now COD comes out with.

 

If we find out there is a VT by lynching someone, well Rhizo is still Scum because well there can't be 2 VT's in a game.

 

 

Like seriously?  So I'm Scum because there's no proof anyone else is, so I have to be, but if we find there is someone else, well he's still scum then.

 

 

Its the same shit I've put up with all this day.

 

ABT: Vote Rhizo because he's inactive, not going on witchhunts or trying to help town

Some People:  Vote D3mon for being inactive, not voting, not posting, not contributing.

ABT:  Don't vote D3mon, we don't benefit from lynching Inactives

 

ABT:  Vote Rhizo because he's inactive, not going on witchhunts or trying to help town

Rhizo:  Rhizo posts some

ABT:  Vote Rhizo because he started to post

 

ABT:  Vote Rhizo because he's inactive, not going on witchhunts or trying to help town

Rhizo:  Posts a theory about Mandarijn prior to getting more clarification from Mand

Imran:  Rhizo is trying hard to push a lynch on Mand, thus he should be Scum

 

 

It doesn't matter what I say, what I do, or what I don't do, the likes of these 3 will say the exact opposite as a reason to lynch me.

 

It's Rhizo is scum because it's a role madness game that he has to be since there is no signs of a VT....but if there is a sign of a VT, well he's still scum because then there cant be 2.  Vote Rhizo because he doesn't contribute or help the town...but don't vote D3mon because he does the exact same, in fact less.  Vote Rhizo because he doesn't go on a witch hunt, I go on a witchhunt...o he must be scum because he went on a witchhunt and push a lynch.  

 

I do like the last part COD adds...as he makes sure to shed doubt if I came up town if I got lynched on why he shouldn't be suspected as scum.  Already looking to defend himself and try to not look scumish.  

 

Like I said, it's obviously it doesn't matter what I say, do or don't do, the likes of Imran/ABT/COD are going to turn it into why I'm scum, even if it goes against what they've said earlier.  

[Chaplain of death]

Because as with nearly everything in mafia for the town, there is no gurantee. Its possible you are who you say you are, but i find it highly unlikely.

As for stating the obvious about if you come up town? People don't appear to be thinking for themselves so the obvious would go right over their heads. I didn't say i shouldn't be suspected because nothing confirms me as town as of yet though i welcome any investigative role to investigate me so there can be. Nobody should follow anyone else blindly, you have to analyze what people say and how they vote to try to find who is town and who is not.

[Robert2424]

I need to take a closer look at this when I get home.

[Canik]

Those voting on d3mon.. I understand the wait till next day for Rhizo, lynch an inactive first argument. It's not a bad one, but consider this - no one has moved to defend d3mon. Whoever the scum is, they seem content with targeting d3mon and therefor I do not find him an attractive option.

Meanwhile, there has been a lot of controversy around Rhizo despite the strong case against him (compared to the other cases presented so far, at least). It makes me think certain people have some favorable bias towards Rhizo.

So between the two, Rhizo seems much more likely to be part of the scum team. Lynching Rhizo would definitely give us much more to analyze and go on moving forward. I think it would be a good idea to switch from d3mon to Rhizo. Don't repeat the Kazio mistake.

[Rhizoctonia]

Those voting on d3mon.. I understand the wait till next day for Rhizo, lynch an inactive first argument. It's not a bad one, but consider this - no one has moved to defend d3mon. Whoever the scum is, they seem content with targeting d3mon and therefor I do not find him an attractive option.

Meanwhile, there has been a lot of controversy around Rhizo despite the strong case against him (compared to the other cases presented so far, at least). It makes me think certain people have some favorable bias towards Rhizo.

So between the two, Rhizo seems much more likely to be part of the scum team. Lynching Rhizo would definitely give us much more to analyze and go on moving forward. I think it would be a good idea to switch from d3mon to Rhizo. Don't repeat the Kazio mistake.

 

No one has defended D3mon?  That's your argument?  You want someone to defend someone off of what exactly....two posts?  There's plenty that have done what they could to "defend" him, including your very post.  If anything, the likes of you and others are working harder then anyone to get a lynch off D3mon.  I'll have to remember next time when I play to not post at all, or do anything.

 

Here we go again with strong evidence.  Where is it, I've yet to see it.  All I see is people assuming Vanilla means I have to be scum because no one believes there could possibly be a VT...or even if we find out there is another VT, I am still scum by COD's logic.

 

Man for someone who just posted the other day about telling people to just pick one, and "not caring," you seem to be now...suddenly when the lynch wagon is off you.