EPTAssuming syllo, what are YOUR thoughts on risk.nuke bro? Can we smoke that fool today plx?
Election Mafia - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
Assuming syllo, what are YOUR thoughts on risk.nuke bro? Can we smoke that fool today plx? | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 05:51 VisceraEyes wrote: Not sure on the election mechanics...so whoever gets first place will get the Secretary of Defense and whoever gets 2nd gets the Surgeon General, is that right? Can someone answer this plz before I cast my election vote? | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
Ergo, my election vote will be going on GiygaS, with the intent of him getting Surgeon General. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 08:07 GiygaS wrote: I'm gonna look at Risk.Nukes history and see if his town play has even been like this before. So town. You go on, bro. Tell us what you find, because I had intended to do this once I finish what I'm doing now. ROCK!!! | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
But I'm totally interested in what you find mang, this was literally next on my to-do list. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
MarserBlood Opening post doesn't say much. Basically says "I don't know who to elect or lynch" Decides who to elect, not sure who to lynch. Zeks isolation analysis. Cites that he chose Zeks because he was "one of the suspicious persons," but finds his contributions satisfactory and chooses to vote MrZentor because of "a scummy post" he made, and lack of "obvious scum" to vote. Also states aversion to lynching lurkers for obvious reasons (no info, probably town, etc.) Here and here he states suspicion that Mafia was behind the removal of Palmogism from the electoral running. Also "congratulates the doc" in dismaying over the loss of a blue. But taken with wanting to talk about something at night, I still get a null read from these posts. Here I can't tell if he's trying to appear pro-town or trying to maintain a productive atmosphere in town, so again…null. Soft-defends Radfield from an attack by risk.nuke. Verdict: Null leaning Town. nyczbrandon Notes his inexperience. You only get one freebie guy.  Short response to Spaackle saying he should think for himself. Uh oh… another appeal to his newbishness… He also comments on Zeks, saying he was suspicious before, but because he called out Sheth for a perceived contradiction….what? He's not suspicious anymore? He doesn't say. But he does say that he'll vote for MrZentor or Sheth. Sheth I assume for the 'contradiction', and Zentor because he "seems to change votes a lot." I don't know, it seems to me like a raw-newbie wouldn't consider indecision as a scum-tell. Possibly help from outside sources? His scum-buddies? I DON'T KNOW BRO! Here is something interesting. A raw-newbie asking about a modkill for not voting. I mean, okay, it's a valid question from anyone who read the OP…but this seems to indicate that he did NOT read the OP. Curiouser and curiouser. Verdict: Newb-Scum Lean | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 08:13 VisceraEyes wrote: Although it occurs to me that whatever you find will likely be argued to be useless as he's claimed in-thread that he's "changing his playstyle up" this game, essentially rendering any meta research done pretty null. But I'm totally interested in what you find mang, this was literally next on my to-do list. On December 16 2011 08:44 nyczbrandon wrote: He did say that he was going to try and change styles this time. Amazing. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
 In seriousness though, why aren't you willing to share YOUR reads? Are you afraid of vet-bias or something? "Hey guys, Rad said he's suspicious! GET HIM!!!!" | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 09:03 risk.nuke wrote: No sorry, I think I just had jetlagg from XLVII where I'm still suffering from beeing angry. Some of my accusations have been to spark argumentation. Not greymist though, Greymist is instinct altough I'm sorry I didn't realise you had to call it meta in order for it to be acceptable. Some of you have been freaking out so hard over me not providing solid evidence but compare it to who anyone says they want dead most of them will tell you "I don't like the way he plays, I think his play is suspicious or meta from earlier game" (altough this is starting to change now as we start to leave day 1, I glimpsed at ViceraEyes writing something that looked nice but I also think ViceraEyes is very fickle due to him playing in two game). I've been singled out because I've been more agressive then others. Me changing my style is not referring to this game which from what I read you seem to belive. I ment I'm gonna stop how I've been playing in this game up untill now. "fickle due to him playing in two games"....what does this mean? And could you comment on the inconsistencies that GiygaS pointed out between how you played in Steamship Liquidia where you were town-aligned and your play this game? Your cooperation would be appreciated. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 09:07 Radfield wrote: Not at all. When I am quite suspicious of someone I often try to sit back and watch what they do. I don't put them in the hot-seat at all, and let them do what they would if they thought they were under no suspicion. I particularly do this with players who I expect to contribute, but are not. The thing is, I pretty much already know what's going to happen once I hard accuse them, so I'm trying to get the maximum amount of knowledge on their baseline play before that happens. Also, I am often wrong at this stage of the game, and once you start publicly accusing someone it's harder to change your views. By allowing player X to show he is contributing or being townish, it lets me save my effort for when I need it. Thats all pretty general though, and the reason in this case is simply that I do not want that player to know I am suspicious of him. Very suspicious.... Fair enough. As you were. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 09:30 risk.nuke wrote: What I mean by fickle I mean inconsistant. I think you have the potential to analyze and think and post. I also know you think you can be lazy which I think you were went you went after me, some of the things you have said like, "I was going to do that, let me know what you find out sounds lazy." I played very differently in Steamship. If you want a reason I would guess moodswings. Why is going after you 'being lazy' exactly? I pointed out exactly what I thought was scummy, said why I thought it was scummy. And I guess you're selectively reading, because I asked Palmogism who they wanted me to look into and I was balls-deep in that when GiygaS cited interest in looking into your meta, which was on my to-do list so I approved his action - again, in what way is this lazy? If anything, it shows how lazy YOU are for not reading the thread. So 'moodswings' is the reason that in SL you played a decent town game (and were aligned with town) and you're playing like scummy balls this game? Mmmmmkay. As I said before, I'm not coming after you today because the vets think you're probably town and I won't get support for your lynch while that's the general consensus among the vets. But watch your ass man, if you start slippin' and the vets change their opinions, I'm comin' for ya. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
On December 16 2011 09:56 risk.nuke wrote: What do you want from me, I played spammy and agressive in my last game and I was town then but nobody mentions that. I know I'm town so if you're getting the conclusion that I am mafia you're clearly getting it wrong. ViceraEyes I'm just telling you what your case on me sounded like from my perspective, and in my opinion it wasn't very deep. I think you thought I looked scummy and wrote a bunch of 2 minute posts on me in combination with tunneling. If you were serious and put in alot of effort in reading me well then the more fault to you. Cool bro! Maybe you could do some scumhunting instead of continually defending yourself after I've stated very clearly that I'm not even looking at you anymore! Yeah? No? Here's a start - tell me what you think about....oh I don't know, let's start with zeks. Read through his posts and tell the class what you think about him. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
Go look through zeks' posts, and as you're reading them, consider "Would scum say this?" and write the answer that comes to your head, and give the reasons why you think that. Then, when you're done with that, go through Sheth's posts and do the same thing. Then, when you're done with that, go through risk.nuke's posts and do the same thing. Then, after you've done all 3 of us, come back and post your findings. If you post ANYTHING that even RESEMBLES a defense of your lurking again, I'm going to insta-vote you. Stop lurking. Start helping. Or hang by the neck until dead. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
us = them in the last statement - I included myself in the original post, but decided to instead do players he's either voiced suspicion of or defended, just forgot to change the us to them. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
I had to read through his posts twice before I found anything worth even mentioning. Also, I'm having a hard time discerning what he's voting people for - as his reasoning is almost universally nil…so I had to go back and look at the posts in context to find out what he's talking about a lot of the time. Also, there's a distinct lack of trying to find scum, so don't even try to look for it. Here though he claims he'll look at zeks and GreYMisT. Doesn't. Does, however, claim to vote for my slot. For funsies. RNG's his election vote…that's not only bad for town, but simultaneously makes him absolutely free of accountability for his choice! WUT? Honestly, I'm not sure what this post is supposed to be saying. At the time, there was a vote-switch in the works. My slot was being voted by a lot of people and Rad (I think) came in and said that someone else should be lynched instead. Not sure why, but my guess is the whole 'don't lynch lurkers'…also my slot didn't vote, so maybe he was hoping for a better replacement. AT any rate, I don't know what evan is commenting on in this post, but resolves to look at Spaackles. This post…this post is something. He defends his RNG for Pardoner by saying 'I didn't start that'…I think. Also, defends his choice of Nisani as a lynch by saying 'Palmogism told me to'…which isn't the worst reason in the world (for fun, arguably, is). And defends his decision to not defend himself because "we had a bigger problem". PAUSE I'm assuming the "bigger problem" was Arctocod being removed from the electoral race. Why would that be a problem for him? 1) he wasn't voting for Arctocod, 2) he didn't care who won (lolRNGlol), and 3) he wasn't talking about it at all. So why would that be a valid excuse to not defend the accusations against him? RESUME He then goes on to say 'for goodness sakes, don't waste a check on me' qualifying it with 'at least use it on someone who might cause town a problem if they were scum'. Really? REALLY? 1) No one was even talking about checks that I can see, 2) You're not contributing, so how are we supposed to gauge your alignment? 3) 'for goodness sakes'…like it would be some kind of huge mistake. 4) any scum are a problem, you included. If you're scum, we need to know because you're going to cause a problem. Saying DTs should check someone else because you're a 'weak player' is…weak bro. Verdict: leaning Scum | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
| ||
