|
On November 16 2011 18:09 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 18:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote:The top part of my previous post was in response to Harbringer. On November 16 2011 17:27 wherebugsgo wrote:Coag is also a pretty good player, so if he's scum, he's capable of lurking and surviving. For the same reason he doesn't make a good day 1 lynch because if he's not scum, then scum will want to shoot him. On November 16 2011 16:26 sinani206 wrote:On November 16 2011 13:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
to clarify again, each person go for whoever they think is scummiest. That doesn't mean all of us go for the same person. This is completely stupid because some people have more than one read at a time. Why focus when you can divide (your attention) and conquer? No. We can't differentiate between lurkers too heavily based purely on meta. If someone is lurking and being useless, they should be a valid candidate for lynch, especially if they are good and should have known better. Killing someone that is renowned to be a good player sends out a stronger anti-lurker message, which is the whole point in doing it. This is why Coag is a great choice for lynch at the moment, as opposed to someone like Sinani. Giving people a free pass on reputation leads to stupid things like Palmar managing to win in LotR mafia as third party while basically not even trying. Speaking of Palmar: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=87086Useless mass of one liners. So, leaving someone alive who has no potential to be of any use (sinani) is favorable to leaving someone alive who has great potential for use? (Coag)? Either way if they're still useless by tomorrow they need to die. The difference between sinani and Palmar/Coag is that sinani never does anything, and Palmar/Coag are actually useful as town.
Are you saying that Coag is in absolutely no danger of being lynched even if he continues to lurk? That seems to defeat the point of threatening to lynch lurkers. By bringing up the good players as the best choices, we can get them to stop lurking day 1, and prove why they are indeed worth keeping. Add to that the mafia might choose to pick them off for being good in meta, not wanting them around to actually pick up their game.
The whole point in lynching lurkers is to discourage other lurkers. What incentive do these 'good' people have to stop lurking if they know they are safe because other lurkers will die first?
|
On November 16 2011 18:50 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 18:48 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 16 2011 18:09 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 16 2011 18:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote:The top part of my previous post was in response to Harbringer. On November 16 2011 17:27 wherebugsgo wrote:Coag is also a pretty good player, so if he's scum, he's capable of lurking and surviving. For the same reason he doesn't make a good day 1 lynch because if he's not scum, then scum will want to shoot him. On November 16 2011 16:26 sinani206 wrote:On November 16 2011 13:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
to clarify again, each person go for whoever they think is scummiest. That doesn't mean all of us go for the same person. This is completely stupid because some people have more than one read at a time. Why focus when you can divide (your attention) and conquer? No. We can't differentiate between lurkers too heavily based purely on meta. If someone is lurking and being useless, they should be a valid candidate for lynch, especially if they are good and should have known better. Killing someone that is renowned to be a good player sends out a stronger anti-lurker message, which is the whole point in doing it. This is why Coag is a great choice for lynch at the moment, as opposed to someone like Sinani. Giving people a free pass on reputation leads to stupid things like Palmar managing to win in LotR mafia as third party while basically not even trying. Speaking of Palmar: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=87086Useless mass of one liners. So, leaving someone alive who has no potential to be of any use (sinani) is favorable to leaving someone alive who has great potential for use? (Coag)? Either way if they're still useless by tomorrow they need to die. The difference between sinani and Palmar/Coag is that sinani never does anything, and Palmar/Coag are actually useful as town. Are you saying that Coag is in absolutely no danger of being lynched even if he continues to lurk? That seems to defeat the point of threatening to lynch lurkers. By bringing up the good players as the best choices, we can get them to stop lurking day 1, and prove why they are indeed worth keeping. Add to that the mafia might choose to pick them off for being good in meta, not wanting them around to actually pick up their game. The whole point in lynching lurkers is to discourage other lurkers. What incentive do these 'good' people have to stop lurking if they know they are safe because other lurkers will die first? So assuming that they're going to keep lurking, you'd rather lynch Coagulation than sinani? Or would you rather lynch both?
You two don't seem to understand the point in lynching lurkers. It's to discourage lurking and promote a town atmosphere. Coagulation, as with any good player, is capable of picking up his game enough if he got in trouble for lurking right now. Thus, if it came to lynching a lurker, I would go with Coag as the first option, then fall back on lynching someone who will only lurks like Sinani. If we skip straight to threatening Sinani, Coag has no reason to pick up his game until tomorrow.
