|
Didn't realize this had started.
On March 02 2012 09:19 deconduo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 02:09 Paperscraps wrote:
Probulous is town
Palmar is null
rg is town
deconduo is scum for his horrible reads so far
Vote: deconduo Scumslip much? I might have bad reads, but the only way you could know they were bad is if you're scum. Especially seeing as neither read was about you. Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 06:45 Probulous wrote:On March 02 2012 01:18 deconduo wrote:On March 02 2012 01:14 Palmar wrote:
There is nothing wrong with making a list, you guys are insane. Do you want me to show you how often scum make pointless lists in games? Its the most obvious filler you can make, because it a massive important looking post that adds absolutely nothing to the game. On March 02 2012 01:15 Palmar wrote:On March 02 2012 01:14 deconduo wrote:On March 02 2012 01:12 Palmar wrote:
I think that analysis is surprisingly bad deconduo. Why is it so bad? Can you explain that to me? Dunno I'm going through filters so I might be missing the order in which things were posted. I'm just reading the game for the first time now. So you agree it's bad? No, I have no idea why YOU think its bad. Decon, are you seriously saying that my list was the only thing I contributed to this game? Because that is the only way it could be used to drive an agenda. To make it look like I was contributing while actually posting nothing. Well so far I pointed out Pandain's scummy attempt to undermine me, Palmar's "scumslip" (I don't believe it, just needed a response) and I had the discussion with Misder which convinced you he was scum. How can you cast suspicion on me for hiding? It should be clear to everyone that the list was made early game to help people be aware of timezones. That is all. How that is scummy I will never know. I never said the list was the only thing you contributed, I said the complete opposite. The list didn't contribute, which is why I found it scummy. Compared to your other posts it stands out. Everyone who's played mafia before understands that people are in different timezones, and even people in the same country can be on at different times. After Adam posted this: Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 12:29 Adam4167 wrote:
3:30am in Iceland and Ireland right now, probably a bit hopeful that Palmar and deconduo are on. The other two may be around, depending on which US states they're in.
Welcome back Misder, second wiggles game for both of us. If you're town again, do you plan on playing out the whole game this time? There was no need for your post, as it added nothing to the game. However your posting since has been good, so I'm not as suspicious of you anymore. I think you are wrong about teacup though.
I rarely agree with Decon but when I do we lynch scum.
|
Let's get this game rolling and focus on one person for now. If someone lurks in the meantime, they'll only hurt themselves later. By focusing on one, we get to see the reactions of all.
Can you explain why you don't view Toast as scum? You gave a vague reason but I'm sure you have more.
|
I have magic powers! I summon a Jackal and here he appears 
Seriously though just for clarity's sake, what exactly do you agree with from deconduo? That paperscraps is scum?
|
On March 02 2012 09:44 Probulous wrote:I have magic powers! I summon a Jackal and here he appears Seriously though just for clarity's sake, what exactly do you agree with from deconduo? That paperscraps is scum?
Yes and also that your location list serves no purpose. And no, sorry, you have no magic powers.
|
On March 02 2012 09:44 Pandain wrote:
Let's get this game rolling and focus on one person for now. If someone lurks in the meantime, they'll only hurt themselves later. By focusing on one, we get to see the reactions of all.
Can you explain why you don't view Toast as scum? You gave a vague reason but I'm sure you have more.
Well for one he has been pretty consistent.
The more fluff, random posts in the thread, the easier it is for scum to hide. Keep it focused.
We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say
I wasn't trying to specifically call you out. See the first word in that bolded sentence? "WE" As in ALL of us, together, need to avoid getting side tracked. I'm also unsure how you get me accusing you of "spamming" from me saying we need to avoid getting side tracked.
Then he got indignant when I was needling him. I admit that my reading of his accusation was weak, I was really just seeking clarity around what he meant by "sidetracked" but he got flustered. To me this reads like someone trying to avoid a stupid argument.
