894 replies to this topic

[Martino]

You're free to think what you want to think but Narsis' case and mine have clear differences. I immediately expounded when prodded, he did not. It's that simple.

Again, I don't think 'narrowing it down' to 50% of the players was a very helpful expansion of your suspicions.

Sorry if I don't appear pro town to you but the feeling is mutual. And you're actions are way scummier than a "clear contradiction" since contradictions are not glaring scum tells in and of itself, especially when it's not a contradiction in the first place.

Quick to vote and hallowed basis? Scummy.

I disagree. I believe that contradictions are decent scum tells. If you are contradicting yourself, one of the two statements must not have been honest. Townies should always post what they really think, not what makes them seem protown/helps them in their attack on someone. If you always post what you really think, you shouldn't end up contradicting yourself. Unless someone convinced you of the opposite in the meantime, but I doubt that is the case as you hadn't explicitly stated who your suspicions were about when you attacked Narsis.

And it would appear you didn't read my post very well. If you read it back again, you will see specifically who the "experienced" players I was talking about.

Lastly, even if you don't get what I wrote, conceding that it's "too broad to help us" means at least you think it helps. Narsis' post on the other hand in no way helps.

So please, read again.

I've just read it again and I still don't see who you were talking about. I've pasted the explanation post below, perhaps you could bold the part where you specify who you were talking about. I have seen you attack KevinH and Narsis, but those attacks were in direct response to posts they made after this post. So those cannot have been a clarification of your previous suspicions.

Well I think the scum is more likely to be a veteran of playing Mafia games. Reading off junk's death, it would appear a very lucky NK. But junk could have very well been targeted because he was the most active.

Now why would that have been a smart NK instead of a lucky one? Simple. There were WIFOM posts here stating that usually the most active ones are those with power roles and I don't know if it's a breadcrumb but I'm pretty sure the scum knew this that's why they tried their luck to the person that was most active.

I have more suspicions but I'm going to cohere my thoughts first before I post it. I wouldn't want to lay all my cards and have the tables turned on me by the mafia once I put pressure. I'm going to have to fight experts... and I'm presuming they would try to counter me. But for now I suggest you look at the meta-game and WIFOM posts. Look for internal player consistency and posts in relation to junk's death.

**** I'm scared.

Funny thing is, you even mention the consistency in your own post. So at least at that point you must have thought that being inconsistent could be a scum tell.

[Falzis]

meta-game and WIFOM posts. read between the lines.

And I didn't say contradictions are not scum tells, I said they are not glaring scum tells and in and of itself is not a scum tell. Because as you have said, you have to take into consideration all the other posts and the context of the post.

Plus, what I did wasn't a contradiction. If you still want to push it, fine. But it's your interpretation that is way out of perspective since again, I expounded, Narsis didn't. You're seeing the trees for the forest.

[KevinH]

First, if I were Sojourner and I were scum, I wasn't even close to being lynched on Day 1.

One more vote at the deadline and he'd have been dead. That's not close?

Vote: Falzis

for attempting to mislead.

[Falzis]

At least you're voting. And I'm pretty sure now at least one of the three people voting for me is scum. With 10 people alive, 5 or 6 is the majority? Need clarification mister mole.

And it wasn't an attempt to mislead, I forgot about that half majority gets lynched thingy. I was thinking along the 7 votes needed.

[Falzis]

Ooops there are 12 people seems lower since only a few are active. I guess it's still 7? Or 6?

With 12 alive, you need 7 to lynch.
Vote count to come in a minute.

Edited by molestargazer, 17 June 2009 - 08:23 PM.

[molestargazer]

VOTE COUNT
Falzis (3): Martino, Theophilos, KevinH

Not Voting (9): sojourner, Nerau, Sir Jesus, partyin01, Narsis, Electric Mango, Falzis, Kaziocore, Aquinas

With 12 alive, 7 votes are needed to lynch.

[KevinH]

At least you're voting.

I always said I would.

Call me Mister Consistency.

