|
On September 18 2011 06:15 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 05:37 raynpelikoneet wrote:
My vote is on prplhz, at least now. Let's c if anything new comes up before day ends.
##vote prplhz wow what a 100th post i'm so blown away i want to vote for me too now i don't like drh or heist or wiggles but there are tons of people here who are worthy of scrutiny Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 04:46 DoctorHelvetica wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
It's generally agreed that a 50/50 bandwagon is pretty much the ideal situation for mafia. Actually when the town all agrees on one player that is the scummiest and tunnels them leaving no wiggle room, that is the worst scenario for mafia because assuming town was correct they have no way out of it.
Vain is definitely being antagonistic and the fact that he slipped under the radar for such bad posting isn't a good sign.
People seem to be complaining that we're still talking about Gollum or the ring or whatever but most of the discussion on the last few pages is about a lynch so stop complaining. I'm keeping my vote on WBG until I make up my mind. Vain, Drazerk, prplhz are all people I'm looking at.
stuff like this, it's the wiggle room we want 'cause that's when people really have to talk about stuff, even if we're lynching a scum i think 51/49 is better than 100/0 and drh should probably think so too unless he's a crazyman i'm fine with wbg and cyriandor and syllogism, good questions and wbg is not worth the attention he's getting right now, let him troll around and then maybe a vig can shoot him at some point or whatever
I'm not gonna fight with you on this. I'm not saying people shouldn't press who they think is scum. But when there is one overwhelming bandwagon against an obvious mafia we shouldn't go out of our way to split it since that's what the mafia wants. I'm not advocating analyzing/voting for only one player a day. That's silly. There is usually only a single bandwagon when something like a major scum slip/red DT check/really good analysis comes up on a player and that's exactly what should happen in that case. Maybe there is just a misunderstanding between us but I think having (in a vacuum) a split wagon between two players is the ideal situation for scum.
On September 18 2011 05:58 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 05:49 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On September 18 2011 05:39 wherebugsgo wrote:On September 18 2011 05:35 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Drazerk never said that you're scum because you have posting restrictions. You aren't making any sense and now that you're getting "pressure" to scumhunt you're showing the worst case of scumhunting I've ever seen.
"TranceStorm is scum TranceStorm is scum Trancestorm is scum" is not scumhunting. Neither are OMGUS votes based on bad misunderstandings of what another player is saying.
You said your first vote/reasons were bad. Yet in that same post you say "
I already found you scum, look at TranceStorm." That's some big confidence for a "bad" vote. Cut the bullshit. It's obvious that what ever you are, you're not here to help us.
Honestly on Day 1 I'd be more content lynching a pretty sure SK/Third Party player than some gut scum read that is probably wrong and end up killing some VT or power role that is actually helping us. As far as your posting all you are is an annoyance and a distraction. Are you fucking kidding? Drazerk didn't say anything about me being scum other than "leaning" scum on me. In the same post he says there are "definitely posting restrictions" when participating in a conversation about me talking about the ring in posts I make. Drazerk is scummy. I also think TranceStorm is scummy, I don't think my vote reason was bad, I just didn't explicitly state my vote reason. I wanted it to appear "bad" to promote discussion (which I did, no?) You specifically said this. THIS GUY IS SCUM.
He thinks, "wherebugsgo has a posting restriction"=he must be scum.
Hey genius, guess what, I'm not scum just because I have a posting restriction. Drazerk never even once implied that you having a posting restriction makes you scum. So no, I'm not kidding my point still stands. He never said or implied it was scummy. Sorry. This entire quoted attack on Drazerk is based on a bad misunderstanding. You didn't say anything about TranceStorm being scum other than he was scum and that was it. It wasn't until way later that you explained your vote (giving us all of one sentence of justification). If that's your basis for voting Drazerk, perhaps you should vote for yourself. Oh I see you're playing bad on purpose to "promote discussion" i.e draw all attention to yourself and make the whole day 1 discussion worthless. Very good town play, bravo. Why don't you tell me Drazerk's motivation for voting for me, then? Why did he mention the posting restrictions in the context of his vote on me? Why did he sheep Chaoser? You seem to know all about Drazerk. Go ahead and tell us. And yes, I did say that my vote reason was bad, because that was the way I intended it to appear. I have reasons for voting him, I don't have to state everything and put it out on a silver platter for you. This is the same reason why I'm not going to tell anyone why I want the ring. If you guys decide to give me the ring, fine, if you don't, you're just hurting yourselves. Of course, I might actually have to put everything on a nice silver platter, since most townies are usually extraordinarily thick and incapable of reasoning.
