Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On January 14 2012 07:13 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2012 01:44 Blazinghand wrote:Well, RoL, it looks like you've finally decided to make a case. It took till D3 ingame and several days of harassment but you're finally doing something that may nominally appear to be useful. However, your case is against me, so I will defend myself. I don't count out the scumhunting efforts of scum automatically in this game because there are two factions-- you could well believe your own case, and be a Demon trying to edge his team back into this game, etc. Without further ado, my point-by-point rebuttals: On January 13 2012 14:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Part I: Day 1 Day 1 for BlazingHand can be characterized by a couple of issues that I think are worth noting, but barring his Day 2 activity wouldn't necessarily consider top candidate. Firstly, he focuses heavily on the set up. Then we look at his interaction with the Palmar. The third thing I am not too sure how to feel about is his overbearing activity. He is absolutely dominating the towns posts, his filter quite frankly is such a ridiculous amount to read it would scare off most people. I know I usually wouldn't bother reading WBG's filter in games because its usually like 8-10 pages within the first couple of days. By the end of day two his filter was 14 pages long, and accomplished an absolutely retarded amount of nothing except making this game insanely annoying to read. To be fair, the actual length of my filter (in terms of word count rather than, say, post count) isn't so bad. Most my posts are overwhelmingly short except for my analysis posts, which are few but long. My filter is susbtantially longer than average for this game, but not so much that it's some herculean feat to actually read it. I gladly encourage people to read and think for themselves rather than blindly accepting what RoL has to say (or even what *I* have to say, as a matter of principle) about any person's filter. By the end of day two, my filter didn't do nothing-- I successfully, erm, pushed an Erandorr lynch. Now, granted, Erandorr flipped town, but most people thought he was scum, and voted their thoughts. It wasn't like I was posting mindless drivel. Your filter sucks and is massive regardless of how you look at it. Way to try to defend the Erandorr lynch by shoving it off on to other people. I didn't even mention that but your defensiveness on the issue is worth noting.
The Erandorr lynch was good and I would do it again in the same circumstances.
On January 14 2012 07:13 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2012 14:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:So that being said let's get to his set up analysis. Now generally speaking, it is considered a bit scummy to dwell on a set up and post a about it. In this case due to the extremely unusual nature of the game I might be able to forgive that. For point of reference, I will include the posts in the spoiler. + Show Spoiler +On January 04 2012 15:57 Blazinghand wrote:
Sup guys? I'm Blazinghand. :DDDDD
A thought from me: Angels have like 1.5 KPs atm, and that drops to 1 (since the acolyte doesn't always get a kill)-- their power goes down with time. Demons have 0 kps but fight us for control of the lynch (among other things), their power goes up with time.
The demon team isn't able to kill people, but it's got a lot of ways to manipulate elections-- and these only increase with power as the game goes on. I think the early game threat in terms of scum are angels, and the late game threat in terms of scum are demons, just because they could pretty easily control these elections.
The demons seem to have it tougher, but things will get much easier for them as the day goes on.
Also, due to the secret vote, vote count analysis isn't available, which makes me feel somewhat at a loss. I think we'll have to hold people accountable to what they say, since we can't hold them accountable to how they vote.
Although we have a variety of interesting blue roles at our disposal, our chief focus has to be on scumhunting and succeeding via lynch early while we still have assured control of the vote.
So, a question: we should/can totally claim corruption when we get corrupted? This exposes us to death via acolyte, but also lets us see who's corrupted and get an idea of how many votes we actually have doing something. This won't really be an issue for a couple days, though.
Another question: is it sensible at all to "try" to get angels or demons first? I haven't played in a multifactional mafia game before, and am looking for some advice here-- or do we just scumhunt and lynch who we find?
Another thought: the possibility for masked flips from the Angel of Death really scares me. I don't like the idea of someone dying and us not having any idea who it was. I don't really know what else to say on that subject but I thought I'd bring it up. We will, of course, be killing Angels exclusively via lynch-- our "vig" type role, the Demon Hunter, can only kill townies and angels.
