Mini 456: Ultimatum Mafia - Game Over!
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Stoofer: What you said about active lurkers is very true. Based on what happened in MAD mafia, we have to keep a very close eye on people who try to lurk in plain site. We don't want this to become a "active townies go after each other while semi-lurking scum coast their way to victory".
I don't necessaraly agree with the "no one should challange" plan, though. I think we're going to get some information based on who challanges who, and that information could be very useful to figuring out who could be scum with who.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
BTW, that was in response to Stoofer's first post. Stoofer Plan 2.0 is better, although in the past such things haven't worked out so well; in these kinds of games (like Bad Idea mafia and such) usually someone just ends up ignoring the votes and going off on their own anyway. Noneteless, I do support the idea of "nominating" the challanger (or perhaps both the challanger and the challangee) and keeping track of votes and all that, so as to gain information. All we've got to go on this game is day information anyway, so we might as well generate as much as we possibly can.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Huh?VanDamien wrote:I'm pretty suspicious of the whole nominate plan, and this is why. If we're nominating the challenger, especially this early, we're effectively giving either scum team a pass to challenge. If we're nominating the challengee, there's no reason for scum to jump on the challenge for safety, but they happily can with the majority already having stated who they prefer to be voted out through the nomination process.
I think the idea is that we take someone who looks suspicious and make him be the challanger, on the theory that that will give us information about someone we find suspicious, and give us a chance to lynch that person if we so choose after a debate. I don't understand at all how "that gives either scum team a pass to challange". In fact, the scum might be more hesitant to offer challanges, as that puts them at risk, although there's obveous WIFOM potential there.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Anyway, on the theroy that active lurking and keeping your head down is a probable scum stratag for this game, might as well start out with this one:
dylan41985 wrote:i also agreevote:dylanfor challanger until he makes more of a contrabutionI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
The difference is that a townie may be willing to risk his life if it means getting rid of someone he thinks to be a scumbag, wheras scum would much rather just sit back and let townies challange other townies if possible. Again, like I said, there's lots of WIFOM involved, a scum might be very active and agressive just to look pro-town, but that's all right; it's much easier to figure out the alignment of someone who's being very active and agressive then to figure out the alignment of a semi-lurker. If we ignore lurkers, that could very easily cost us the game, just like it cost the town the game in MAD.VanDamien wrote:
The same coould be said for the townies, especially with two scum groups that could be cross-challenging.mneme wrote:The scum don't want to either offer or receive challenges -- as both give scum a chance of dying that staying out of the limelight Van Damien's post is nonsensical. I don't know that it's scummy, but I'm happy enough with my vote anyway.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Dean: How does keeping track of votes help the scum? (And yes, they are scum; a group of 3 people who know each others identy and want to lynch everyone else are scum, by defination; scum groups don't have to kill. The "uninformed majority" is town, even though they're not quite a majority.) The alternate is basically "some townie decides on his own to go after someone he thinks is scummy" and in the past, in games with daykills, that hasn't worked out to well for the town.
So, you're suggesting the nomination system helps the scum manipulate the town? In a sense, that's probably true, but by that very process of seeing who votes for who and who wants to put pressure on who, we get information about everyone in the game. The way mafia works is that scum try to manipulate the town and town try to catch them doing it. If you don't have people expressing opinions about who should challange who, then I don't really see how the town has a chance to figure out who's scum.DeanWinchester wrote: Even the biggest group has a 50/50 ratio. So Town/scum terms don't really apply.
This nomiantion system does not help the group of six. It gives the groups of three an advantage because they can help control the group of six without making challenges themselves.
Well, yes. If the town figures out who the scum is, they win.If the group of six can figure out who is in the group, it's game over. We can use our superior numbers and the, over looked, rule that you can only challenge once untill everyone has gone atleast once.
Probably. The idea is that we want the two most scummy looking people to challange each other, in the hopes that at least one (and perhaps both) of them are scum, perhaps scum in different groups.Anouther issue with this nom theroy is that won't the person nominated to be the challenger most likely lose anyway?
Town wins normal games of mafia far more often then "lone cowboy" type games of mafia. So making this game more like a normal game of mafia probably improves the town's chances.This whole nom system is a way for the groups of three to take control of the game and make it like a normal game of mafia.