You're pretty good at jumping to conclusions. He mentioned it because it was what we were talking about. Other people were speculating about whether or not you have a posting restriction and he is coming out and saying you probably do. He never connected it to his vote for you or his reasons for thinking you're scum. I'm not Drazerk I don't know why he voted for you. Stop being obnoxious I never said I knew anything about his reasons or what he's thinking I'm just saying your basis for attacking him is flawed. You have no reason to be this defensive unless you're guilty of something, slow to understand basic logic, or intent on being as annoying as possible in this game.
I've decided you're a clown and I'm not wasting anymore discussion talking to you about this. Come up with something good enough to reply to and I'll think about it. You're just noise.
|
explains what you didn't even make a case on him
|
If we don't have a viable serious scum target then I'd be fine getting rid of a detrimental player who is probably a third party SK. Better than hitting town.
However, let's knock off the "he's too bad to be scum" nonsense. I've seen worse from mafia players in the past. being bad doesn't clear you.
|
No, I'm voting for WBG because I have no strong scum read and his play is the most anti-town. If I had to guess his role it's a neutral serial killer and I'd rather day 1 lynch an SK than what will probably be a town. I also never said WBG isn't scum. It's day 1.
So far our scum cases boil down to "your plan was stupid" "you didn't post enough" and "idk you voted for me and you didn't explain it well."
If I get a strong scum read then I'll move my vote. My read on WBG is either scum or SK. Either way, he's a detriment to town and I'm pretty sure he is not a pro-town role. I feel more comfortable voting for a player that I'm about 75% sure is a non-town player than a player I'm 15% sure might be scum.
My vote for greymist was really just a placeholder to get him talking. That's pretty standard stuff.
That's it. I'm not concerned with defending myself, I'm doing what I feel is right. WBG has been posting a little bit more constructively and at the very least, if he is a bad townie, he's learning that you can't shit post and troll without getting heat. There are still 24 hours left but so far all of the "scum" cases I've seen have been incredibly weak and I don't know why people seem to think it's impossible WBG is scum in the first place. Because he's too reckless? I've seen worse.
|
On September 19 2011 04:35 prplhz wrote:
also, drh fits the reasons for my jack vote too, he's not doing as good as i'd expect and i think that that is very weird, he is arguing for silly things like "lets just have one candidate for lynching" and "lets wait for a guy who is 100% scum before we lynch scum, until then we just lynch 3rd party" and a lot of you agree that that is a terrible agenda. but drh wasn't going anywhere so i switched to jack.
god i never said any of those things dude you are really misunderstanding me
|
To clarify all I'm saying is we should never artificially split bandwagons. If someone is obviously scum and everyone is content with that there is no reason to split the bandwagon. That helps mafia. Usually singular bandwagons form naturally because a player is obviously anti-town and that's a good thing. Tunneling can be a good thing. I would never advocate singling exactly one player out for the entirety of voting/discussion every day and I never did. Huge misunderstanding. Of course there should be multiple lynch candidates. All I'm saying LITERALLY ALL IM SAYING is that when the entire town jumps onto one target this isn't necessarily a bad thing. And a pure exact 50/50 bandwagon is a good thing for mafia because they can split votes and ALWAYS ensure the innocent player is the one who gets lynched.