Don't forget to breadcrumb everything, blues.
Also, let's try not to lurk, and promote healthy discussion like the sick nerd baller town we deserve to be. On January 04 2012 16:02 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
If we lose our demon hunter or sage, then we need to start worrying about the demons more, and if we lose both then they become a threat on par with the angels, if not a greater threat. Now, I am not really sure how to distinguish between angel and demon rather than just town or not town until we get an angel or a demon to flip, but if you have a leaning toward one or the other, remember that killing angels is more important for now.
I'm guessing we'll just identify scum and kill them. Also, although angels have the KPs, it's possible to kill an angel while eliminating 0 kps or just eliminating their "semi" kp while conserving their masked KP. Demons are a much bigger threat long run with their lynch control. Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
All that being said, I don't want to hear about strategies for angels or for demons unless you also have a very good counter to said strategy that you will be sharing with us. They both already have 3 people per team to figure out the best way to play this setup, no sense in helping them out even more.
No. This is a terrible idea. If there are strategies for angels and demons that are obvious (like demons using corrupted votes to go after blues or masking an important death) it's so, SO important that you share it so we can figure out how to deal with it. If it can help, share it with the town. Honestly, they already have 3 people per team and already know whatever it is you're gonna share. The idea that we should try to avoid sharing information is exactly the kind of scummy idea that sinks towns. Don't be that guy. Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 15:51 Bluelightz wrote:
Well, helo guys anyway what do you think on how should we approach the day 1 lynch? step 1) find scum step 2) lynch them step 0 is get everyone to talk so we can get reads. On January 04 2012 16:31 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 16:20 Bluelightz wrote:
I think that the channeler should use his/her ability as a medic power as well as being a roleblock power Yes this seems fairly obvious for a "jailer" type ability Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 16:17 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 16:02 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
If we lose our demon hunter or sage, then we need to start worrying about the demons more, and if we lose both then they become a threat on par with the angels, if not a greater threat. Now, I am not really sure how to distinguish between angel and demon rather than just town or not town until we get an angel or a demon to flip, but if you have a leaning toward one or the other, remember that killing angels is more important for now.
I'm guessing we'll just identify scum and kill them. Also, although angels have the KPs, it's possible to kill an angel while eliminating 0 kps or just eliminating their "semi" kp while conserving their masked KP. Demons are a much bigger threat long run with their lynch control. On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
All that being said, I don't want to hear about strategies for angels or for demons unless you also have a very good counter to said strategy that you will be sharing with us. They both already have 3 people per team to figure out the best way to play this setup, no sense in helping them out even more.
No. This is a terrible idea. If there are strategies for angels and demons that are obvious (like demons using corrupted votes to go after blues or masking an important death) it's so, SO important that you share it so we can figure out how to deal with it. If it can help, share it with the town. Honestly, they already have 3 people per team and already know whatever it is you're gonna share. The idea that we should try to avoid sharing information is exactly the kind of scummy idea that sinks towns. Don't be that guy. On January 04 2012 15:51 Bluelightz wrote:
Well, helo guys anyway what do you think on how should we approach the day 1 lynch? step 1) find scum step 2) lynch them step 0 is get everyone to talk so we can get reads. You are informed when you are corrupted. If the sage is still alive you say "I got corrupted" and then the sage cleans you of corruption. 2 cycles of demon powers taken care of. (they only get to corrupt every other night) As I said, I am not very worried about them until we lose our demon hunter or sage. What do you think about information sharing? Are you still anti-sharing-ways-to-fight-strategies-and-stuff? Also-- the downside of claiming corruption is the "night actions order" Show nested quote +
The Transport and Banish actions are resolved simultaneously before all other actions, and can consequently cause the other actions to fail.
All other actions except corruption and the cleansing aspect of the illuminate action are then resolved.
The corruption action is then resolved (even if the demon who is performing the action was killed the same night.)
Finally, the cleansing aspect of the illuminate action is resolved (even if the sage was killed the same night.)