[Electric Mango]

I like all of the pressure on Falzis. I have always thought that by putting pressure on someone helps reveal who is who as things progress in the game. That said, I for one do not think that Falzis is guilty. No, I'm not saying that definitively as I have no special powers, but I do feel I have a pretty good feel on Falzis. The two arguments that are against him is that he contradicted himself and he tried to mislead us. I can agree that these things do stand out. I can see how people try to go on anything that they find to snuff out scum. With out a lot to go on we have to look for even the smallest clues. I still don't think he's guilty though and here's why.

Falzis has been very active and leads all of us in posts and activity. That always gives me good vibes. Remember junkaholic? Also his "attempt to mislead" can be written off as a simple mistake. I don't think a scum would risk his neck trying to fool us with that post. Is the gain even close to the risk? The other deal about the contradiction I don't see it as others do. After everything I've read from his posts I'm thinking he's pro town.

I also think that at least one of the people voting for him are scum. Out of the 3, I think KevinH is the most suspicious. It seems like he was just jumping on the wagon. He didn't really explain much when he was voting. He did give an explanation but when I went back and read it again it just seems like he was trying to find any other reason he could to pile on votes. I've been getting a weird vibe from KevinH for a while.

Vote: KevinH

[KevinH]

FOS: Electric Mango and Falsis
If Sojourner had been lynched and found to be innocent, the suspicion would have been on them.

If I were scum, I would want to lynch somebody, anybody, day 1.
...
Regarding those that didn't vote day 1, I withdraw any previous FOS. It might as well have been a vote to no-lynch.

SFOS: Electric Mango and Falzis

One more vote at the deadline and he'd have been dead. That's not close?

Vote: Falzis

for attempting to mislead.

I think KevinH is the most suspicious. It seems like he was just jumping on the wagon. He didn't really explain much when he was voting. He did give an explanation but when I went back and read it again it just seems like he was trying to find any other reason he could to pile on votes.

SFOS: Electric Mango
Do my previous posts quoted above need more explanation?

[Falzis]

The first quote is a big big WIFOM and what if. It's not even a soft evidence because sojo isn't dead, you don't know his alignment unless you know sojo to be mafia and you are protecting him.

The second quote is disputable especially when you are in the camp of "No Lynch" school of thought and a lot of other people are not, which is you being inconsistent since you FOS'd everyone before who didn't go along with your No Lynch idea but then withdrew it and only put it on us just because we let our vote stay, which is quite courageous you know since no mafia would dare give more information to townies on voting patterns or behaviors.

You're approach is just baffling.

The Kevin I know is more meticulous, hard evidence based, and comprehensive than that.

[Theophilos]

Flip-flopping? Can we get meticulous on that I would want to see specific examples instead of name calling me a flip flopper. And don't repeat the ones I've already answered.

The fact that you gave an "answer" doesn't mean that you answered the question or that your answer was satisfactory ...

That said ... at one point you stated that KevinH could be a SK and a "minute" or so later that Calderone could be a SK ... and almost FoSed Narsis o.0 ... without a, how did you call it, meticulous case or any case at all for that matter.

Faulty reasoning? Again, more point by point illustration so I can know what to defend myself against.

Well I think others wrote plenty on that subject ... but generally this as well: saying your statements are true or that your actions or reasoning have merit simply because a tendency was noted in Mafia wiki - that means nothing we can all read that, so why wouldn't scum choose actions that are a "sure" sign that your a townie, etc etc

Pro-lynch hardline ...

Did you even read what I said about this ... I my self was against a no-lynch policy!?

You say everything I've done is pro town but only want to "appear" pro town.

Where exactly have I said that? Please read my statement again ... also posting frequently and/or aggressively means nothing at this point, especially if your posts lack substance ... that said, that's another reason why I think your scum/mafia, 'cause your posts only cause confusion and are more likely to do harm than good to townies. I mean you FoSed 5-6 people by now, without a hint of evidence, so half of all survivors (at this point) - so you only cause confusion --> therefore scum/mafia.