Also I never said we should wait for 100% scum. I would rather lynch SK if there are literally no convincing scum reads. However like I said (never used the term 100%) I would definitely vote for someone I thought was mafia over someone I though was SK but on Day 1, as it is, there is no one I have a strong read for (and I have a lot o freading to catch up on and my mind will probably change). Also I think there is still a pretty strong chance WBG is mafia because his earlier behavior was considerably scummy and from the environment we have he would have known he could get away with posting like that. Lots of scum have done worse. I have absolutely no reason to believe WBG can't be scum. Please stop misrepresenting me and twisting my thoughts and words
|
On September 19 2011 05:19 Palmar wrote:
Radfield is a cool guy and Errandor has done nothing that looks like town posting.
WBG is almost definitely not scum, just put yourselves in his shoes, why the shit would he post the things he's done if he was scum, he's basically piling on attention and scummyness by wanting to look for his precious, outright demanding it.
I'll be voting for Errandor.
"why would a scum player act so scummy?" terrible reasoning btw
|
On September 19 2011 03:34 wherebugsgo wrote:
I'm going to vote Jackal. I'm not convinced on prplhz.
It should be fairly obvious that I'm an easy lynch for mafia. I'm not scum.
##unvote Archon_Toilet
##vote Jackal58
I suggest we look at Archon_Toilet, Dr. H, and Drazerk more carefully, particularly after the lynch. None of them have contributed anything; all the voters on me have feigned contribution by essentially voting me and saying nothing else.
yeah no case against you could possibly be contribution right
|
I think it's quite probable Errandor is scum and misunderstands my reasons for voting for WBG and is trying to parrot/hide behind my bandwagon. However, if I have to switch my vote I personally get a worse feeling from Supersoft and chaos13 did a pretty good job of pointing out that very strange inconsistency.
|
I'm keeping my vote on WBG out of principle because I am sure he is either SK or Mafia. The fact that no one is even exploring the possibility that he is scum says volumes to me. If he were, in fact mafia, it's a fitting enough to say "nah hes obv just 3rd party he can't be scum if yoou vote for him youre scum becasue hes not scum" but we don't know what alignment anyone is only mafia know that :-)
|
On September 19 2011 07:55 prplhz wrote:
@wiggles
why would my flipping scum make wbg more likely to be scum? i didn't deal too much with him or support his supposed 3rd party agenda more than any other, i only said that 3rd party shouldn't be designated for lynches 12 hours into the day.
@drh
you're still on my list for sure. what principle is making you abstain from voting? don't you think one of me and erandorr could be scum?
I didn't abstain from voting, I voted for WBG because I think he is scum or SK more than Errandor. I will always vote for the person I think is most scummy and should be lynched.
|
On September 19 2011 07:52 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 07:50 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I'm keeping my vote on WBG out of principle because I am sure he is either SK or Mafia. The fact that no one is even exploring the possibility that he is scum says volumes to me. If he were, in fact mafia, it's a fitting enough to say "nah hes obv just 3rd party he can't be scum if yoou vote for him youre scum becasue hes not scum" but we don't know what alignment anyone is only mafia know that :-) That was my whole reason for voting for him originally and the reason Ill probably vote for him tomorrow. WBG won't be lynched today but hopefully he will be shot tonight or lynched tomorrow.
stop doing this dont you know saying anything bad about wbg isnt contributing it also makes you scum
|
On September 19 2011 09:57 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 09:52 Jackal58 wrote:On September 19 2011 09:18 wherebugsgo wrote:
I think the case on Jackal is still pretty strong. We should consider lynching him tomorrow.
Other people who stand out to me are Drazerk and Dr. H.
Palmar still needs to post more, I think I saw a couple by him but he doesn't normally lurk this much.
Sandroba will hopefully have internet tomorrow and will be able to weigh in on all of this. It's not a very good idea to lynch either of them unless they begin showing signs of harboring a scum agenda. What case? Oh the one where I thought lynching a 3rd party suspect was better than a mislynch? Or the one where I'm supposed to be some sort of mafia messiah and I haven't delivered you to the promised land yet? Mig convinced me to stay btw. <3 The one that involves you telling people to give me the ring day 1 (when it's outlined in the OP that the ring may only pass hands at night) and also to lynch me at the same time, coupled with the fact that there were likely multiple scum on my wagon, meaning if I were to receive the ring (and not die) and then be lynched the ring would be sent to one of my voters. AKA scum. That case.