The acolyte can just crap on you before you get cleansed. that's the risk. This is a complicated game, take some time to read the OP before commenting on this sort of thing On January 04 2012 16:57 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 16:52 Refallen wrote:
Finally started! Hype!
My first thoughts on the setup;
Obviously, I think the best way to go about this game is to focus on killing angels in the early game. Once we get rid of the acolyte, the seer has an infinitely easier job in cleansing corruption because we can actually claim if we got corrupted and not get targetted right now as we get closer to the late game lynching demons obviously becomes more and more important, but town would have a huge benefit if we can reduce angel KP early on in the game, as this has a building effect of letting more townies live = demon corrupt has less of an impact. This sounds super correct. Once the Angel of Death or Angelic Acolyte is dead, claiming corrupted won't result in instant death since even if the Angelic Acolyte is still alive, at that point it'll be easier to just Slay rather than try to pick up a KP via Stalk. On January 04 2012 16:58 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 16:56 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 16:52 Refallen wrote:
Finally started! Hype!
My first thoughts on the setup;
Obviously, I think the best way to go about this game is to focus on killing angels in the early game. Once we get rid of the acolyte, the seer has an infinitely easier job in cleansing corruption because we can actually claim if we got corrupted and not get targetted right now as we get closer to the late game lynching demons obviously becomes more and more important, but town would have a huge benefit if we can reduce angel KP early on in the game, as this has a building effect of letting more townies live = demon corrupt has less of an impact. Oh right, kills resolve before corruption removal. T_T Why are you quoting him and not me ._. i be all up in in this thread pointing these things out way earlier On January 04 2012 17:56 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 17:40 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 17:32 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2012 17:19 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 16:58 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2012 16:56 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 16:52 Refallen wrote:
Finally started! Hype!
My first thoughts on the setup;
Obviously, I think the best way to go about this game is to focus on killing angels in the early game. Once we get rid of the acolyte, the seer has an infinitely easier job in cleansing corruption because we can actually claim if we got corrupted and not get targetted right now as we get closer to the late game lynching demons obviously becomes more and more important, but town would have a huge benefit if we can reduce angel KP early on in the game, as this has a building effect of letting more townies live = demon corrupt has less of an impact. Oh right, kills resolve before corruption removal. T_T Why are you quoting him and not me ._. i be all up in in this thread pointing these things out way earlier You pointed it out in the post prior, I was reading the thread, and read the whole thread before replying to it, and his was the more recent mention of it so I hit the quote button on that one. On January 04 2012 16:31 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2012 16:20 Bluelightz wrote:
I think that the channeler should use his/her ability as a medic power as well as being a roleblock power Yes this seems fairly obvious for a "jailer" type ability On January 04 2012 16:17 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 16:02 Blazinghand wrote:On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
If we lose our demon hunter or sage, then we need to start worrying about the demons more, and if we lose both then they become a threat on par with the angels, if not a greater threat. Now, I am not really sure how to distinguish between angel and demon rather than just town or not town until we get an angel or a demon to flip, but if you have a leaning toward one or the other, remember that killing angels is more important for now.
I'm guessing we'll just identify scum and kill them. Also, although angels have the KPs, it's possible to kill an angel while eliminating 0 kps or just eliminating their "semi" kp while conserving their masked KP. Demons are a much bigger threat long run with their lynch control. On January 04 2012 15:34 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:
All that being said, I don't want to hear about strategies for angels or for demons unless you also have a very good counter to said strategy that you will be sharing with us. They both already have 3 people per team to figure out the best way to play this setup, no sense in helping them out even more.