On November 16 2011 18:54 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 18:48 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 16 2011 18:09 wherebugsgo wrote:On November 16 2011 18:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote:The top part of my previous post was in response to Harbringer. On November 16 2011 17:27 wherebugsgo wrote:Coag is also a pretty good player, so if he's scum, he's capable of lurking and surviving. For the same reason he doesn't make a good day 1 lynch because if he's not scum, then scum will want to shoot him. On November 16 2011 16:26 sinani206 wrote:On November 16 2011 13:16 wherebugsgo wrote:
to clarify again, each person go for whoever they think is scummiest. That doesn't mean all of us go for the same person. This is completely stupid because some people have more than one read at a time. Why focus when you can divide (your attention) and conquer? No. We can't differentiate between lurkers too heavily based purely on meta. If someone is lurking and being useless, they should be a valid candidate for lynch, especially if they are good and should have known better. Killing someone that is renowned to be a good player sends out a stronger anti-lurker message, which is the whole point in doing it. This is why Coag is a great choice for lynch at the moment, as opposed to someone like Sinani. Giving people a free pass on reputation leads to stupid things like Palmar managing to win in LotR mafia as third party while basically not even trying. Speaking of Palmar: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=282366&user=87086Useless mass of one liners. So, leaving someone alive who has no potential to be of any use (sinani) is favorable to leaving someone alive who has great potential for use? (Coag)? Either way if they're still useless by tomorrow they need to die. The difference between sinani and Palmar/Coag is that sinani never does anything, and Palmar/Coag are actually useful as town. Are you saying that Coag is in absolutely no danger of being lynched even if he continues to lurk? That seems to defeat the point of threatening to lynch lurkers. By bringing up the good players as the best choices, we can get them to stop lurking day 1, and prove why they are indeed worth keeping. Add to that the mafia might choose to pick them off for being good in meta, not wanting them around to actually pick up their game. The whole point in lynching lurkers is to discourage other lurkers. What incentive do these 'good' people have to stop lurking if they know they are safe because other lurkers will die first? I will not support a day 1 coag/palmar/whoever lynch unless they are actually doing things other than lurking that further a scum agenda. This includes other lurkers as well. When the players are otherwise equivalent, if I have to I will support lynching players like sinani over Coag, on day 1 at least. It just doesn't make sense to lynch someone who is not consistently bad just because they aren't active. You lynch people if they are scum or if they are being detrimental to town. Merely lurking falls into neither of these categories, which is why we have to be careful of how we implement lurker lynching. As I said earlier, if a player like Coag has done nothing by day 2 then that probably means we should get rid of them then. Until that time, other players take priority (for me) in the lurker lynch order.
Merely lurking doesn't help to promote a pro town atmosphere, and provides us with less information to determine peoples alignments, both of which are detramental to town.
|
On November 16 2011 21:29 Palmar wrote:
hey guys, I'm in a good mood today, so here's a great offer to you:
I will write an alignment analysis on the first three players people ask me to do. Each player can only select one person for me to analyse, and I will provide a post for each subject on what I currently think of their alignment.
Go!
wherebugsgo
|
On November 16 2011 22:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 21:29 Palmar wrote:
hey guys, I'm in a good mood today, so here's a great offer to you:
I will write an alignment analysis on the first three players people ask me to do. Each player can only select one person for me to analyse, and I will provide a post for each subject on what I currently think of their alignment.
Go! wherebugsgo
Oh derp, too late, probably a worse choice than I could have made anyway
|
On November 16 2011 22:01 Drazerk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 22:00 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 16 2011 21:29 Palmar wrote:
hey guys, I'm in a good mood today, so here's a great offer to you:
I will write an alignment analysis on the first three players people ask me to do. Each player can only select one person for me to analyse, and I will provide a post for each subject on what I currently think of their alignment.
Go! wherebugsgo Your late to the party but I am surprised no one said him as well
My intial reaction was to pick someone who had an opinion that differed with mine recently, but I think this would have been better on a more established player, for instance Forumite or DCLXVI
|
On November 16 2011 22:07 prplhz wrote:
You all realize that Palmar is just manipulating you, right?