Well, right. DO you have a better idea about how to figure out who is town then through some kind of voting system?For the group of six to win we need to figure out who is (or most likely) in this group and abuse our numbers.
Huh? How does voting mean that "the six will nominate each other"?This nom theroy puts the group of six in a situation where we have to nom each other as opose to going after the smaller groups. The smaller groups can not afford to chalenge each other or they will lose to our numbers.
Um, that would only be true if we knew who all of the members of the town were. In any case, you're trying to make it sound like each vote will have 6 townies on one side vs. 6 scum on the other side; the point you're missing is that the groups of 3 want to lynch each other just as badly (or perhaps even more badly) then they want to lynch townies, as the informed groups are probably actually bigger threats to each other then anything else. So we're not at lynch or lose, because even if we lose a townie or two the scum will tend help us lynch the people in the opposite scum group.For the group of six this day is lylo for us, kinda. We need to get a challenge between us and any group of three and win the deadlock. If we can acomplish that we win because every vote will then be between us and one of the smaller groups or small group vs small group, which we are fine with because we will have the numbers to make the debate go our way every round
Neither of those statemets is at all true.@ The rest of the group of six: If we lose one of us today it going to be hard to win. If we can get one of the smaller groups today it will be incredibly hard to lose.
...Note: If the challenge ends up with one of the six and one of the three's we will almost know imediately who is among the six because neither of the small groups can afford to give us numbers. Thus they can't afford to vote for one of the six to win.
Because scum never vote for each other in order to look innocent, amiright? And townies never accidently vote for other townies?
You're not making much sense here.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
What?Sparks wrote:mod: please modkill mneme, he just admitted that he's been conferring with his scumbuddies outside the thread during day
Mneme was speculating that the scum might be allowed to talk during the day because there are no nights. How can you go from that to assuming that scum can't talk and assuming that mneme is scum and assuming that mneme is scum who broke the rules?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
So...we're on a strict deadline, and that means you have to say things that make absolutly no sense and then refuse to explain them? Does that somehow make the game go faster?Sparks wrote:go read lo2 i have no time for this nonsense we are on a strict deadline
That dosn't make much sense either, Sparks...if you're 99% sure you would get challanged, then why wouldn't you rather challange a person of your choice first?we should challenge before we have two so we can get some more juicy debates between two people
i shouldnt challenge because im 99% going to be challeneed
If you did have to challange, who would you challange, and why?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Rather then specifically saying "first to 7", Stewie, I'd say we just select a specific point at which the person with the most nominations has to challange someone, and reccomend (although we can't, and probably don't want to, make it manditory) that he challange the person with the #2 number of nominations.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
After all, I don't think we have enough time to get a full 7 votes here. We want to get someone to make the challange on the 11'th, just 2 days from now, because I think a random challange would be quite bad from an information gathering point of view, and the only way to make sure that dosn't happen is to have the challange happen quite early on the 11'th at the latest.
Actually the safest thing to do would probably be to have the challange go out on the 10'th, before midnight, just to make sure it dosn't go random, as the deadline hits "in some random monent between the 11'th and the 12th".I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
...Sparks wrote:im not goin to respond tostewis' pile of shit until he puts mor thuhgt into it
His response makes a lot more sense then anything you've posted so far this game, Sparks. I'd suggest you respond to some of the things people have said to you if you want to convince anyone you're not scum.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Stewie: Partly, I'm just trying to get Dyllen to particiapte more; he's cleary around, as he posted yesteday and the day before, but he's also clearly not saying much. Honestly, he looks like scum trying to fly under the radar to me, with just saying "i agree" and a reasonless bandwagon vote, wheras I honestly don't know WHAT to think about Sparks at the moment, I can't see town OR scum wanting to act the way he's acted so far.Stewie wrote:Yosarian, is that not active lurking? I asked many meaningful questions, and once again he's passing them off as useless in an attempt to not answer them.
The "he seems to have inside knowlege about if the scum can talk during the day" argument is a strike against Sparks, though, and he'd probably be my second chocie right now.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No problem, Dan.