No. This is a terrible idea. If there are strategies for angels and demons that are obvious (like demons using corrupted votes to go after blues or masking an important death) it's so, SO important that you share it so we can figure out how to deal with it. If it can help, share it with the town. Honestly, they already have 3 people per team and already know whatever it is you're gonna share. The idea that we should try to avoid sharing information is exactly the kind of scummy idea that sinks towns. Don't be that guy. On January 04 2012 15:51 Bluelightz wrote:
Well, helo guys anyway what do you think on how should we approach the day 1 lynch? step 1) find scum step 2) lynch them step 0 is get everyone to talk so we can get reads. You are informed when you are corrupted. If the sage is still alive you say "I got corrupted" and then the sage cleans you of corruption. 2 cycles of demon powers taken care of. (they only get to corrupt every other night) As I said, I am not very worried about them until we lose our demon hunter or sage. What do you think about information sharing? Are you still anti-sharing-ways-to-fight-strategies-and-stuff?Also-- the downside of claiming corruption is the "night actions order"
The Transport and Banish actions are resolved simultaneously before all other actions, and can consequently cause the other actions to fail.
All other actions except corruption and the cleansing aspect of the illuminate action are then resolved.
The corruption action is then resolved (even if the demon who is performing the action was killed the same night.)
Finally, the cleansing aspect of the illuminate action is resolved (even if the sage was killed the same night.)
The acolyte can just crap on you before you get cleansed. that's the risk. This is a complicated game, take some time to read the OP before commenting on this sort of thing I explicitly said don't share them unless you have a counter. I never said I was against sharing ways to fight strategies. If anything my statement implies that you should share if you have a counter to an angel or demon strategy. Don't twist my words. Ok, but imagine an alternate situation-- you don't have a counter to a strategy, but it's likely the angels/demons have thought of it. wouldn't this be a good time to share so that you can learn stuff? Like, I don't like the idea of a bunch of town players who aren't working together and pooling their ideas. That sounds bad. That sounds like a pro-scum town environment. You seem to be harping on this quite a bit, and yet haven't posted a single demon or angel strategy. The closest you have come is posting the risk of claiming the corruption. So, are you just pointing fingers at me for no reason, or are you withholding information that in your opinion should be shared? Or do you have no idea of how they should play but feel like other people will know and should share it? Nice dodge-- respond with questions, yes, that looks credible. Look, I haven't thought of anything. But if I did, I'd surely share it with the rest of the town, and I encourage others to do so. Why are you so adamant about supporting a crappy posting policy? If I think of something, I'll share it with people, as should everyone else. I think this is what creates a good town environment. The last post specifically, I have bolded an interesting point. He wants us to share plans, then shits all over me when I do it. Fine whatever, the set up posting was minor we can let that slide. The setup posting was minor? ._. there was nothing else to talk about. I don't know why you brought this up. If you don't feel this is an important part of your case, then I will not address it other than this: I wanted us to share plans, so I could promote a healthy town discussion and find scum. Someone shared plans-- and that person happened to be scum, and it became clear from his horrid, terrible plan (at least to me) that this was the case. This is not inconsistent with me wanting us to share plans. I told you I could accept that it was minor and not a huge tell, but given that your day 2 posting was scummy as shit it was worth mentioning as an additive. Nice way to twist your words to justify getting up my ass. Regardless of how scummy you perceived my plan itself as, everyone else saw the way I was pushing it and how passionately I fought for it as being town. You seem to be the only outlier on that issue. Show nested quote +On January 13 2012 14:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:The next part I want to focus on is his other player interactions. Generally he is hostile with most players, while on Day 1 it can be a good way to generate discussion I don't believe that was entirely what he was doing, some of it was straight up bullying which just makes it so townies are less likely to challenge you, and more likely to sheep with you to avoid confrontations. I will include some of the posts in a spoiler once again. + Show Spoiler +On January 04 2012 18:06 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 18:03 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 17:57 Blazinghand wrote:
I'm not FoSing you or anything, HofD, I'm just saying that your policy ideas and posting ideas are bad, and I want everyone to know it so they don't follow your advice. I will "harp" on this as much as possible to promote good posts. Say this was a normal game of mafia and you were town. Would you discuss the ideal ways to play as scum? If not, why do you think discussing the ideal ways to play as demons and angels is a good idea? Ah yes you're right let's figure out how to fight scum without talking about how they think or what they might do, and if we have thoughts about this and need help let's not get help from each other about it. Hey look when I put words in your mouth it sounds bad too! The point i'm trying to make here is that a healthy discussion of what Angel and Demons might use as a strat and what we can do to counter it is very important, especially if you don't immediately know the counter strategy. On January 04 2012 18:09 Blazinghand wrote:IN FACT YOU EVEN RESPOND TO THAT POST RIGHT HERE: Show nested quote +On January 04 2012 18:00 HarbingerOfDoom wrote:On January 04 2012 17:59 Refallen wrote:
Not to mention that while angels CAN kill demons, it hardly seems optimal for them. With 11 town and only 3 of each faction, for angels to kill off demons would just mean that town will have an easier time. I think that we can consider the scenario of angel and demon killing each other therfore, highly improbable. They don't know who is town and who is a demon. They might do it by accident. Granted, only the angel of death can do it accidentally (until the angel of death is killed at least) and then we'd never know the difference anyway. Why aren't you telling Refallen off? because you forgot for a moment about your poorly-thought-out rule and acted like a reasonable person. Try to do that more and think about your "well lets never discuss what scum actions might look like in this complicated setup" rule less. On January 05 2012 04:31 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:27 syllogism wrote:On January 05 2012 04:19 Blazinghand wrote:On January 05 2012 04:15 syllogism wrote:
If bluelightz doesn't contribute by the end of the day we can re-evaluate. I assume you mean an IRL day or something here right? We're not made out of time. Bluelightz had 3 hours, and he spent them making one-liners and posts that were literally meaningless. I consider this play to be anti-town. I don't care who does it-- you could have done it, and it would be anti-town. Then he bails. Given that he knew he had to bail in a few hours, he could have made a post with, well, content. But he didn't. No, I meant the first in-game day, that is to say up to 72 hours. Get used to certain players not immediately establishing their innocence, because that is going to be the norm. Whether bluelightz is going to be one of them remains to be seen, but there are "veterans" who to some extent do it every game. The fact that it's anti-town does not mean the optimal play is to lynch them every game for it. If you can pressure them to contribute, that's fine. The #1 goal of a town player should be to establish their innocence. Look, regardless of whether "oh bluelightz isn't establishing his innocence" or whatever, just look at that filter. That is an unhelpful dude. I don't have a solid scumread atm, but we've got 3 lurkers and one guy who's posted like 6 one-liners and said nothing. This is fine because probably the lurkers are asleep-- but ideally we have a sweet day1 discussion and get some juices flowing. I will not stand for an inactive crappy town. I will NOT get used to players not establishing their innocence. I will hunt down and kill all the scum whether in doing so I earn YOUR approval or not. Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:27 syllogism wrote:Also is Mr. Wiggles actually playing? I see he edited his only post to say "can't", but he is still on the player list. Is Mr. Wiggles playing? On January 05 2012 04:34 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:28 layabout wrote:Bluelightz i think...: he lacks confidence in his own abilities that he may try to lurk that he has not tried to help that what he has written makes sense from a "town that has to get on a plane and will have limited internet acess" perspective he has provided us with very little that can be analysed effectively i do not think that there you can make all of those inferences + Show Spoiler +"profoundly unuseful" and "anti town" and say that they are his verdict and his damnation. BH at this point in time nearly any case you can come up with needs to forced and isn't necessarily helpful You seem to like throwing your vote around but do you really think that at the current moment in time everyone should vote for bluelightz to kill him, possibly end the day and let night actions happen? if i were the type i might accuse you of "trying to gain town cred by forcing a case based off of thin air." i will not do that.  If anything, I'm burning bridges. The fact of the matter is, I'm not trying to get town cred by forcing a case off thin air, because doing so is how you lose town cred. My case is solid as hell. The guy was here for 3 hours and made 6 posts saying nothing. This is unacceptable and I will not stand for it. Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 04:31 layabout wrote:
What i think we should do today:
I think that we should agree within the next few hours to commit to lynching a lurker day 1. If people do not post day 1, or try to hide, or like make 1 post then dip up out of here, of course we will lynch them. However, it's possible some of the players who haven't posted are still asleep, and it seems Mr. Wiggles may not be playing at all. Solid case indeed chap, you base it off useless posts. Definitely no signs of weakness. On January 05 2012 04:36 Blazinghand wrote:
Look if Bluelightz gets off his plane, realizes he's being a tool, and decides to seriously help out, I won't have as much of a case on him any more because he'll be being, well, helpful.