Naturally, but that doesn't mean we can't use it to our advantage now and call him out on it later if he appears scummy.
|
On November 16 2011 22:30 prplhz wrote:
Yes, no one will pay attention to your analysis because of my one-line, muahahaha! Or maybe all the new people in this game will read twice before they trust you unconditionally. You always set yourself up as townie prophet, coming down from the mountain to converse with the plebs for exactly 3 posts before you retire up there again to meditate and achieve endless insight in the game. A lot of people may fall for this, I'm just saying that if you're new maybe you should read twice before listening to Palmar.
Also, I'm not getting lynched day1, wtfux???
On November 16 2011 23:52 prplhz wrote:
I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR DRAZERK BECAUSE HE IS SCUM
##Vote Drazerk
Your vote looks scummier than his play so far.
You claim that Palmar's opinions should not be taken for gospel when he plans on doing a write-up on you. It then gets released, and you find out in Palmar's opinion you might be a townie.
At what point did this mean you could start trash posting? The bolded part was great content, and then proceed to throw away any value your post might have added.
On November 16 2011 23:54 Palmar wrote:
oh wait... I can vote for multiple people?
That's awesome
##Vote Coagulation
##Vote Drazerk
Coagulation vote I understand because I had the whole lurker spiel, explain the Drazerk vote.
Up until you had to ask townies what you should focus on, you were more or less in the same boat as him with the one liners.
|
On November 17 2011 02:30 Zephirdd wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 23:10 Zephirdd wrote:
I'll unvote him should he provide anything useful. I guess I should be fair and say that my votes will be volatile since we can vote/unvote as much as we want.
I'll do as I said. ##Unvote: Palmar(on an unrelated note, is it okay to quote votes? For example, the host said we shouldn't vote and unvote the same person in a post, but what about quoting the vote?) Also, as I said, I agree with lynching lurkers. We shouldn't go apeshit over them, but at least one lurker should go. That said, ##Vote: KenpachiPalmar was my lurker of choice, but he already provided lots of useful discussion; Kenpachi's turn atm.
I'm going to assume the answer to the questions are yes.
As a choice of lurker lynch, Kenpachi over Coagulation? What?
|
On November 17 2011 03:36 Nisani201 wrote:
Can we get a votecount?
The game is being run by a bot, stop being lazy and put it together if you want it soon. Otherwise I'll make one in an hour or two I suppose.
|
|
|
This bot doesn't cease to amaze...
Due to prolonged inactivity-
##Vote: Coagulation
Fairly self explanatory.
I'm also going to
##Vote: Chaoser
For placing votes down seemingly at random, then backing them up with strawman logic.
Not only was he lying, which a townie shouldn't be doing, he also repeatedly placed votes seemingly at random, then proceeded to back them up with terrible logic, before attacking the person that called him out on it.
On November 17 2011 04:30 chaoser wrote:
et tu brute?
mihi quoque
|
Oh wow fail, rehashed the same line twice. Oh well you get the point
|
On November 17 2011 04:38 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 04:35 Cyber_Cheese wrote:This bot doesn't cease to amaze... Due to prolonged inactivity- ##Vote: CoagulationFairly self explanatory. I'm also going to ##Vote: ChaoserFor placing votes down seemingly at random, then backing them up with strawman logic. Not only was he lying, which a townie shouldn't be doing, he also repeatedly placed votes seemingly at random, then proceeded to back them up with terrible logic, before attacking the person that called him out on it. On November 17 2011 04:30 chaoser wrote:
et tu brute? mihi quoque When did I lie?
If I've been keeping track correctly, you lied in your very first post, the VT claim.
That is why it's alongside a 'LaL sucks' statment.
|
On November 17 2011 04:41 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 04:40 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 17 2011 04:38 chaoser wrote:On November 17 2011 04:35 Cyber_Cheese wrote:This bot doesn't cease to amaze... Due to prolonged inactivity- ##Vote: CoagulationFairly self explanatory. I'm also going to ##Vote: ChaoserFor placing votes down seemingly at random, then backing them up with strawman logic. Not only was he lying, which a townie shouldn't be doing, he also repeatedly placed votes seemingly at random, then proceeded to back them up with terrible logic, before attacking the person that called him out on it. On November 17 2011 04:30 chaoser wrote:
et tu brute? mihi quoque When did I lie? If I've been keeping track correctly, you lied in your very first post, the VT claim. That is why it's alongside a 'LaL sucks' statment. ...how do you know I lied about my VT claim?