I wasn't trying to say you were spamming, I don't know why you are being so defensive about this. Pandain made a point about avoiding outside conversation in the thread, I agreed with that point. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything. So no, I don't have a problem with it.
Given that was what he was trying to do from the start, it looks townie. Finally his response to your case is clear frustation. He isn't scared or submissive but rather frustrated that he can't seem to establish his innocence. It would have been much easier for him to target someone else but instead he attempts to clarify his position. His point about you quoting me looks like sarcasm.
All in all it doesn't read as scum to me.
|
Paperscraps usually posts like that.
Still not enough for him to be lynched D1, I d say.
I d prefer not to talk about Arkham, I had a simple plan, but it failed, due to some truth-loving townies. Still baffled that only 3rd parties managed to figure out my role and that I did not look scummy.
##Unvote
[QUOTE]On March 02 2012 09:18 Pandain wrote:
[QUOTE]On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:
[QUOTE]On March 02 2012 08:26 Pandain wrote:
AKCT hasn't done anything scummy. At least not anything that we can pinpoint definitively too. Right now your just clouded by the fact they both accused you, and you probably think anyone who supports you is town to. That's a dangerous, oftentimes wrong assumption to make. The_Toast, to the best of day1 analysis can go, is our best bet for right now.[/QUOTE]
I agree on RG. If you have courage take a look at Arkham City (Adam rolls his eyes). He claimed everything under the sun and looked scummy as hell but ended up being a regular vet. The fact that he put together an atrocious case on me and called it so makes him pretty much town in my eyes. Weird play but produced some interesting results.
Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't.
I am fully aware that townies will target other townies. That happens all the time, that is why people's motivations for posting are important. From what I have seen from Tea he wants to look like he is contributing without contributing. Hence my suspicion. The fact that it was me is irrelevant.
[/QUOTE]
AKCT isn't actingi scummy. What was his first post? A vote of you with no explanation. Mafia would never ever EVER do that, that's so suspicious. Mafia are usually careful, and reticent in demeanor(part of why I think The_Toast is mafia).
Theres one thing I have suspicions about but as of yet I'm waiting to see what he does about it, and telling him will ruin it. As of now I feel any evidence regarding AKCT is speculative, while more conclusive evidence is elsewhere.
Toast's latest response is more interesting actually....
[QUOTE]On March 02 2012 08:55 TheToast wrote:
[QUOTE]On March 02 2012 07:51 Pandain wrote:
I believe Probulous is town, or at least not scummy enough to lynch day 1. He's way too active/aggressive I feel for him to be mafia, although I'll have to look at his previous games for confirmation.
I'm most suspicious of The_Toast. Contrary to his last game as town, [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=306452&user=89961](filter HERE)[/url] he is much more taciturn this game.
Compare that with his current posts. All hes done is [url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=315210¤tpage=7#134]agree with what others said[/url], and justify his own views(almost guiltily/apolegtic.)
[quote] Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say. [/quote]
[quote] I would say why don't we wait for a few hours and see if we actually have any lurkers. And obvious scum should still be lynched first day one, if there are really no good candidates I would say then we should consider lynching a lurker. But in that case the lurker would be the best candidate, so I still say lynches need to be based on good analysis.
I reiterate: silly lynch rules really only benefit scum. Logical analysis first please.[/quote] generic, "pro town" advice.
[quote] wasn't trying to specifically call you out. See the first word in that bolded sentence? "WE" As in ALL of us, together, need to avoid getting side tracked. I'm also unsure how you get me accusing you of "spamming" from me saying we need to avoid getting side tracked.
And to be fair, you did start a side conversation with Misder. I don't know that constitutes "spamming", but it's not going to lead to posts that can provide good analysis one way or the other. Just saying.[/quote]
[quote]
I wasn't trying to say you were spamming, I don't know why you are being so defensive about this. Pandain made a point about avoiding outside conversation in the thread, I agreed with that point. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything. So no, I don't have a problem with it.