If you get a chance, it'd help if you could just read the game and say who you find most suspicious; I know we don't have much to go by yet, but we don't have any time to waste here and I'd like to hear from everyone before the challange phase starts.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok, this is probably futile, but I'm just going to try one more time here.
THAT WAS STOOFER'S PLAN. YES, HE WAS CALLING THEM "NOMINATIONS" INSTEAD OF "VOTES", BUT OTHERWISE THAT WAS IT.Sparks wrote: WE DO NOT NEED SOME HOMOSEXUAL NOMINATION SYSTME. HOW DO NORMLA MEANS OF FINDING SCUM NOT FUCKING APPLY HERE? THIS IS A GAME OF MAFIA LIKE ANY OTHER. WE CAN STILL USE VOTES, ITS JUST NOT HOW ALYNCH WILLL BE DETERMINED. ITS BASICALLY LIKE KINGMAKER BUT FASTER AND A DIFFERENT VARIENT.
And FYI, every time you call players who are showing every sign of being much stronger mafia players then you "stupid", or when you throw around words like "gay" or "homosexual" it just makes you look that much worse.
You know, I don't care.nominate:Sparks. He's pretty clearly decided to be :not helpful:I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Sparks, that hasn't been stoofer's plan since way back on page one, he's been supporting the nominations and stuff. And that's what you were clearly talkign about, since you were talking about nominations being a bad move.
And while I obveously agree with going after inactives, at the moment I actually think that your posting is much more harmful to the town then they're lack of posting. And it has very little to do with your spelling. It has more to do with the way that your lack of logic, your insults, your total lack of logic, your unwillingness you explain yourself, and your lack of manners is making it very hard for anyone else to accomplish anything else here.
This kind of random and innane insult, for example, just hurts your case:
And the only reason we're still discussing the plan at this point is because you flipped out about it and kept going on about how it was hurting the town, without ever giving a good logical reason why. You keep changing your story, and now you're trying to say that it's "just a matter of semantics". IF so, then why did you flip out and insult and attack everyone in favor of some kind of plan and voting system?if yos seriously thinks ive been less helpfil than danmonkey, spinwizard, and dylan combined, he is a huge idiot ecuase thats as plain aslike a two year old.
At this point, I want to lynch you just because I don't see us accomplishing anything else or making any progess in finding scum so long as you continue to rant and scream and insult people in long incomprehensible posts that ramble on about nothing. Your lurkerhunting was a reasonable move, but it was buried by the garbage you keep spewing here. I just can't really see the way you're acting as helping the town in any way, and the way you reacted to mneme's comments does make me think you might be scum with insider information.
By the way, everyone, we're going to want someone to challange before the end of the day today, I believe, just to be on the safe side.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That's nice to hear, but I don't know if you will survive this challange unless you contribute with some substantial opinions first. So, again, if you could try and give us some thoughts about other people in the game, who you think is scummy and who looks more pro-town to you, it would probably help.dylan41985 wrote: However, I pledge to contribute more often with more substantial opinions if I survive this challenge.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah. I'm really happy with this challange so far, as I think they're probably both scum.
I'm stongly considering voting to keep Sparks around, if Dyllan dosn't start explaining some of his actions and his thoughts better. They've both made huge scumtells, in any case.
Again, Dyllan, you made a list of people who looked pro-town to you. Can you explain any of that?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
What? If we're trying to figure out who was the most suspicious, then how are you're "mistakes" irrelevent"dylan41985 wrote:My initial nomination and mistakes (regardless of if you think I'm lying or not) are irrelevant at this point because I am the person challenged by Sparks.
Are you paying attention to this game?But ask yourself this: Was it really fair for Sparks to challenge me this early? What have I done to him? Why was he so eager to challenge me? Isn't that action more suspicious that my behavior?
If someone didn't challange someone else on the 10'th, then we could have had a random challange on the 11'th, which would have been bad. And several people made clear that they wanted Sparks to challange someone or they were going to challange him themselves, so instead, he challanged a suspicious looking person.
I'd expect him to act that way no matter what his allignment was, personally.
