By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Linkzmax on 14 February 2011
theprof00 said:
trashleg said:

not being funny or anything,

 

but 192 new posts overnight? thats going to take some time to read and i only have an hour before i have to leave for work. but il try read as much as i can, then il be back online at like 4.30am GMT. sorry.

as of this quoted post, there were 59 posts on the page @100 pp @18:59 GMT 2/14/11

first post on page 5 http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3914696 @19:14 GMT 2/13/11

post difference: 159 posts

bottom of page 4 http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3914670 @19:00 GMT 2/13/11

total post difference: 170

bottom-mid page 4 http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3914377 @15:02 GMT 2/13/11

total post difference: 192

total time difference 28 hours @ 192 posts.

 

your post on page 4

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3913155 18:43 GMT 2/12/11. 

So, you said 192 new posts, eh? That means that last time you were online was 14:41 GMT 2/13/11, which means you went without posting for 20 hours, and just watched.

Glad you saved me from going back to check out this claim. I knew trashleg's last post was on the 12th and though I'm not sure about when her night is, I knew there was no way it was 192 posts overnight. I wouldn't have found it strange to have not been on since then and been a little overwhelmed by the number of posts to read through upon returning, but to have dropped in and read some of the going-ons without having anything to say makes me suspicious.

And since I already dissected her vote of ABC, I find it the one that stands out most. noname has decided to keep what was a joke vote on him due to the time-travely ways. Republic voted based on the same reasoning, it's possibly just a bangwagon vote but the posts prior to the vote lead me to believe it's independent thinking. I also said I don't think radish's vote was well reasoned, but I admit I expect something like that from radish. Though now I realize that means I'm holding him to a lower standard than someone I've never played with, and that's unfair especially given his claim of being new and improved.



VGC Mafia Archives

Around the Network
Wonktonodi on 14 February 2011
Linkzmax said:
Hephaestos said:

Linkzmax said:http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=3915858

well since you're putting brainpower into this.

1) I read the initial comment as proff... that he was waiting for proff's opinion.

2) "sort of" means the answer is pretty much BS, that he's fed up with explaining it cause it was a slip that he prefered not to have made.

3) I now get your future remarks. makes the answers even more BS.

Still I don't get that high a scum vibe from him.... the only think that really bothers me is I would have expected him to drop the ball when proff was after him and be already fed up with playing here, he was already hesitant to join, was very enoyed with having to talk about his other site... He's making a big big effort to stay in the game and be active. (and i might regret that paragraph just there...)

It's strange that you numbers points, but didn't put numbers into the quote so I don't really know if you're refering to some small part or the post as a whole. Anyway:

1) Huh, you mean prof's opinion on someone else? Others have done the same, but we've already learned it was a miscommunication. After much arm twisting, ABC stated that he essentially meant he was waiting for prof in order to get a read on prof. Not only in the quote within my post, but elsewhere if you'd like me to dig it up.

2) That's possible. I think he was fed up with answering it over and over again, although most of the answers were too unclear so it was his own fault.

3) Exactly. If it is BS, then I would expect Wonk to see that also, not just pass it off with "Ok that makes sence." That is what gives me the impression that Wonk was having an artificial interrogation of ABC. Others have simply dropped their line of questiong with him due to frustration due to nonsense answers or have responded to the nonsense with a vote. Wonk stands out to me as the only one that has "bought" something that doesn't make sense.

I'm confused.  What I "bought" is what you said in point one.  Also I'm really not sure what it has to do with 3.



Wonktonodi on 14 February 2011
A Bad Clown said:
radishhead said:
A Bad Clown said:
snip

Now that doesn't seem suspicious at all...

If you explain how it's suspicious, I'll try and solve the situation - but that response makes me feel more confident that I've hit a Mafia.


Well, when we decided to look at someone else you finally started talking to me. Earlier in the thread when I was being ganked you didn't have much to say about me. When prof and I decided to look into you specifically you at first didn't have much to say but quickly posted again about not really being suspcious of you. It looked like you wanted to keep low until you saw that others still had votes on me. This would have been the perfect time to vote me because the conversation against you restarted. Voting now would be tactical at this point when two people would both be questioning you. If the prof would have questioned you first, you would have to wait until you could appeal to him by voting the person he was suspicious of. Now that you've stated you want to vote me he will probably follow along, saving yourself.

ABC robot please clear up this posts.



noname2200 on 14 February 2011
Linkzmax said:

On ABC: The robo thing is making him far more understandable now. It's made me do another read over his posts. I find myself thinking that everytime he seems to clear up things and get suspicion off of him, he goes and says something else that makes me think "HUH!? That makes no sense" and thus I'm back to being a bit suspicious of him. But that makes me wonder if a mafiosi would continue to blunder along like that, or would've been sure to be more careful/take a step out of the limelight for a while. That's making me think he's townie, but still those "HUH" posts linger on my mind as well as noname's timeline thing and the one post I've noticed.
Final-Fan said:

Honestly, my opinion at this point is that it was more likely one of those "too scummy to actually be scum" situations.  But I could be wrong; and I don't know what else I could say to convince you (or anyone, really) that no, your suspicions are totally valid, it's just that his behavior went so far beyond suspicious that surely nobody actually guilty would be so incautious as to say those things. 