And you're right, I do try to think logically. As such I don't think two posts by themselves are enough to prove anyone as scum.[/quote]
#vote the Toast[/QUOTE]
Let me get this straight. You think I'm scum because I'm being too nice? Based on what, the one* other game of mafia I've played? Well then, why don't you take a closer look at that game, you might see that I didn't post any serious analysis or votes until like 24 hours into the game. I prefer to wait until there is a good amount of evidence before making any votes or claims. And why does agreeing with you contribute to my scumminess? Are you now suddenly in favor of conversations that side track the game? Or just in favor of lynching people who agree with you about avoiding conversations that side track the thread? I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided.
Pandain right now you have 4 posts in this game. You called out Probulous with some vague accusations:
[QUOTE]On March 01 2012 12:57 Pandain wrote:
That took a long time to post. Are you hiding something?[/QUOTE]
Then after both probe and sandroba call you out on this, you've very next post is--not responding to either of these--but rather to come out claiming Probulous is town--without a single shred of evidence or analysis--and claiming that I am scum based on scant evidence. Then post #4, have you addressed probe or sandroba's accusations? Nope. You tell Probe (who again, has not mysteriously become townish) that his vote on AKCoT is bad and that tunneling me is the best bet.
Pandain, right now I still don't think there is enough evidence against you to make a scum call; but it looks to me like you are desperately trying to focus attention off of yourself.
[/QUOTE]
Contrast this tone with the others. Looks like hes trying hard to make a good point(with italics + bolding and shit). Not only that but while writing this post he researched other players(shown by his accusations of me, saying how I had 4 posts, noting my play).
His accusations of me mean that he could either be a trigger-happy townie, or that he's trying to downplay me. I can't determine anything out of that, actually it sort of helps his case.
This part is quite interesting though:
[quote] I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided.[/quote]
I'm interested what you meant by that, Toast. Why would you defending me lend you any town support? How would you know if I'm town?
By far though the most compelling and persuasive argument against him is the fact that he accused me, rather certainly in his opinion, that i was "desperately trying to hide something", and that I'm playing scummily. And yet overall, I'm not a good enough vote? Seems a bit of a paradox there.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Pandain,softdefend your scumbuddy,Cup?
Saying that he isnt scummy because of WIFOM(scum wouldnt do that) and that more conclusive evidence is to be found elsewhere is, on the other hand, scummy as hell.
The Toast has shown his(its?) teeth once he was attacked. Typical town, scum usually get defensive in this spot.
Probulous, that s why you have lost 3 games. The Toast isnt trying to divert attention, not with such a vocal post.Plain wrong, though I would like to see something other than OMGUS from him.He is leaning town, actually.
Glad you arent spamming anymore.
So far, It s between Cup and Pandain. Especially as Cup is a newbie and could very well have scumslipped.
Lurkers, speak up.
|
Oh, I must ve done something wrong. The text didnt appear under normal format.
|
On March 02 2012 09:59 rgTheSchworz wrote:
Oh, I must ve done something wrong. The text didnt appear under normal format.
Here you go:
Paperscraps usually posts like that.
Still not enough for him to be lynched D1, I d say.
I d prefer not to talk about Arkham, I had a simple plan, but it failed, due to some truth-loving townies. Still baffled that only 3rd parties managed to figure out my role and that I did not look scummy.
##Unvote
On March 02 2012 09:18 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:On March 02 2012 08:26 Pandain wrote:
AKCT hasn't done anything scummy. At least not anything that we can pinpoint definitively too. Right now your just clouded by the fact they both accused you, and you probably think anyone who supports you is town to. That's a dangerous, oftentimes wrong assumption to make. The_Toast, to the best of day1 analysis can go, is our best bet for right now. I agree on RG. If you have courage take a look at Arkham City (Adam rolls his eyes). He claimed everything under the sun and looked scummy as hell but ended up being a regular vet. The fact that he put together an atrocious case on me and called it so makes him pretty much town in my eyes. Weird play but produced some interesting results. Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't. I am fully aware that townies will target other townies. That happens all the time, that is why people's motivations for posting are important. From what I have seen from Tea he wants to look like he is contributing without contributing. Hence my suspicion. The fact that it was me is irrelevant. AKCT isn't actingi scummy. What was his first post? A vote of you with no explanation. Mafia would never ever EVER do that, that's so suspicious. Mafia are usually careful, and reticent in demeanor(part of why I think The_Toast is mafia).