I don't understand. Are you saying scum voted for you because they thought someone would give you the ring so they could get the ring when you got lynched and thats why me and drazerk voted for you
|
I think if Jackal was mafia he'd be more careful about the rules. I really doubt prplhz is mafia, wishy washy townie who jumped to some really bad conclusions about what I was saying. He misunderstood me.
and yes, I'm dialing down my activity level in this game. I spam too much. I second guess myself too much. I think the fact that I didn't change my vote around 100 times and say every little thing on my mind is better play but I guess it comes off as a lot different from how I normally play. I read Vers guide like twice before this game.
Wiggles has a good DT checklist although Palmar/jeejee definitely warrant a check. Both have been well under expected activity levels and I think it was JeeJee who made the rather cryptic posts about shadows. Odd behavior.
Medics should go for the big veteran townie targets as usual. Myself, Radfield, JeeJee, Mr.Wiggles I would venture are the biggest targets. But really, you should use your own discretion.
Medic - pick the experienced player you think is most likely town
DT - pick the player you think is most likely scum.
|
Erandor and supersoft had marginally good cases against them but played less scummily than you. You're either SK or scum and I never implied you couldn't be scum so honestly i don't even see you rpoint
|
I feel stronger about you being SK than scum but Erandor/Super being scum was so flimsy/unsure to me that I would always policy vote for third party over someone I have that weak of a feeling on. Radfields analysis was somewhat ok but it was really nothing more than a gut read.
|
antagonistic/rude trying to get under peoples skin
almost purely defensive play focusing only on people who criticized or voted for you
everyone discounting the possibility you're scum
begging for ring day 1 and spamming
spam
im done go read my posts ive said enough about you im not gonna keep repeating myself
|
On September 19 2011 21:44 syllogism wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2011 09:57 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
No, I'm voting for WBG because I have no strong scum read and his play is the most anti-town. If I had to guess his role it's a neutral serial killer and I'd rather day 1 lynch an SK than what will probably be a town. I also never said WBG isn't scum. It's day 1.
So far our scum cases boil down to "your plan was stupid" "you didn't post enough" and "idk you voted for me and you didn't explain it well."
If I get a strong scum read then I'll move my vote. My read on WBG is either scum or SK. Either way, he's a detriment to town and I'm pretty sure he is not a pro-town role. I feel more comfortable voting for a player that I'm about 75% sure is a non-town player than a player I'm 15% sure might be scum.
My vote for greymist was really just a placeholder to get him talking. That's pretty standard stuff.
That's it. I'm not concerned with defending myself, I'm doing what I feel is right. WBG has been posting a little bit more constructively and at the very least, if he is a bad townie, he's learning that you can't shit post and troll without getting heat. There are still 24 hours left but so far all of the "scum" cases I've seen have been incredibly weak and I don't know why people seem to think it's impossible WBG is scum in the first place. Because he's too reckless? I've seen worse. Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 05:37 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I think it's quite probable Errandor is scum and misunderstands my reasons for voting for WBG and is trying to parrot/hide behind my bandwagon. However, if I have to switch my vote I personally get a worse feeling from Supersoft and chaos13 did a pretty good job of pointing out that very strange inconsistency. Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 07:50 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I'm keeping my vote on WBG out of principle because I am sure he is either SK or Mafia. The fact that no one is even exploring the possibility that he is scum says volumes to me. If he were, in fact mafia, it's a fitting enough to say "nah hes obv just 3rd party he can't be scum if yoou vote for him youre scum becasue hes not scum" but we don't know what alignment anyone is only mafia know that :-) I can't quite reconcile these statements with the fact you left your vote on WBG. Care to clarify? Did you just became more certain about WBG being scum/mafia somewhere along the way? Why? What do you think about the possibility of WBG being a third party who isn't a serial killer?