You say I point to mafia (when did I point because I don't know who the mafia is, I'm pointing to suspects) every time someone says something I don't like. Uhmm... that's called scum hunting and putting pressure on people. =.=

No it's not .... simply FoSing someone because you don't like/agree with what he's saying isn't scum hunting ... to me at least ... example I didn't agree with KevinH on his No-Lynch policy, that's no reason to FoS him ...

FOS: Theophilos for bandwagoning hastily and unmeticulously and unreasonably

Bandwagoning ... I think I was the second to vote for you, if that's bandwagoning ... hastily? Well if you think so ...

[KevinH]

The Kevin I know is more meticulous, hard evidence based, and comprehensive than that.

Except ...

... in this case there is no hard evidence and I doubt there will be.

I know that both Falzis and EM would have voted to lynch somebody even if they were townie.
But if they were scum they would also have voted to lynch somebody.

Everybody else didn't vote to lynch somebody which is a pro-town act.
Could scum have not voted and pretended to be pro-town?
Yes.

But what else do we have to go on?

[Electric Mango]

Voting for someone on day 1 is not a scum tell Kevin. Every other experienced player it seems like I have ever played with favor a day 1 lynch, as does the mafia wiki. You've played enough games with me to know that I ALWAYS vote to lynch on the first day. To say that I or others are scummy because we did that is not true. I'm not going into the whole lynch or non lynch debate again except to say that voting to lynch on day 1 is PRO TOWN.

As for Falzis, he's doing a good job for the town. He was accused of being aggressive and pointing the finger at many people, a scum tell in Theo's words. This is also wrong. Falzis is sticking his neck out and letting his opinions known. Scum would not want that. They want to remain as neutral as possible as to not draw attention to themselves. Also by attacking people you are generating new information. Vgmmaster is the winningest player in IRON mafia history and that's how she plays the townie role as well. I've seen days where she's voted and unvoted for 3 or 4 people just to create pressure and uncover clues.

There's nothing wrong in stirring up the pot. How else are we to base our votes if we don't have someone out front giving us something to talk about?


We need more people to vote. Scum are perfectly happy to just sit back, not say anything, and pick us off one at a time. The townies best weapon is his vote, let's use it before we lose it.

[Electric Mango]

This game needs more activity if we're to win.

My personal thoughts so far.....


Theophilos - posting some
sojourner - haven't heard from in a while
Nerau - need more Nerau
Sir Jesus - WWJD? Need more posts to find out
Calderone partyin01 - Does he know we've started Day 2?
Narsis - Need more Narsis
Electric Mango - active
Martino - doing good
Falzis - highly active
Kaziocore - Can't remember anything he's said
KevinH - active
Aquinas - need more posts

[Narsis]

want more Narsis?

to be honest this is similar to a few games ago where everyone seems to be playing it close to the chest. except for maybe Falzis, but i've got mixed feelings on the guy.

time to put the pressure on me thinks:

Vote: KevinH

want some hard-evidence? then put some pressure on. yes you've voted Falzis, but it has some pretty...flawed reasoning behind it. well not flawed necessarily...more...i dont know. can't think of the right word.

[Nerau]

yea it seems no one want to give to much away so i can't get a read on anyone

plus i do not wish to join in on a bandwagon

[Martino]

yea it seems no one want to give to much away so i can't get a read on anyone

plus i do not wish to join in on a bandwagon

I think there has been enough discussion on D2 to allow you to post more than just this. For examplle, what is your opinion on the discussions involving Falzis and KevinH?

[Theophilos]

He was accused of being aggressive and pointing the finger at many people, a scum tell in Theo's words.

Wrong - I didn't say It's a scum tell because he's aggressive or because he's posting a lot. I said it's a scum tell, 'cause he's posts are often contradictory and more time than not confusing. I'm not sure how that can help us townies - ergo scum.

Falzis is sticking his neck out and letting his opinions known. Scum would not want that. They want to remain as neutral as possible as to not draw attention to themselves.

Yeah, that might be true if he didn't FoS or vote for half of all surviving players. So what does he think? Basically that every second person in the game is guilty or probably guilty!? That could as well be a tactic to draw attention away from him and his scum buddies ... My point is this - you can't claim a particular tactic of playing only for one side or the other.

