|
On August 21 2011 05:44 Trotske wrote:
The next page after I made my post calling Foolishness inactive he posts quite a few times while not addressing my post at all.
Your post was stupid. DropBear's campaign for mayor is something worth analysing but it's not like it was going to happen, ever. Foolishness was simply acting funny.
If you want to go against Foolishness, don't base your post around such a worthless argument.
Also, Supersoft, after crying out about how I was avoiding casting my vote for Sevryn, we are facing the possibility of a non-linch due to you (and Jackal) unvoting.
|
On August 21 2011 06:02 RayzorFlash wrote:I think it would be good leads to go after anyone aggressively pushing for Sev if he's green, and I know i'm included in that list :S.
Who else would you include in this list?
|
Would you pick a non-lynch instead of lynching Sevryn?
|
On August 21 2011 07:54 DropBear wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 07:46 xtfftc wrote:
Would you pick a non-lynch instead of lynching Sevryn? Are these directed at me or not? I can't tell To xtfftc, I'd rather lynch someone than noone. I would much rather kill hiro or chaoser over sevryn though.
It was directed at Palmar's post but it is a question everyone has to think about, even if we don't discuss it openly.
Is there a possibility to lynch anyone but Sevryn tonight? It doesn't matter who would you like to lynch tonight if it's impossible.
If the answer is negative, it all comes down to lynching Sevryn or lynching no one.
|
On August 21 2011 10:22 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 06:02 RayzorFlash wrote:
Sure, I'll gladly take the fall if Sev proves to be green, but I don't think there was anything scummy at all about my post. I think it would be good leads to go after anyone aggressively pushing for Sev if he's green, and I know i'm included in that list :S. Does anyone think a scum would say such a thing? Especially considering he said this when everyone was voting for Sevryn?
Yes, they would. Don't forget that Rayzor said this right after I challenged his previous post.
On August 21 2011 12:50 RayzorFlash wrote:
Also, saw somewhere in there that xtfftc asked who else would be on my list of people who have aggressively attacked Sev... it would be:
- Myself
- Nard
- Munk-e
- Mig
Thanks, you took your time ^^
Care to elaborate a bit on your list? If you are town, you should be happy to share your thoughts with us; if you are mafia, you have to do it anyway to ease the suspicion from your persona.
|
You know, here and there. Where are you?
|
Nah, I'm just bored of Supersoft. If anyone else has questions for me, I'd gladly answer them.
|
On August 22 2011 22:33 Palmar wrote:
Yes, I have quite a few questions. are you available for a conversation?
First thing's first. Do you have any major suspicions. If it's up to you and you only, whom would you lynch today?
Sure.
I'm still just as suspicious of Rayzor as I saw two days ago. His defense ("would a mafia say this?") did not convince me because he was in a position when he had to say something like this. However, just like to days ago, I think that he is someone who should be pressured to talk more until he makes another mistake or we are convinced he is town. Even if he is mafia, he is not particularly dangerous at the moment because he can not influence the town at the moment.
This is why at the moment I'd go for Mig. Although he improved after his early post about Sevryn, he did not provide anything substantial. Also, although a lot of people casted their vote for Sevryn and then went to bed, Mig did it in in the middle tha attempted switch to Rayzor.
|
On August 22 2011 22:40 Erandorr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 22:25 xtfftc wrote:
You know, here and there. Where are you? Hes actually contributing.
Posting a lot =/= contributing. He is missing a lot of things in his analyses. For example, first he jumped on me and Nard for not being convinced that Sevryn was mafia and waiting for him. After the lynch, he goes on and on about us not being there to change our votes, although he is also from Europe and should be well aware that the deadline was 4AM. And guess what - Sevryn wasn't mafia. Similarly, he refers to QuickSilver as the vigilante when mentioning that QuickSilver was after me as if QS's role somehow gave extra weight to his opinion. As I've said before, I don't think that Supersoft is mafia but I think that if he focuses more on quality rather than quantity, his posts would be much better.
|
On August 22 2011 23:22 supersoft wrote:
Why don't you share your thoughts on the Rayzorlight thing. Do you believe, that he's town
I was the first to point the finger at Rayzor, feel free to filter my posts and re-read my arguments against him.
On August 22 2011 23:22 supersoft wrote:
and everyone was just randomly afk at the deciding point of time?
Most of us were active at the deciding point of time.
|
He is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect.
|
On August 23 2011 03:38 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. Nah, let him answer. He's been dodging.