It's that simple. It won't be hard for him if he's being town.
step 1) be helpful
step 2) blazinghand is no longer attacking you And this guy gets up my ass about being a dick to players. On January 05 2012 08:41 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2012 08:41 Blazinghand wrote:On January 05 2012 08:26 Grackaroni wrote:
KK I'm back. I suggested the Bluelightz lynch and it looks like BH took a lot of shit because of me. No I took a lot of shit because of me. You didn't contribute to my Bluelightz idea at all, except to remind me he existed and is bad. If you like the bluelightz lynch, make a case and make your vote like a man. If you don't like it, don't do it. You make expand and defense it and you do so with vigor. Being like "hey guys should we pressure Bluelightz" and then apologizing for it doesn't help my case against him, and it doesn't help him either. Not to be abrasive or anything, I just don't think there's any reason to pull your punches. Oh cool, because you said not to be abrasive, then its all fine. This is just to establish the needless aggression and discouraging players. I want to establish a difference. When he is doing it here, it is to discourage people from coming against him. When I was posting abrasively in defense of my plan it served the purpose of attempting to shut down contention fast and efficiently because it was a rush scenario. The difference is his is to shut down objections to himself by less aggressive players, while mine was a tactical decision to help my plan get going on an extremely constricted time basis. Now for how he acted about Palmar. He starts off subtle trying to justify the case, then gets full swing behind it before jumping to an easier lynch in Erandorr/Risk.nuke. I will explain what I mean in the spoiler.
So what do you think of all this, Blazinghand?
I think Wiggles, in his aggression, overlooked a more legitimate way to take this argument to Palmar. Why DID Palmar do all that dayvig stuff when he could have just kept on pressing? The world may never know. Clearly Palmar was unhelpful and repetitive leading up to Wiggles' accusation. I'd consider that a serious problem. I think Wiggles' case is shitty, but not because Palmar isn't scummy. Wiggles just made some huge mistakes in presenting his case.
I have no reason whatosever to believe Wiggles is town based on the way he put together his case and the fact that he has failed to contribute in a meaningful fashion besides erecting a 5-lane tollbooth-assisted 2-way tunnel at Palmar.
All that being said, I think there's something up with Palmar. I don't know why he's acting so weird, and it gives me the heebie jeebies.
Palmar comes off as scummy. I'm not taking into account his contributions after the Wiggles case, nor am I taking into account Wiggles' contributions after the initial response to Palmar's defense-- if Palmar is scum, it should be clear from his actions before Wiggles began putting together his tunnel. Also, most of that stuff has happened WHILE I was writing this post. It's kind of a long post.
I don't like his read on risk.nuke; I don't like the FASHION in which he pressure Bluelightz-- that is to say, ineffectively, noncommittally, and generally unhelpfully; and I don't like the defense of said pressure.
The one thing I'll say about his actions post-Wiggles-Accusation (besides his initial defense) since there's a lot of WIFOM rolling around based on whether or not he'll be more aggressive, etc-- is that I don't understand why he changed his vote to Erandorr.
I really don't.
And that's the reason I'm voting Palmar instead of Erandorr at the moment. I GET IT that Erandorr looks scummy. *I* think he looks scummy. But Palmar himself admits that given that he's town, he's horribly surprised that Wiggles would tunnel him like this. He even said "There's no way you're this bad" or something along those lines.
It makes no sense. None at all. The fact that it came right after my comprehensive case on Erandorr doesn't mean anything either-- maybe he was legitimately convinced, but he could have been looking for another wagon to hop on.
So why the sudden change, Palmar? Have you no explanation for me? You were so sure of Mr. Wiggles!