Also by attacking people you are generating new information.

Fair enough ...

[Falzis]

That said ... at one point you stated that KevinH could be a SK and a "minute" or so later that Calderone could be a SK ... and almost FoSed Narsis o.0 ... without a, how did you call it, meticulous case or any case at all for that matter.

If this is flip flopping, I'm a fish. I made this way way back when people were enjoying D1 random and playful posts. Saying Kevin or Calderone could be an SK isn't flip flopping. It's just an either or which isn't flip flopping, fence sitting maybe but not flip flopping,

Almost FoS'd Narsis... hmm so why do I need to have a case when I just "almost" FoS'd him. Other people voted for him without even a case. I "almost" FoS'd Narsis and you're asking me for one? How unreasonable. And if I remember correctly, you are the one who joined bandwagon votes on D1 with hardly a case too.

Well I think others wrote plenty on that subject ... but generally this as well: saying your statements are true or that your actions or reasoning have merit simply because a tendency was noted in Mafia wiki - that means nothing we can all read that, so why wouldn't scum choose actions that are a "sure" sign that your a townie, etc etc

No one has rejected my assertion that tips on mafia wiki have merit. If you read it yourself, you can even see statistical analysis of a No Lynch strategy. If it's faulty reasoning support an argument from an independent and unbiased source such as mafia wiki regarding the No Lynch debate, then I'm guilty of it.

And there are no "sure" signs of being a townie. You have to take everything into consideration.

Did you even read what I said about this ... I my self was against a no-lynch policy!?

I was defending myself from your vote basis that I was a pro-lynch hardline. If you yourself is against a no-lynch policy, why did you use it as a basis for your vote? GLARING INCONSISTENCY.

Where exactly have I said that? Please read my statement again

Umm on your post voting for me. You said and I quote:

Finally the only vibe I'm getting from him is, that he wants to appear townie at all cost

... also posting frequently and/or aggressively means nothing at this point, especially if your posts lack substance ... that said, that's another reason why I think your scum/mafia, 'cause your posts only cause confusion and are more likely to do harm than good to townies. I mean you FoSed 5-6 people by now, without a hint of evidence, so half of all survivors (at this point) - so you only cause confusion --> therefore scum/mafia.

Wow... my posts lack substance. Wow... my posts cause confusion. What have you done my friend? I'm speechless and actually hurt after all the time I've spent trying to be active and prodding people and scum hunting. But oh well that's your read.

No it's not .... simply FoSing someone because you don't like/agree with what he's saying isn't scum hunting ... to me at least ... example I didn't agree with KevinH on his No-Lynch policy, that's no reason to FoS him ...

It's about putting pressure. And where are the FoS I made "just because I don't like/agree"? If that was so, I'm sure it was because I had a good reason which maybe wasn't clear to you.

Bandwagoning ... I think I was the second to vote for you, if that's bandwagoning ... hastily? Well if you think so ...

Yes. Bandwagon. Voted right away after Martino. If that's not jumping on the wagon, when it's running, I don't know what is.

[Falzis]

Except ...

... in this case there is no hard evidence and I doubt there will be.

When I say evidence, I mean voting patterns and reaction posts. But guess what we have a scarcity of that because people didn't vote on D1, including you. And you like running possibilities, which you haven't done much until now.

I know that both Falzis and EM would have voted to lynch somebody even if they were townie.
But if they were scum they would also have voted to lynch somebody.

So where's the scum tell there for an FoS if there's an equal chance of us being townie and scum? FoS means you're leaning towards a scum tell.

Everybody else didn't vote to lynch somebody which is a pro-town act.
Could scum have not voted and pretended to be pro-town?
Yes.

No no no. Why are you always repeating your assertion that people who favor No Lynch is a pro-town tell? I'M TIRED OF IT. You are confusing the newbies and maybe even misleading them.

You are messing with people's head in this game with always trying to insert No Lynch vs Pro Lynch on D1 discussion. Stop it already.

But what else do we have to go on?

It's certainly not my fault. It would be the fault of people who didn't post, react, and vote. And you are most certainly one of them.