In last game's dead thread, I posted that the surviving townies (yourself included) could have caught nen if you guys had taken a step back and stopped overthinking everything. Judging by these posts, you're doing the same thing here: rather than going with what you apparently believe, you're creating a fictional framework of how scum Would Act in a situation, and then checking to see if the observed behavior matches this fictional framework. 

I'm not urging you to vote for ABC at this moment, but I am telling you that playing mindgames with yourself is a fantastic way for a townie to lose.

Wonktonodi said:

It is also helpful for townies to see who thinks like them as well. 

Why?  What benefit does a townie get from this if they're not actively lobbying for votes?

Hephaestos said:

okay, well...

1) ABC well i do have the feeling that he's better for later...His playstyle is also now changed. There seemed to have been way too much miscommunication early on for this to just be misscommunication though... so i'll keep my fos till we see more info tomorow. Wasn't there an alphabet killer?.... or was that something I saw in a movie/series...

2) Radish... well I saw that ABC pointed out my thought already... the argument looked fake, especially based on the smileyface and the radish defence. That and the illogicity of wonk's arguments against radish. He must have known that he would be rushing into a wall. I believe a Wonk lynch today is the most usefull information we could get. If he's mafia then we a radish lynch would be interesting too. If not, then radish has no dirt on him 'yet'. It'd be a shame though to lynch wonk on day one...he barely blossomed.

Vote: Wonk

3) trash, I thought her vote on ABC to be a bit flumsy... not much else to say though. First time I play with her, but she kept cool with the jokevotes so little info gained there.

What do you mean by "and the radish defense"?  Also, why do you think trash's vote is flimsy?

Final-Fan said:

Well, there is one specific thing I want to add:  I think it's less likely ABC lied about his reasoning than that he just didn't remember and made up a reason that seemed to make sense, even though, as you point out, it doesn't. 

Isn't your motto usually "lynch all liars," though?

Stefl1504 said:


I haven't read to the end of the posts yet, but I thought that I needed to reply to this.

I said that we should not focus ont ABC, I was not trying to stop asking him questions, but like you side, get people also to look at others than him, while he is likely to be scum, I still think there are other players out there that haven't gotten any attention yet (as far as I read now). Why I said that we should wait for trangent... yeah, I was hoping he really has some clues for us.

Very well, but now that that's ended I'd like to hear your thoughts and suspicions, since you've been unusually quiet this game.



Wonktonodi on 14 February 2011
A Bad Clown said:

Statement: If it were any help, I started to play here this game because my former site has grown inactive in "Mafia" games.

 


I'd like to know why you didn't understand some of the basics

I'm also curious why you didn't like people posting while you were alseep

why were you angry people voted you over night but really didn't go into it much with many of the people who voted for you?



Around the Network
theprof00 on 14 February 2011
Linkzmax said:
theprof00 said:
Linkzmax said:

I understand that, but please do not vote him until much longer down the line. Please read today before doing anything rash.

Have I ever seemed rash? Rest assured that I'm not going to vote until I'm caught up on the thread, current with potals(now with a finger pointing chart), and have a good idea who I'd suspect tomorrow given the possible flips of the lynch.

Exactly why are you so insistent on people leaving ABC alone? I had the same feeling as you, that efforts would better be focused elsewhere, but the way you seem to be trying to push that feels very odd. If you're both mafia I can't imagine you'd try to cover for a scumbuddy like this, but then again maybe that's exactly how you're trying to make me feel. On the other hand, I don't see you going to these lengths as mafia if he's a townie, so if that's the case then I guess it's a plus for you.

I'm just really worried that you're going to vote and then someone is going to hammer. I'm already upset that republic put him back to 4, another vote would be even worse.

I don't want this day to be over, I have thrown out so many questions and none of them are answered. 

I'll say it again, even if ABC is scum, he's not going to last long regardless. I'm here following leads and making the most of day 1, and I'm not going to waste this chance when he is either going to be cleared or not or flip scum after a lynch anyway, especially when I'm now the favorite for early death. This is my day to play, don't take that from me.



A Bad Clown on 14 February 2011
Wonktonodi said:
A Bad Clown said:
radishhead said:
A Bad Clown said:
snip

Now that doesn't seem suspicious at all...

If you explain how it's suspicious, I'll try and solve the situation - but that response makes me feel more confident that I've hit a Mafia.