*shakes head*
##Vote Palmar
On January 13 2012 14:33 RebirthOfLeGenD wrote:
He basically does an entire analysis using wiggles posts which makes him hold zero accountability. On top of this he uses it to justify a vote he has been easing himself into.
If you read the filter there is some more posts about palmar, but I feel this adequately sums it up. He hesitates to engage Palmar, then does it vicariously through wiggles arguments. When Palmar flips he could look good for this if it wasn't a two faction game. This is the reasoning I use to determine he must be an Angel. The part that makes him scummy is his absolutely shameless tunneling of me for 5 straight days, then compromising on a different mislynch.
' Um, ok so I don't know if you actually read my posts, but I'm basically saying I think Mr. Wiggle's arguments are completely shitty and I make up my own to attack Palmar with. At that time of my post, I seriously entertained the idea that they were both scum from different factions. The idea that I'm at once "aggressive and abrasive" but also "afraid to stick my neck out" is dumb. Let me show you the key areas of my case against Palmar where I basically smack down Mr. Wiggles: " Blazinghand Wrote:
Mr. Wiggles finds this more non-committal and hedging than I did. This is indeed one of many unhelpful posts by Palmar." " Blazinghand Wrote:
So Mr. Wiggles notes the same thing I do about Palmar's weirdness with Bluelightz. He also thinks the follow-up is bad. From a "Wiggles-as-town" perspective, there's two possibilities here: 1) Palmar got an accurate read of town from BL's wishiwashiness, or 2) Palmar is scum trying to look town." Blazinghand Wrote:
I think Wiggles, in his aggression, overlooked a more legitimate way to take this argument to Palmar. Why DID Palmar do all that dayvig stuff when he could have just kept on pressing? The world may never know. Clearly Palmar was unhelpful and repetitive leading up to Wiggles' accusation. I'd consider that a serious problem. I think Wiggles' case is shitty, but not because Palmar isn't scummy. Wiggles just made some huge mistakes in presenting his case.
I have no reason whatosever to believe Wiggles is town based on the way he put together his case and the fact that he has failed to contribute in a meaningful fashion besides erecting a 5-lane tollbooth-assisted 2-way tunnel at Palmar.
what, you think I wouldn't remember MY OWN CASE? I didn't steal it from wiggles, I MADE IT UP MYSELF and SHAT UNREMORSEFULLY ON WIGGLES. That's right guys, I wasn't noncomittal, as RoL claims: I STUCK MY NECK the fuckk out and attacked both players. I said A) Palmar is scum B) Wiggles is right for the wrong reasons and I constructed my own case. Read the actual goddamn post before listening to RoL's bullshit: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=298603¤tpage=27#532My case against Palmar speaks for itself. I will be continuing this, addressing RoL's second case post in my next post. This is a load of shit. You used wiggles arguments as a hinging point so if palmar flipped in a bad way you can blame him. You didn't "Shat all over wiggles", not even fucking close. Since when the fuck would Show nested quote +
I think Wiggles, in his aggression, overlooked a more legitimate way to take this argument to Palmar. Why DID Palmar do all that dayvig stuff when he could have just kept on pressing? The world may never know. Clearly Palmar was unhelpful and repetitive leading up to Wiggles' accusation. I'd consider that a serious problem. I think Wiggles' case is shitty, but not because Palmar isn't scummy. Wiggles just made some huge mistakes in presenting his case.
Qualify as shitting all over someone? Hint: It doesn't. Your case against Palmar does speak for itself. You used wiggles arguments to create a point for you to start, mildly disagree with wiggles which could set him up for a day two lynch should the Palmar vote take off and then fail to hit scum, and then now that I call you out on it you try to completely exaggerate your negatively towards wiggles and your hostility towards palmar to justify your vote. Bullshit.
??? Wow dude I don't even know what the deal is here. I say that Wiggle's case is bad and I vote Palmar. Is there some problem here? I think you're ignoring most of my criticisms and making stuff up. Responding to drivel like this is not a good use of my time.
|
EPT