When someone breadcrumbs that they might be lying in mafia, it's usually scum doing it by accident.
|
On November 17 2011 04:41 chaoser wrote:
Do you have day time DT powers?
Quickly! Role-fish before you die so it's not in vain!
|
On November 17 2011 04:47 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 04:45 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 17 2011 04:41 chaoser wrote:
Do you have day time DT powers? Quickly! Role-fish before you die so it's not in vain! oh brother... Show nested quote +When someone breadcrumbs that they might be lying in mafia, it's usually scum doing it by accident. ?? What? When did I breadcrumb I was lying to mafia? and how can a breadcrumb, something that is by definition a deliberate action, be done accidentally? Where does this shitty logic come from??
On November 15 2011 22:23 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2011 13:29 Kenpachi wrote:
real long day ok.
hi i am Kenpachi and i am a Townie
welcome to TL mafia to those who are just starting and i hope you have a good time here.
We are the 99% I am also green townie <3 LAL is stupid
That breadcrumbing phrase was poorly worded, catching a liar isn't as easy as finding something they said that directly conflicts with what they said before, you have to take into account things that hint at it too.
You call yourself a green townie offhandedly, then offhandedly call LaL bad. Right after the other.
If that's not both lying and promoting an atmosphere where you can get away with said lying, I don't know what is.
On November 17 2011 04:52 GreYMisT wrote:
Cyber, why vote coagulation and not sinani? They are both lurking, but sinani os far more scummy about it in my opinion.
These three posts
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On November 17 2011 05:02 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +That breadcrumbing phrase was poorly worded, catching a liar isn't as easy as finding something they said that directly conflicts with what they said before, you have to take into account things that hint at it too.
You call yourself a green townie offhandedly, then offhandedly call LaL bad. Right after the other.
If that's not both lying and promoting an atmosphere where you can get away with said lying, I don't know what is. So...you're saying I'm lying about being a green townie from two lines that I wrote because you can somehow read my intent when writing those two lines? And that I'm lying about being a green townie cause I'm secretly a mafia who accidentally breadcrumbed that actually I want everyone to think I'm blue?
Specifically a blue encouraging people not to tell only the truth, making it harder for us to legitimately find scum, yes.
|
On November 17 2011 05:33 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +Why did you claim green townie? You've seen what happend to Kenpachi after he claimed green townie. The two guys who have claimed green townie currently have the most votes. I can't see any benefit to saying you're a green townie day 1, its just bringing undeserved attention to your self. Should ask yourself first. Why would mafia want undeserved attention? And what does mafia gain from saying they're townie outright in thread? What does a townie gain from claiming townie outright in the thread just as the game starts? Ask yourself why are people saying the main reason they want to vote me/kenpachi for saying we're townie when it's a null tell? I don't mind getting lynched, but I'd rather kenpachi doesn't. He's pretty underrated. Sinani is a way better lynch.
From the top. Not all mafia play the same. Plenty of mafia have called out unwarranted attention in the past, neutral survivor balrog comes to mind. Do they have anything to lose, as mafia or town, in claiming townie, specifically green?
In a game where LaL is in effect, a blue has nothing to gain by telling a lie, but mafia have to lie at some point, why not stop LaL coming into effect?
On November 17 2011 05:11 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 05:10 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 17 2011 05:02 chaoser wrote:That breadcrumbing phrase was poorly worded, catching a liar isn't as easy as finding something they said that directly conflicts with what they said before, you have to take into account things that hint at it too.
You call yourself a green townie offhandedly, then offhandedly call LaL bad. Right after the other.
If that's not both lying and promoting an atmosphere where you can get away with said lying, I don't know what is. So...you're saying I'm lying about being a green townie from two lines that I wrote because you can somehow read my intent when writing those two lines? And that I'm lying about being a green townie cause I'm secretly a mafia who accidentally breadcrumbed that actually I want everyone to think I'm blue? Specifically a blue encouraging people not to tell only the truth, making it harder for us to legitimately find scum, yes. cool
It sounds convulted, but it boils down into a) claiming vanilla townie, knowing that anyone could be making the claim, and b) calling LaL a terrible idea.
But that is not the only reason your being voted for by me, and shame on me for being mislead into only talking about that.