Theres one thing I have suspicions about but as of yet I'm waiting to see what he does about it, and telling him will ruin it. As of now I feel any evidence regarding AKCT is speculative, while more conclusive evidence is elsewhere.Toast's latest response is more interesting actually.... Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 08:55 TheToast wrote:On March 02 2012 07:51 Pandain wrote:I believe Probulous is town, or at least not scummy enough to lynch day 1. He's way too active/aggressive I feel for him to be mafia, although I'll have to look at his previous games for confirmation. I'm most suspicious of The_Toast. Contrary to his last game as town, (filter HERE) he is much more taciturn this game. Compare that with his current posts. All hes done is agree with what others said, and justify his own views(almost guiltily/apolegtic.) Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say. I would say why don't we wait for a few hours and see if we actually have any lurkers. And obvious scum should still be lynched first day one, if there are really no good candidates I would say then we should consider lynching a lurker. But in that case the lurker would be the best candidate, so I still say lynches need to be based on good analysis.
I reiterate: silly lynch rules really only benefit scum. Logical analysis first please. generic, "pro town" advice. wasn't trying to specifically call you out. See the first word in that bolded sentence? "WE" As in ALL of us, together, need to avoid getting side tracked. I'm also unsure how you get me accusing you of "spamming" from me saying we need to avoid getting side tracked.
And to be fair, you did start a side conversation with Misder. I don't know that constitutes "spamming", but it's not going to lead to posts that can provide good analysis one way or the other. Just saying.
I wasn't trying to say you were spamming, I don't know why you are being so defensive about this. Pandain made a point about avoiding outside conversation in the thread, I agreed with that point. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything. So no, I don't have a problem with it.
And you're right, I do try to think logically. As such I don't think two posts by themselves are enough to prove anyone as scum. #vote the Toast Let me get this straight. You think I'm scum because I'm being too nice? Based on what, the one* other game of mafia I've played? Well then, why don't you take a closer look at that game, you might see that I didn't post any serious analysis or votes until like 24 hours into the game. I prefer to wait until there is a good amount of evidence before making any votes or claims. And why does agreeing with you contribute to my scumminess? Are you now suddenly in favor of conversations that side track the game? Or just in favor of lynching people who agree with you about avoiding conversations that side track the thread? I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided. Pandain right now you have 4 posts in this game. You called out Probulous with some vague accusations: On March 01 2012 12:57 Pandain wrote:
That took a long time to post. Are you hiding something? Then after both probe and sandroba call you out on this, you've very next post is--not responding to either of these--but rather to come out claiming Probulous is town--without a single shred of evidence or analysis--and claiming that I am scum based on scant evidence. Then post #4, have you addressed probe or sandroba's accusations? Nope. You tell Probe (who again, has not mysteriously become townish) that his vote on AKCoT is bad and that tunneling me is the best bet. Pandain, right now I still don't think there is enough evidence against you to make a scum call; but it looks to me like you are desperately trying to focus attention off of yourself. Contrast this tone with the others. Looks like hes trying hard to make a good point(with italics + bolding and shit). Not only that but while writing this post he researched other players(shown by his accusations of me, saying how I had 4 posts, noting my play). His accusations of me mean that he could either be a trigger-happy townie, or that he's trying to downplay me. I can't determine anything out of that, actually it sort of helps his case. This part is quite interesting though: Show nested quote + I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided. I'm interested what you meant by that, Toast. Why would you defending me lend you any town support? How would you know if I'm town? By far though the most compelling and persuasive argument against him is the fact that he accused me, rather certainly in his opinion, that i was "desperately trying to hide something", and that I'm playing scummily. And yet overall, I'm not a good enough vote? Seems a bit of a paradox there.