Looking over Radfields case, it wasn't as strong as had really thought at first glance. That was a pretty bad kneejerk reaction. I think WBG is mafia or SK. WBG is playing pretty arrogantly. He thinks I can't possibly have another reason for voting for him other than he "asked for the ring" (i provided several others, whatever) and I think he's SK or Mafia. It's very possible he is non-sk third party or even town. Unfortunately I don't have DT powers, I can't check.
What reason do I have as mafia to tunnel a useless and obnoxious player like WBG when I can take the easy bandwagon on Errandor or Prplhz (who was accusing me anyway) ? Yeah, I know it's WIFOM but if I'm really about to get bandwagoned for making the "wrong vote" then I don't know what to say other than TL Towns really are getting worse.
|
On September 20 2011 01:54 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 21:44 syllogism wrote:On September 18 2011 09:57 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
No, I'm voting for WBG because I have no strong scum read and his play is the most anti-town. If I had to guess his role it's a neutral serial killer and I'd rather day 1 lynch an SK than what will probably be a town. I also never said WBG isn't scum. It's day 1.
So far our scum cases boil down to "your plan was stupid" "you didn't post enough" and "idk you voted for me and you didn't explain it well."
If I get a strong scum read then I'll move my vote. My read on WBG is either scum or SK. Either way, he's a detriment to town and I'm pretty sure he is not a pro-town role. I feel more comfortable voting for a player that I'm about 75% sure is a non-town player than a player I'm 15% sure might be scum.
My vote for greymist was really just a placeholder to get him talking. That's pretty standard stuff.
That's it. I'm not concerned with defending myself, I'm doing what I feel is right. WBG has been posting a little bit more constructively and at the very least, if he is a bad townie, he's learning that you can't shit post and troll without getting heat. There are still 24 hours left but so far all of the "scum" cases I've seen have been incredibly weak and I don't know why people seem to think it's impossible WBG is scum in the first place. Because he's too reckless? I've seen worse. On September 19 2011 05:37 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I think it's quite probable Errandor is scum and misunderstands my reasons for voting for WBG and is trying to parrot/hide behind my bandwagon. However, if I have to switch my vote I personally get a worse feeling from Supersoft and chaos13 did a pretty good job of pointing out that very strange inconsistency. On September 19 2011 07:50 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
I'm keeping my vote on WBG out of principle because I am sure he is either SK or Mafia. The fact that no one is even exploring the possibility that he is scum says volumes to me. If he were, in fact mafia, it's a fitting enough to say "nah hes obv just 3rd party he can't be scum if yoou vote for him youre scum becasue hes not scum" but we don't know what alignment anyone is only mafia know that :-) I can't quite reconcile these statements with the fact you left your vote on WBG. Care to clarify? Did you just became more certain about WBG being scum/mafia somewhere along the way? Why? What do you think about the possibility of WBG being a third party who isn't a serial killer? Thank god someone else noticed this. The whole point of me calling out Dr. H was to expose this contradiction. He said he had no scum reads, then said Erandor is probably scum and didn't vote him despite saying he would vote someone other than me once he actually had scum reads. Somewhere in there he magically goes from me bein third party to being scum solely because no one else thinks I am scum.
No I think you're probably more likely SK than scum but I still thought you were more likely scum than Errandor was. As you continued posting I became more confident in my vote, not less actually. But whatever. Since everyone is 100% sure you can't be mafia for some dumb fucking reason I guess I'll take the heat .
|
On September 20 2011 03:04 syllogism wrote:
It's night and you were only asked to clarify something. Saying that you are about to be bandwagoned seems like an overreaction to me, no? Tunnelling WBG as mafia makes sense because, assuming that he is a third party, you don't really get into trouble for it and you can do it with some real conviction given that you don't have to make up reasons for finding him scummy.
I'm annoyed that I'm in the hot seat for picking the "wrong" bandwagon when the one everyone else went onto flipped out a pretty good power role. I'm also overreacting because WBG's attitude and play style annoys me so much I seriously considered quitting this game yesterday. I'll cool down but I'll never play another game with him, i know that much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