My theory is that your theory is totally meaningless. Sparks may be scum, you may be scum, or both of you may be scum in different groups. If you want to survive, you're going to have to do better then that.My theory is that Sparks is scum and anyone voting to save him ispossiblySpark's secret scum buddy.
If you want to live, don't promise to contribute more later, contribute more NOW. Like, an explinaiton of why Spark's actions would be more likely to be committed by a scum then by a town, or a discription with reasons of who else you think is suspicious, or a better explination for your own actions.Fonz, I really don't know how else to convince you but to say that later in the game you won't regret keeping me here. I can promise you that.
Why would that be a reason to keep you alive?Plus, I'm a vulnerable target for future rounds.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Sparks: We read those posts of yours. THe point is, while you may have been "joking" about mneme, it still looks like you already knew scum couldn't talk during the day. Randomally accusing Stoofer of "not reading your posts" dosn't actually answer that question at all.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hmm. I'm really having trouble deciding here. I guess I'm going tovote:dylanjust because I could possibly see most of the things he does as newbie mistakes, wheras I have a harder time seeing Sparks as town at this point. Still think they're both probably scum, but at this point getting rid of Sparks seems like the best bet.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
We probably want to get rid of one of the conservative mafia people today; if we go hunting for last liberal mafia member, it just makes the 3 member conservative mafia stronger and they're the biggest danger to the town right now.
At the moment, I'm thinking Dylan is most likely to be a member of the conservative mafia; he looks quite scummy, and clearly wasn't scum with Sparks, so at the moment he's my best suspect for a conservative mafia member.
vote:dylan
I also agree with The Fonz that we need to hear more from SpinWizard and DanMonkey.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Eh...nominating up to 2 isn't really harmful, but I don't think we should or can try to pick both sides; basically, the person with the most nominations should decide who he wants to challange to a debate, and if he fails to do that someone else should challange him. That's basically what we did yesterday and I think it worked out well.mneme wrote: To add a secondary thread to the !dylan topic -- anyone disagree with keeping the "nominate up to two" feel from yesterday? I think it does its job at generating extra info beyond the pure lynch.
So, you're thinking that it's more important to lynch someone who's high probability scum rather then someone we think is more likely to be a member of the conservative mafia? I'm not sure I agree; the longer we go without getting rid of a conservative mafia member, the more dangerous they will be as a voting block, and also even if we get the last member of the liberal mafia it won't really give us any information that can help us find who's town and who's conservative mafia. I mean, we do need to get rid of the last liberal eventually, but I don't think that should be a priority now.That said, it's very important that we lynch in highprob->lowprob order, with enough info to be able to win the endgame (which means, really, correctly identifying at least two players as not part of either scum group and being right, though correctly identifying more town players will let us win faster).I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hmmm. I've got to say, I don't really trust VanDamien here. I'm not sure why the last member of the liberal mafia would claim, as he'd then have basically a 0% chance of winning, while it might make sense for a conservative mafia member to claim liberal so we don't lynch him for a few days.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hmm. That was NOT a good move, at all. That being said, I'm not going to vote to keep Van Damienalive unless I'm convicned Battle Mage is scum; killing people just to "enforce game disipline" is usually a losing battle.
Dylan, just last page you said you thought Battle mage was a conservative scum. Why did you think so then? And why did his challange change your mind?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That dosn't really make sense, Dylan. No one, scum or townie, would make a challange in the situation BM did unless he thought he would won. So either BM is a townie who thinks he's going to win this challange, or BM is a conservative mafia member who thinks he's going to win this challange. At the moment, either seems possible to me.dylan41985 wrote:mneme - I don't understand your post 290.
We believe VD is a liberal.
We think it may be best for the town to keep him around for awhile.
Why would a conservative go up against VD knowing that we'll probably vote to save VD?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
While BM's move was anti-town, I'm not really sure you can consider it a scum-tell, as it would be a bad move for town or for scum I think.