Yeah, Pandain,softdefend your scumbuddy,Cup?
Saying that he isnt scummy because of WIFOM(scum wouldnt do that) and that more conclusive evidence is to be found elsewhere is, on the other hand, scummy as hell.
The Toast has shown his(its?) teeth once he was attacked. Typical town, scum usually get defensive in this spot.
Probulous, that s why you have lost 3 games. The Toast isnt trying to divert attention, not with such a vocal post.Plain wrong, though I would like to see something other than OMGUS from him.He is leaning town, actually.
Glad you arent spamming anymore.
So far, It s between Cup and Pandain. Especially as Cup is a newbie and could very well have scumslipped.
Lurkers, speak up.
|
On March 02 2012 09:53 Jackal58 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 09:44 Probulous wrote:I have magic powers! I summon a Jackal and here he appears Seriously though just for clarity's sake, what exactly do you agree with from deconduo? That paperscraps is scum? Yes and also that your location list serves no purpose. And no, sorry, you have no magic powers.
What do you think of misder, for a vet his posts have been pretty lacklustre.
|
On March 02 2012 10:02 deconduo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 09:53 Jackal58 wrote:On March 02 2012 09:44 Probulous wrote:I have magic powers! I summon a Jackal and here he appears Seriously though just for clarity's sake, what exactly do you agree with from deconduo? That paperscraps is scum? Yes and also that your location list serves no purpose. And no, sorry, you have no magic powers. What do you think of misder, for a vet his posts have been pretty lacklustre.
He's picking a fight over an issue that really has no bearing on the game. I've seen other scum do that before. Choose a side on a LaL or lurker argument and beat it to death. Oh wait, that was you!
I'd have no problem lynching either of them.
|
I could see Pandain as scum, I'll explain later, I can't explain now cuz I got school work tho.
|
@Pandain I'm surprised you responded to me. I thought maybe you would ignore my post and show up in another 10 hours with random accusations against someone else.
On March 02 2012 09:18 Pandain wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:On March 02 2012 08:26 Pandain wrote:
AKCT hasn't done anything scummy. At least not anything that we can pinpoint definitively too. Right now your just clouded by the fact they both accused you, and you probably think anyone who supports you is town to. That's a dangerous, oftentimes wrong assumption to make. The_Toast, to the best of day1 analysis can go, is our best bet for right now. I agree on RG. If you have courage take a look at Arkham City (Adam rolls his eyes). He claimed everything under the sun and looked scummy as hell but ended up being a regular vet. The fact that he put together an atrocious case on me and called it so makes him pretty much town in my eyes. Weird play but produced some interesting results. Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't. I am fully aware that townies will target other townies. That happens all the time, that is why people's motivations for posting are important. From what I have seen from Tea he wants to look like he is contributing without contributing. Hence my suspicion. The fact that it was me is irrelevant. AKCT isn't actingi scummy. What was his first post? A vote of you with no explanation. Mafia would never ever EVER do that, that's so suspicious. Mafia are usually careful, and reticent in demeanor(part of why I think The_Toast is mafia). Theres one thing I have suspicions about but as of yet I'm waiting to see what he does about it, and telling him will ruin it. As of now I feel any evidence regarding AKCT is speculative, while more conclusive evidence is elsewhere. Toast's latest response is more interesting actually.... Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 08:55 TheToast wrote:On March 02 2012 07:51 Pandain wrote:I believe Probulous is town, or at least not scummy enough to lynch day 1. He's way too active/aggressive I feel for him to be mafia, although I'll have to look at his previous games for confirmation. I'm most suspicious of The_Toast. Contrary to his last game as town, (filter HERE) he is much more taciturn this game. Compare that with his current posts. All hes done is agree with what others said, and justify his own views(almost guiltily/apolegtic.) Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say. I would say why don't we wait for a few hours and see if we actually have any lurkers. And obvious scum should still be lynched first day one, if there are really no good candidates I would say then we should consider lynching a lurker. But in that case the lurker would be the best candidate, so I still say lynches need to be based on good analysis.