Well, when we decided to look at someone else you finally started talking to me. Earlier in the thread when I was being ganked you didn't have much to say about me. When prof and I decided to look into you specifically you at first didn't have much to say but quickly posted again about not really being suspcious of you. It looked like you wanted to keep low until you saw that others still had votes on me. This would have been the perfect time to vote me because the conversation against you restarted. Voting now would be tactical at this point when two people would both be questioning you. If the prof would have questioned you first, you would have to wait until you could appeal to him by voting the person he was suspicious of. Now that you've stated you want to vote me he will probably follow along, saving yourself.

ABC robot please clear up this posts.

Statement: When User: A Bad Clown was being targeted it began

Formerly, raddish was occupied with you

Targeting me and agreeing with the users to vote me would have been tactical.

If you and radish were "mafia" it would save you both, by voting with them before the other users started to interrogate raddish or you.

Ending suspicion of you two not talking against me for a reason, and ending your possible "mock arguing" suspicion.

 

I must eat, you may check out other users



19:44:34 Skeezer METAL GEAR ONLINE
19:44:36 Skeezer FAILURE
19:44:51 ABadClown You're right!
19:44:55 ABadClown Hur hur hur
19:45:01 Skeezer i meant
19:45:04 Skeezer YOU ARE A FAILKURE
19:45:08 Skeezer FAILURE*
noname2200 on 14 February 2011

I'd also like to take this time to ask anyone who hasn't commited to a vote yet to state what their vote is at this moment (actually voting is not necessary and, if it's for ABC, may be detrimental right now).  Equally importantly, I'd like to hear WHY you'd vote that way.  This includes people who currently have a joke vote on someone.  You may also choose to go with a "No Lynch" as your vote, if you so feel, but please explain why.

I already have my non-joke vote on someone, but to get the ball rolling:  I'd vote for ABC, because he's repeatedly given explanations for his actions that are not possible, i.e. they are lies.  Additionally, I'm uncomfortable with how he's flipped his suspicions on trashleg, hephaestos (both with no discernable explanation), and myself (especially after he's failed to address the timeline post).

Bonus: if I had a second vote, it would be on wonk.  I'm not comfortable with his behavior towards radishead, although I'm less convinced than others that he's been buddying up to/communicating with radish.  His waiting to jump on radish until linkz and heph did so first is odd, and while I understand his explanation that he's just trying to trim the fat, the way he's distanced himself from pushing radish's lynch ("I'm not saying we lynch him, I'm saying we think about lynching him") combined with the way he started that proposal long before there was any danger of a no lynch just does not sit well with me right now.



Wonktonodi on 14 February 2011
noname2200 said:
 
Wonktonodi said:

It is also helpful for townies to see who thinks like them as well. 

Why?  What benefit does a townie get from this if they're not actively lobbying for votes?


There are several I think I have pointed this out to linkz so some might be repeated but some might be knew

Seeing people who think like you can lead to a future vote even if not a current vote.

Also dependind on what they agree with how they agree and if they point out any flaws you can get some idea on the other players alignment. 

Yes it could be more easy to manipulate if you aren't going for a current vote but you can still get information.  Or know you have to go back and refine the idea. 



theprof00 on 14 February 2011
Wonktonodi said:
theprof00 said:
Wonktonodi said:

2. @ABClown Situation: Is it really important that he plays Mafia on another site? I mentioned that I did that on my first game here and you guys just found the site, had a few lols at the 60 player game, and left it be. I'm sure that he's not a multi - let's just move on xO

2. Good point prof hase focused on that too long

 

 

" I used to play a few Mafia games at a time, and therefore I didn't have all of my time available to catch up on the games that were occuring on VGC. However, this game I've decided that I'll only play one game of Mafia at a time. I thought that this would have an effect on the way that I played, and I actually thought that it was working, but you don't seem to notice that I've changed. It's not the same old radishhead - I'm still improving, but surely you notice a little difference?"

 

Yup I focus on playing outside games too much! </sarcasm>

 

secondly wonk, you don't know about wessle, or some of the other players that simply do not care how they play. If someone has outside experience and they are posting like a lunatic, I'd like to know what frame of reference I should be using.

I know I don't understang about past people on here, so I can understand concern about an alt or someone playing many games.  However the thing that stood out the most to me was if he plays outside games why was he so unsure of how the game works.  So that should have been the focus of the questions.  Not who it was with or where. 

I wasn't really satisfied with his answers for why he didn't understand how the game works since he's played before. I do agree he's doing better as a robot, but I still have some digging to do.

yaknow wonk, it was a little bit of everything. Go back and read my posts. I said, how can you be familiar with vgc mafia games and not be familiar with how to read vote totals.

He also said that he had read me playing on here, yet then he said the only game he read was DBZ, which I hadn't played in, and which had vote totals showing unvotes.

Now, ABC, I don't want you to respond to this. Just ignore it. 

Wonk, I've attacked ABC from every different angle, and covered just about everything there is to cover, so if you want to be one of those people saying, "prof is harping on the same subject" be my guest. It's not the same subject, it's different sides of the same coin/dice, and I'm just going to ignore it from now on.