If someone can actually make a reasonable case for why BM is scum, I might consider voting to save VanDamien. Just saying "we should execute BM as a policy lynch" or "BM is scum because he challanaged me" isn't going to do it.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I never said I wasn't in favor of Battle Mage's death. I said I would be in favor of Battle Mage's death if someone could make a good case showing he's scum. I really don't like the way you've been arguing, Mr Stoofer; you never lynch someone because of "policy", you lynch them if you think they're scum. Period. Anything else is usually an excuse.Mr Stoofer wrote:Also, I am suspicious of Yosarian2 for not supporting Battle Mage's death. I would have thought that he would be as keen as anyone to deter unilateral action.
And I also don't like the way you're suddenly trying to say that I'M suspicious for not wanting to do "policy lynches". Saying someone is "suspicious" just because you disagree with their stratagy is bad mojo.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Stoofer: It's not so much that I don't agree with the nomination plan, as I just don't think an attempt to enforce it strictly even if it causes us to make bad lynches will be profitable or useful. Like I said early in the game:
I like the nominations idea, I think it's helpfull, and the fact BM ignored it is a small black mark against him, but I never really expected it to work perfectly without some people "going off the reservation" when they thought it was a good idea. I've just never seen something like that work in this kind of game; no matter if it's a bad idea mafia or a kingmaker game, someone always just ignores the vote-count and does what they want anyway. And what's more, it's quite often a pro-town person doing it (note in Mad Mafia, for example, everyone who launched an ICBM, real or fake, was pro-town).Yosarian2 wrote:BTW, that was in response to Stoofer's first post. Stoofer Plan 2.0 is better, although in the past such things haven't worked out so well; in these kinds of games (like Bad Idea mafia and such) usually someone just ends up ignoring the votes and going off on their own anyway. Noneteless, I do support the idea of "nominating" the challanger (or perhaps both the challanger and the challangee) and keeping track of votes and all that, so as to gain information. All we've got to go on this game is day information anyway, so we might as well generate as much as we possibly can.
Besides, we are now in the situation of "BM vs. VanDamien", and I think the best way to get the most information out of this current debate is to have everyone vote to save whoever they think is least likely to beconservativescum. That's how we get the most information. For example, if it later turns out VanDamien is conservative scum pulling a gambit and BattleMage is not conservative scum, I don't want to give the other members of the conservative scum group the easy excuse of "Oh, we just voted to keep VanDaminen alive because we wanted to do a policy lynch". Policy lynches just give the town less information, and it's often an excuse for scum to do what they want without getting in trouble for it.
Now, if you think BM is more likely to be conservative scum then VanDamien, then you should vote to keep VanDamnien alive because of that, not because of "policy".I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I don't think that's true, Fonz; you can't CHALLANGE more then twice, but I don't think there's any limit on how many times a person can be challanged. Basically, we have as many lynches as we have people; if someone gets modkilled, it's just shortining the game by a day.
But, whatever. Dosn't really matter, as VD's already claimed scum.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, I do agree that the comment where BM seemed to "know" you were town is a small scum-tell. What other arguments were there against BM?Mr Stoofer wrote: However, there have been a number of positive points raised as to why Battle Mage might be scum. What do you think of those points? (This is the third time I have attempted to ask you that.)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, that's 4 on Van Damien, so he's going to be saved no matter what now. My vote dosn't really count anymore, so I'll probably vote soon just so I don't screw up and get modkilled.
That being said, I'd still like Stoofer to explain why he thinks Battle Mage is conservative scum; he's kept asking me "what do you think about the case on Battle Mage", but when I ask him what the arguments against Battle Mage are he ignores the question.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Held back until decision was certain? You mean, you suspect me for NOT scummily jumping the gun and ending the day early the way Stoofer and Dylan did?Battle Mage wrote:I have a feeling all 3 are scum. Mneme is an experienced player, and i cant imagine being town. Van Damien is certain scum, id say quite possible Conservative at this point. Ive got a gut feeling that Yosarian could also be Tory scum. Notice the way he held back his vote until the decision was certain, then voted to save me, in an attempt to look good tomorrow.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
And Stoofer, some of your reasons for suspecting BM seem to contradict your other posts. Earlier, you seemed to suggest that you thought BM was scum trying to mess up the nomination system, while later you said that the fact BM did the nomination dosn't say anything about his alignment. The reason I wasnted you to specifically lay out your reasons now, before we find out BM's alignment, is because they didn't quite make sense to me...I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, I really don't like the way he slamed the 4th vote down yesterday to hammer Battle Mage when we still had pleanty of time left to make up the decision. It really feels to me like he cut discussion short by doing that.Mr Stoofer wrote:To clarify, are there any points against dylan other than:- He has consistently lurked.