On November 16 2011 02:42 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 02:32 bumatlarge wrote:Next person that mentions LAL is getting a vote placed on them. Seriously enough with the useless shit. We will be lynching however many scummy people we can find on the particular day. We are restricting ourselves when we don't have a clue as to what our boundaries are. Nisani has posted complete fluff and none of it shows any effort in actually heling town. I don't think the new people are brain-dead, so unless the specifically ask about something, don't use them as an excuse to post asinine shit. Oh, hi kibbibit  ##Vote Nisani201 LAL LAL LAL LAL ##Vote: Forumite
Specifically being useless right after being asked not to. Throws down a vote on someone he had never mentioned with no explaination and no noteworthy bandwagon.
On November 16 2011 03:08 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 03:00 GreYMisT wrote:On November 16 2011 02:58 chaoser wrote:On November 16 2011 02:55 GreYMisT wrote:On November 16 2011 02:42 chaoser wrote:On November 16 2011 02:32 bumatlarge wrote:Next person that mentions LAL is getting a vote placed on them. Seriously enough with the useless shit. We will be lynching however many scummy people we can find on the particular day. We are restricting ourselves when we don't have a clue as to what our boundaries are. Nisani has posted complete fluff and none of it shows any effort in actually heling town. I don't think the new people are brain-dead, so unless the specifically ask about something, don't use them as an excuse to post asinine shit. Oh, hi kibbibit ##Vote Nisani201 LAL LAL LAL LAL ##Vote: Forumite I think the time for troll voting is over... From the OP: You may include multiple votes and unvotes in the same post. However, do refrain from both voting and unvoting the same person in a single post. It is possible that some role abilities are tied to the votes that are cast, so be mindful as to how you exercise your vote. Who said I was trolling? Oh, well then care to provide reasons? I'm afraid i dont speak LAL code. The LAL was for bum The vote was for forumite trying to force bullshit cases, especially the kenpachi/LSB "contradiction". Scum
After having to be prodded, pulls out a bullshit case on Forumite.
Now here's the kicker. After having been called out on voting for Forumite with no logic.
On November 16 2011 04:26 chaoser wrote:
lol
##vote: DCLXVI
So I guess that's two votes for me?
Notice how the grand total of mentions for DCLXVI in his filter is zero. This vote, as with the Forumite one before it, has absolutely no reasoning behind it at the time.
On November 16 2011 04:58 chaoser wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 04:44 Zephirdd wrote:
You say that lies can provide a win-win situation, but how is it a win situation when that lie could have killed a townie, yourself AND wasted a vigilante shot? Lies like that are terrible, and that could very well have cost you the game. Are you really taking these chances? ??? Don't talk about shit you don't know about. Go reread that game if you need to. Show nested quote +Then you go on trying to create a bandwagon over Forumite with nearly no arguments. Forumite at least have a point, and you just go "Scum" over him. What's with that? Despite the one post where you claim that something like a bold lie like claiming DT is beneficial, you don't post anything useful for this. What bandwagon did I create/start? I'm the only one voting for him and I didn't even give a detailed reason as to why. Overreaction much? Why are you defending a guy that frankly, was in no danger of being lynched (Not even 24 hours into the game, voted by one guy with barely any reasoning) Show nested quote +And when someone posts actual arguments and analysis, you just instantly vote over him like you did. It looks like you are just trying to attract attention to yourself, and it very well is working; "attracting attention" that would be used in reality as a cover: You go out loud with zero arguments, and people stop caring about you. I'm confused, so you're saying I'm mafia, and that the way I'm going about hiding the fact that I'm mafia is by "drawing attention" and being "loud" which somehow makes people stop caring about me when really I've posted almost nothing and mafia typically like to hide? ##Vote: Zephirdd
##Unvote: DCLXVIPS, FoS is for sissies, real men just vote
He immediately drops it, instead choosing to vote for the person who actually took some time to call him out on his overall playstyle properly.
At this point you should probably read the back and forth, it speaks for itself.
|
@Kibibit, don't edit your posts, I know you only added the vote because I saw it, but if I hadn't it could have been anything.
be VERY careful about that. Quote yourself and double/triple post if you have to, but don't edit. ever.
|
On November 17 2011 06:15 Nisani201 wrote:
How experienced is chaoser? Has anyone played a game with him?
Multiple. He brought back LotR mafia from the jaws of defeat when he got changed into a Vanilla Townie, and basically single handedly ensured a town victory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