If I was mafia and thought that this was a situation in which a fellow member of the mafia might slip, I'd send him a PM.
On August 23 2011 03:48 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. Are you verifying this?
I am verifying that it would be wise to consider more than one target when talking about vigilantes, especially now that QuickSilver is dead.
|
On August 23 2011 04:23 hiro protagonist wrote:
while you here, could you give me your opinion of xtfftc? who do you want to lynch today?
And while he is working on it, how about you sharing your thoughts on my persona? The first time you ever mentioned me was when you voted for my lynching.
|
On August 23 2011 04:29 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:11 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 03:38 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. Nah, let him answer. He's been dodging. If I was mafia and thought that this was a situation in which a fellow member of the mafia might slip, I'd send him a PM. On August 23 2011 03:48 Jackal58 wrote:On August 23 2011 03:30 xtfftc wrote:
He is saying that if we agree on one single target for a vigilante, mafia would know who to protect. Are you verifying this? I am verifying that it would be wise to consider more than one target when talking about vigilantes, especially now that QuickSilver is dead. Where in that post did I suggest you were mafia?
You didn't, I was responding to the whole page. The hostility in some of the posts is clearly visible, I believe.
|
On August 23 2011 04:40 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 03:49 xtfftc wrote:On August 21 2011 03:37 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 21 2011 03:24 xtfftc wrote:
By the way, I have to apologise to supersoft - I just noticed that I didn't post in the voting thread, which was probably the reason he put me on his list (although it's still kind of sloppy).
So I'm going to vote after Sevryn defends himself. Palmar, DropBear and BrownBear are a story that has to develop further. wtf? why are you afraid of voting now? Is it because others have labeled you as scum already? I expected supersoft to be superhappy about this but noone else. Sevryn is basically dead, one way or another. No mafia will be dumb enough to protect him anymore and the townies are aware that going after anyone else now would look suspicious. But in case Sevryn gets modkilled, we need to use the opportunity for two town kills. Scum-slip bolded! Scum-slip bolded! Self-admitted scum everyone!
On August 23 2011 04:43 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:40 VisceraEyes wrote:On August 21 2011 03:49 xtfftc wrote:On August 21 2011 03:37 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 21 2011 03:24 xtfftc wrote:
By the way, I have to apologise to supersoft - I just noticed that I didn't post in the voting thread, which was probably the reason he put me on his list (although it's still kind of sloppy).
So I'm going to vote after Sevryn defends himself. Palmar, DropBear and BrownBear are a story that has to develop further. wtf? why are you afraid of voting now? Is it because others have labeled you as scum already? I expected supersoft to be superhappy about this but noone else. Sevryn is basically dead, one way or another. No mafia will be dumb enough to protect him anymore and the townies are aware that going after anyone else now would look suspicious. But in case Sevryn gets modkilled, we need to use the opportunity for two town kills. Scum-slip bolded! Scum-slip bolded! Self-admitted scum everyone! God damn it you posted this before my analysis  I WANTED TO BE FIRST
Mod kill = a kill made by a mod.
Mafia kill = a kill made by the mafia.
Town kill = a kill made by the town.
|
On August 23 2011 04:50 wherebugsgo wrote:
xtfftc has made some "contributions", but his reactions have been really strange. Supersoft made a list once of people who haven't voted, and xtfftc jumped to the conclusion that it was a suspicion list.
...
Apologizes meekly to supersoft later, why?
I did not say that the list of people Supersoft made was a list of people who were suspicious - I merely pointed out that he was wrong. I voted for Palmer, Supersoft quoted my post and voted for me immediately after - and then he put me on the list. It was sloppy, no matter how you look at it.
Then I saw I missed doing it on the voting thread, so I apologised for my mistake. Why - because I was wrong and even made a sneer remark on it.
Then there's this gem: Show nested quote +On August 21 2011 03:49 xtfftc wrote:On August 21 2011 03:37 wherebugsgo wrote:On August 21 2011 03:24 xtfftc wrote:
By the way, I have to apologise to supersoft - I just noticed that I didn't post in the voting thread, which was probably the reason he put me on his list (although it's still kind of sloppy).
So I'm going to vote after Sevryn defends himself. Palmar, DropBear and BrownBear are a story that has to develop further. wtf? why are you afraid of voting now? Is it because others have labeled you as scum already? I expected supersoft to be superhappy about this but noone else. Sevryn is basically dead, one way or another. No mafia will be dumb enough to protect him anymore and the townies are aware that going after anyone else now would look suspicious. But in case Sevryn gets modkilled, we need to use the opportunity for two town kills. wat
wat indeed? What is it that you are claiming? Is this all about semantics or is there anything more to it?