- He piled a third vote onto DeanWinchester (as a bandwagon was groing on him) then later claimed that this was merely random.
I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
The Fonz: Well, if we don't lynch a conservative today, then we really want to do so tommorow, so we should only lynch Van Damien tommorow if we think he's more likely to be a conservative then any other suspect. (shrug) Which is possible; he might very well be a gambiting conservative, and the risk is lower as it's certanly better to kill him then a pro-town person in any case. But still, our goal has to be to kill a conservitve today and probably tommorow as well, we don't want to get distracted from that.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Alright; we need someone to make the challange before midnight tonight, as the deadline is some random time between the 25th and 26th.
I wouldn't mind seeing VanDamien challange Dylan before then. Otherwise, I'd probably like to see Stoofer challange Dylan, because as I mentioned Stoofer's behavior yesterday seemed iffy to me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, basically, you were accusing Battle Mage of being scum mostly because he didn't follow the plan and challanged someone. Then, later that day, you admitted that townies are probably as likely or more likely to not follow the plan as scum are, and then when I asked you why you thought Battle Mage was scum, you just pointed back to the posts where you said that scum would be more likely to not follow the plan.Mr Stoofer wrote:
I explained what you perceived to be a contradiction. It wasn't. What was wrong with my explanation?Yosarian2 wrote:Otherwise, I'd probably like to see Stoofer challange Dylan, because as I mentioned Stoofer's behavior yesterday seemed iffy to me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Actually, when I was talking about that, I wasn't talking about your line where you said "Battle Mage is such a player that the mere fact that he went off piste tells us nothing about his alignment", I was talking more about when you said
And the rest of your points seem to mostly center on the fact that BM wanted to kill off VanDamien, the "confirmed scum", specificially. Which, again, I don't see; yes, most of us agreed we probably should wait on VanDamien, but again, that's just the kind of sitatuion where I'd expect one townie to disgree strongly enough with the rest of the town to take matters into his own hands, especally if he thought that VanDamien was more likely a conservative scum then a liberal scum.Mr Stoofer wrote:. I agree that it is Townies that are more likely to go off piste than Scum
Basically, what I was hoping would happen would be that you would specifically lay out your spcific arguments for why BM was scum in one seperate post, as a series of coherent arguments, and then we could discuss your reasons; I had some doubts about your reasons for thinking BM was scum, but I wanted you to lay out all your arguments in detail first before I questioned them, because I wasn't clear on exactally what your argumetns were and I didn't want to strawman you, and there was pleanty of time left. instead, you basically declined to answer me and just voted for him prematurly, helping to end the day yesterday before we even had a chance to discuss it. That kind if dicussion is the only way we're going to find out who's scum and who's not, and I don't like the way you and Dylan cut it off short.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah, Dylan hasn't posted since the 22'nd, and that means that if we hit deadline, he'll be forced to challange, and if he's not around to make the challange in the next 36 hours, then he'll be modkilled.
While Dylan being modkilled isn't the worst thing that could happen, it seems like we might get more info by making someone else we're suspicious of challange him before the deadline hits.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Actually, that is a good point, mneme. I forgot that VD is also in danger of getting modkilled. Hmmm...let me check...ok, VD said he'll be back on Thursday.
That said, and here's the strange part, I'm going to be out of town from Sunday through Thursday.
According to Pablito's mod post at the start of cycle 3, the deadline is
Pablito wrote:Deadline to Lynch: 23:59 EDT 29th of June[/qote]
Which is 11:59 Friday night. So, if someone else challanges Dylan, and VD gets back when he said he would, heshouldhave enough time to vote before the deadline hits.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I think the way it works is that a person can have instructions set up before hand in case of contingincy, so like if VD did send in those instructions, and he had been the one who had to make the challange, it would have happened. I guess it's a shame Dylan didn't notice that in the rules.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey