lots of bodies, let's get some annalisis!
based on place on these wagons, I'm gonna say
VOTE: Antihero
Antihero (1)- Xine
ICEninja (2)- Me=Weird, Oso
Llamarble (0)-
Me=Weird (0)-
Netopalis (0)
Oso (2)- Antihero, ICEninja
PerArdua (1)- Equinox
Equinox (0)-
Xine (0)-
Not Voting (3)- Llamarble, Netopalis, PerArdua
With9alive, it takes5to lynch.
Two playersare the current wagon leader(s), atL-3
Deadline is Sunday, November 7th, 2010 @ 11:59 PM EDT
I don't think scum lurk THAT hard; even lurker Zorblag-scum posted at least once a day until RL made him forget (Open 233).Antihero wrote:If he's picking up the prods and not posting, that = epic superscumfail.
How was ICEninja cultivating this kind of atmosphere? The way I read his posts was a push for more activity, not less; he merely emphasized the need to generate content as much as possible given short deadlines, and he's never pushed for a quick lynch. Your points here against ICEninja do not hold water.Oso wrote:Basically, I accuse him of setting an atmosphere where its urgent that a lynch take place and that I can see scum using it to go after low activity players. And that is exactly what I see happening because at that point his vote is on, you guessed it, Fernando.
Well, then, please present the thought process that you had at the time.Oso wrote:Second post won't be coming. What I thought as as a second obvious scum may not be that at all. Got excited I might have caught two for one, need to think on it some.
Llamarble wrote:Sure, the odds aren't great, but it's all the more glory if we somehow manage to win.
I hope the other town players will take a similar attitude, since we'll all have more fun (it is a game after all) and a much better chance of winning.
Dude. Don't fall for that. If you're town, and I believe you are, you know you're right; don't let a case like this one pull you down.ICEninja wrote:Right. This makes me want to replace out even more.
What was that? I couldn't hear you over the sound of the chainsaws and OMGUS!Xine wrote:I very much agree that this situation is looking a bit dire.Iceon day one you said that this game would open up when we had some dead bodies to annylize, here is a picture of each of these bodies at the moment of their largest wagons:
Shattered Viewpoint(2) -FeRnAnDo,Zinive
Zinive(6) - ICEninja, Me=Weird, Equinox, Antihero, Oso, Llamarble
FeRnAnDo(7) - netlava, Llamarble, ICEninja, Xine, Me=Weird, Antihero, Oso
lots of bodies, let's get some annalisis!
based on place on these wagons, I'm gonna say
VOTE: Antihero
The wording and diction of this post is sincere to me. You asked questions of Ice and explained what you thought the scumtells were.M=W wrote:It's a slip because only scum would know that it's a vig, because of their team size/power. There have been numerous case's of two scum groups in a MN. Usually 2 groups of 2, so ICEninja's probably on team of 3, or with lots of power. Furthermore, why was it a bad shot just because SV wasn't on the lynch? Parts of that post also seemed like AtE, and there was the early game obsession with short deadlines.
First sentence, right off the bat, is sheeping. Second sentence is awkwardly worded and looks like scum trying to avoid a slip. Oso never says why the third sentence is a scumtell, not to mention it's an oversimplification.Oso wrote:Have to throw in with Me=Weird here. Don't want to get in a what I think the set-up might be discussion, when I don't have time to sit and think on it properly but M=W has an excellent point. ICEninja blew straight through any other killing roles right to vig.
Short on time and I wanted to re-read after the night-flips before getting into this day but that is glaring enough for a vote. His(ICEninja's) post needs some explanation.
Xine, I would be *very interested* in your reasoning.Xine wrote:based on place on these wagons, I'm gonna say
VOTE: Antihero
Equinox, I personally don't like policy lynches. I would rather that the lurker get replaced.Equinox wrote:I still haven't read. >_>
BUT! I promise (and I don't break promises ) that I shall get it done later this evening, and you guys are top priority. I love you guys, even if it's unrequited... :sniff:
If we lynch PerArdua today then we're in the exact same boat tomorrow, except we're short whoever scum decides to night kill. We're therefore in an even worse situation day 3 than we are today. No, we don't lynch him. Our odds of either PerArdua or (preferably and) whoever we decide to lynch are the same regardless if he is mod killed or not, but we're denying a night kill by allowing the mod kill. The only argument for killing him today is the pool for who we lynch tomorrow is smaller.Equinox wrote: The point that someone brought up that it gives the mafia an extra kill somewhat makes sense... but only if we lynch correctly today.
It wasn't even a case, it was just him being an ass. There's a difference.Equinox wrote: Dude. Don't fall for that. If you're town, and I believe you are, you know you're right; don't let a case like this one pull you down.
My experience with BaM games have been that the modkills occur at the end of the day following the lynch, and the game still goes into night. The scum get to kill, regardless.ICEninja wrote:Our odds of either PerArdua or (preferably and) whoever we decide to lynch are the same regardless if he is mod killed or not, but we're denying a night kill by allowing the mod kill. The only argument for killing him today is the pool for who we lynch tomorrow is smaller.
I realize that, at this point, you firmly believed in a FeRnAnDo-Zinive scum team. ...but why did you say, "because lynching PRs is bad"?Llamarble wrote:This claim therefore doesn't reduce my suspicion of Zinive (actually increases it by Bayes' rule, since a scum in his position would probably claim a PR whereas a town player has a smaller chance of doing so), butbecause lynching PRs is bad it does make Fernando look like a better lynch.
First bold, not buying it. I don't trust anything that smells of <He/I/They> are just too unintelligent to think of something, especially from the person I just accused of doing it.ICEninja wrote:..
What? Maybe I'm just town, and genuinely feel how I say I feel and you recognized that. I'm terrible at scum, or at least I was the game I played it.You're giving me way too much credit for something I'm probably not capable of.
Most of your case against me is "Oh wait so you WERE scummy for the reasons I said yesterday then decided that they weren't scum tells."
And yes, I was referring to your hop from Llama to Zinive to Fernando. For the most part, scum's goal isn't to be off the wagon, it is generally more to make a mislynch happen. You misinterpreted what I meant by safe.
..
(I'll answer the bold quote along with the next quote) Basically, because of just that, I said I would and fobbing off not doing what I said I would onto someone else simply to try an avoid responsibility for something would just be wrong (in or out of a game). I gave a time I would I would cast my vote if Fernando hadn't shown and I did that. As to hammering someone I figured was town, I covered that already but I'll hit it again. From some of the discussion yesterday, I came to the decision in my own mind that if it came down to having no clear lynch and a lurker was on the block, then I would cast my vote so that we could cut our losses. I think it was Netlava who mentioned (before he replaced out) that Fernando logged after he was lynched so it seems my decision in his case was wrong. He might have come back in but at the time of my vote, he seemed like a good candidate for Mod-Kill at the end of today and if that happened we'd be looking at 2 possible Mod-Kill candidates right now instead of one.Me=Weird wrote:..
241: For all that you go on about ICE obsessing about the deadlines, and voting the lurker, that didn't seem to stop you from voting fernando, who flaked. I know you said that you would, but I don't see why you hammered someone you thought was town when someone else expressed willingness to hammer.Out of curiosity, who else did you think you'd caught as scum?
..
Granted, general thread trust in me at the moment is pretty low but I do promise if it gets to where I have to claim, I'll happily answer that and the bolded in my above post.Equinox wrote:..Well, then, please present the thought process that you had at the time.Oso wrote:Second post won't be coming. What I thought as as a second obvious scum may not be that at all. Got excited I might have caught two for one, need to think on it some.
Reasons please. I can't defend myself without actually knowing why you think that.Antihero wrote:..
Ice is most likely town. This vote is fail, as is Oso's. M=W seems to actually believe he caught a scum slip;Oso doesn't, he's faking it.
Did I ever say anything aboutAlso at Antihero, since when do we use flavor in a mini-normal toconfirmroles.
And you didn't address Antihero's concern about said data and your conclusions...Xine wrote:You are really upset about this vote. I made a gut move, based on the imression I got from viewing some data. you only need to fear this if you are guilty, right?
^This, this, and thisEquinox wrote:I totally forgot about that. >_<
And you didn't address Antihero's concern about said data and your conclusions...Xine wrote:You are really upset about this vote. I made a gut move, based on the imression I got from viewing some data. you only need to fear this if you are guilty, right?
Well, if this is a "gut move," there's got to be some basis for it. I'd like to hear about that.