On August 23 2011 04:50 wherebugsgo wrote:
I will answer to QuickSilver in a separate post because this one is long enough anyway.
but never actually made such a post, semi-copping out with this trash:
If I don't answer QuickSilver, people will claim that I have nothing to say in my defense.
If I don't analyse Sevyrn, I will be accused of not contributing.
I never got to responding to it, mostly because I felt there was not much to talk about. Most of his accusations were based on me arguing the point that lynching lurkers as top priority is not a great strategy for town. The rest was an analysis on my vote for Palmer, which was taken out of context. Still, there you go:
On August 20 2011 16:52 QuickSilver7 wrote:Our scum dying today is xtfftc, he does the same thing that Trotske does. Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour. So lemme get this straight, he votes Palmar to try and get Palmar to convince him that DB or BB are scum? He doesn’t even think Palmar is scum but he’s fine killing him if it means “one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around” Townies throw accusations around not mafia, mafia want to lurk where they won’t be seen.
People vote for more than one reason. Not every vote means "this person is mafia". Sometimes you vote to pressure, sometime you vote to encourage.
He also picks DB and BB as people who he’d switch to if Palmar magically convinces him that one of them is scum. However he doesn’t give any reasons why he’d vote for these people other than a very vague reference to DB’s “behavior.”
Mentioning DB wasn't a vague reference, I had already commented on it in a previous post. Mentioning BB was to encourage Palmar to keep on with his lead because I thought he was onto something.
Here is another: Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 08:46 xtfftc wrote:On August 19 2011 08:38 Curu wrote:
We already had a mess of a first day in Personality with everyone trying to roleplay.
What point are you trying to get at xtfftc? I don't have anything to add really - as long as we're all active, all is good. I'd just bear in mind that people don't want to die, even in a game. Woa red flags going up all over the place, for context xtfftc was posting some troll crap at the beginning about democracy and random stuff which Curu called him out on. Firstly he says he has nothing to add, bad bad bad, as a townie you can always add to the discussion.
For context, this post comes in the middle of a discussion about lynching lurkers and different lynch organization techniques. A townie should have lots to say on this subject, after the lynch is how we’re killing scum. Yet xtfftc doesn’t address any of this and skates by with a very neutral “as long as we're all active, all is good.” Then he drops the bomb “I'd just bear in mind that people don't want to die, even in a game” a townie would be happy to die, every townie that dies at night is a blue that didn’t get sniped (or a medic failure lolol  ). Townies should have no fear of death and be contributing as much as possible, any reticence towards posting indicates something to hide and that indicates scum.
This was a discussion about policies which should have been over a long time ago. I said what I had to say - that some town players will lurk and lynching players for lurking is a bad idea. At the time of my post there were people calling out for lynching all lurkers as a top priority... I don't agree with this and never will.
Anyway next post: Show nested quote +On August 19 2011 08:06 chaos13 wrote:On August 19 2011 08:03 xtfftc wrote:
Surely the Mafia is aware that open discussion is the ordinary citizens' strongest weapon and are thus likely to target those who are unafraid to speak their minds? A dictator always targets the means of communication: the media, the internet, etc. Yes. Does that mean we should all lurk? No. If everybody discusses in a productive way, mafia will have trouble blending in and providing the same level of constructive input, and suddenly those extremely pro-town players don't become such high profile targets, because everyone is joining in to an equal degree. I agree, of course. If the whole population takes part in the democracy process, the people become too powerful to be messed with. But it often takes just one ordinary citizen to show signs of cowardice - and suddenly we see a snowball effect affecting the whole town.
But in the below post he contradicts himself by saying that if 1 person doesn't post, we all lose.
Snowball effect = one person deciding to do something and the others following. One person is not a problem unless the others follow suit.
I apologise if the way I expressed myself was a bit hard to understand but by twisting my words all you do is make me suspicious.
I never said that "if 1 person doesn't post, we all lose" - I said that "One person is not a problem unless the others follow suit."
The nested quotes here show the little exchange about democracy I was talking about earlier. Now I would have let that whole thing go as early game trolling and not taken anything he said seriously, but rather then say “oh hey nbd I was just trolling”, xtfftc chooses to defend his comments which means he meant them, if he mean them than GeyMist’s argument for xtfftc’s posts being scummy is suddenly relevant. Beyond the democracy exchange this post also rehashes stuff others have been saying about lurkers and town KP, adding nothing new to the table. The very definition of CWC.
I did mean them and I still mean them - prioritising on lurkers is bad for the game. According to QuickSilver I was wrong for saying "there is nothing more to add", yet I am also wrong for "adding nothing new to the table". I made my point about the policy, then I made it again. And then I got asked about it again. Yes, I had nothing else to add and I still don't.
|
|
|
On August 23 2011 04:50 hiro protagonist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:30 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 04:23 hiro protagonist wrote:
while you here, could you give me your opinion of xtfftc? who do you want to lynch today? And while he is working on it, how about you sharing your thoughts on my persona? The first time you ever mentioned me was when you voted for my lynching. well, there's this: Show nested quote +On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour. yeah, If I was scum, I wouldn't want someone around that randomly accusing people ether. I mean, why would you want anyone to do something that puts pressure on scum, right?
It puts pressure on everyone and can be detrimental to discussion. Don't take things out of context, please.
|
#1: Why would it have been suspicious to go after anyone else?
Because it would look as if they are trying to save their buddy.
If you had evidence, you could've made the case for someone else!
I did and I made one against Rayzor.
Vote to kill mafia. That's our job. Our job is not to extract information. Our job is to kill mafia. If you're not voting to kill mafia, then you're fucking up.
...
Like I said earlier, you don't vote to "encourage" someone, pressurevote them, whatever. You vote someone to kill them, because you think they're mafia.
I don't agree. The game is not that simple. Yes, if we have a serious target, we vote to kill him. By the time of my vote there wasn't.
Yes, but when people suggest that we could lynch lurkers, you can add to the discussion by instead suggesting SPECIFIC PEOPLE to lynch, and reasons/evidence why.
We are talking about very early Day 1. You and like ~25 of the other players didn't add something constructive about specific people at that time; the few who did were just probing. You can not attack me for not having a concrete target that early in the game.
On August 23 2011 05:55 wherebugsgo wrote:
Oh, I forgot this:
After the #1 (my "wat" comment)
You said we needed to use the opportunity for two kills. Funny thing is, you really didn't have any suggestions for WHO to kill, just "hey guys maybe we should kill two people."
That makes me question your motives for wanting two people to die. If you wanted to lynch mafia, why wouldn't you make a suggestion of who you suspected?
In the next hour after this post I urged DB and BB to enter the discussion and raised my suspicions on Rayzor. But why wouldn't we want a second lynch? Everyone agrees that a non-lynch is bad for town, so why not do two?
On August 23 2011 05:41 hiro protagonist wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 05:37 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 04:50 hiro protagonist wrote:On August 23 2011 04:30 xtfftc wrote:On August 23 2011 04:23 hiro protagonist wrote:
while you here, could you give me your opinion of xtfftc? who do you want to lynch today? And while he is working on it, how about you sharing your thoughts on my persona? The first time you ever mentioned me was when you voted for my lynching. well, there's this: On August 20 2011 05:09 xtfftc wrote:
##Vote: Palmar
He obviously had something in mind and there's no way he wasn't aware of how his accusations would be perceived by the rest of us.
However, his strategy hasn't benefited town by now. He has until the deadline to convince me to vote DropBear or BrownBear. If nothing meaningful comes out of the discussion initiated by him, I'd rather have one less player who throws arbitrary accusations around.
I'd also like to point out that it shouldn't be that difficult to convince me to switch to DropBear, considering DropBear's behaviour. yeah, If I was scum, I wouldn't want someone around that randomly accusing people ether. I mean, why would you want anyone to do something that puts pressure on scum, right? It puts pressure on everyone and can be detrimental to discussion. Don't take things out of context, please. I did not say anything about the negative aspects of random accusations. I said that if I was scum, I would not want someone around that randomly accuses people.
Well you could have asked me why it is that I don't want people throwing random accusations and I would have explained to you what is my stance on the issue. Why it is that you decided to vote before enquiring is beyond me.
|
On August 23 2011 06:22 Foolishness wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 04:22 Vain wrote:On August 23 2011 04:13 supersoft wrote:
i'd prefer vain but let's do it.
##Vote: xtfftc wtf, you prefer me but lets just go for xtffc. Sounds logic. Now when its not xtffc you can always say"oh jeah i liked vain better" very convenient That's totally a townie talking there. Not afraid to voice his opinion or yell at someone.
Yes but in case he is mafia and knows that I am town, he'd be able to point the finger at my most vicious inquisitor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