I reiterate: silly lynch rules really only benefit scum. Logical analysis first please. generic, "pro town" advice. wasn't trying to specifically call you out. See the first word in that bolded sentence? "WE" As in ALL of us, together, need to avoid getting side tracked. I'm also unsure how you get me accusing you of "spamming" from me saying we need to avoid getting side tracked.
And to be fair, you did start a side conversation with Misder. I don't know that constitutes "spamming", but it's not going to lead to posts that can provide good analysis one way or the other. Just saying.
I wasn't trying to say you were spamming, I don't know why you are being so defensive about this. Pandain made a point about avoiding outside conversation in the thread, I agreed with that point. I wasn't trying to accuse you of anything. So no, I don't have a problem with it.
And you're right, I do try to think logically. As such I don't think two posts by themselves are enough to prove anyone as scum. #vote the Toast Let me get this straight. You think I'm scum because I'm being too nice? Based on what, the one* other game of mafia I've played? Well then, why don't you take a closer look at that game, you might see that I didn't post any serious analysis or votes until like 24 hours into the game. I prefer to wait until there is a good amount of evidence before making any votes or claims. And why does agreeing with you contribute to my scumminess? Are you now suddenly in favor of conversations that side track the game? Or just in favor of lynching people who agree with you about avoiding conversations that side track the thread? I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided. Pandain right now you have 4 posts in this game. You called out Probulous with some vague accusations: On March 01 2012 12:57 Pandain wrote:
That took a long time to post. Are you hiding something? Then after both probe and sandroba call you out on this, you've very next post is--not responding to either of these--but rather to come out claiming Probulous is town--without a single shred of evidence or analysis--and claiming that I am scum based on scant evidence. Then post #4, have you addressed probe or sandroba's accusations? Nope. You tell Probe (who again, has not mysteriously become townish) that his vote on AKCoT is bad and that tunneling me is the best bet. Pandain, right now I still don't think there is enough evidence against you to make a scum call; but it looks to me like you are desperately trying to focus attention off of yourself. Contrast this tone with the others. Looks like hes trying hard to make a good point(with italics + bolding and shit). Not only that but while writing this post he researched other players(shown by his accusations of me, saying how I had 4 posts, noting my play).
Bolded and italics and shit. Yeah, I never use those. Rock solid analysis. And lol @ the "research part". Wow, I clicked on your filter, crazy hard research.
His accusations of me mean that he could either be a trigger-happy townie, or that he's trying to downplay me. I can't determine anything out of that, actually it sort of helps his case.
I didn't make any accusations, I made some insinuations but no outright accusations. Again, going back to the last game I played (which you seem to like to reference) you will note I really don't like to make any votes or call out anyone as scum without some good analysis and lots of evidence.
This part is quite interesting though: Show nested quote + I love how you quoted me defending you against Probe's accusation as well. Excellent evidence you have provided. I'm interested what you meant by that, Toast. Why would you defending me lend you any town support? How would you know if I'm town?
Are you saying you're not town?? More than anything I was bemused by the fact that you quoted that as evidence against me. Go back to that page, I wasn't arguing that you were town. All I said was that 2 posts weren't enough to support any of Probe's accusations against you. Basically I wanted to prevent a day 1 bandwagoning, and as I have said multiple times now, I prefer to use analysis and evidence before calling anyone out as scum. I was (and still am) completely lost as to how that figured into the rest of your argument about me being too nice and therefore scum.
By far though the most compelling and persuasive argument against him is the fact that he accused me, rather certainly in his opinion, that i was "desperately trying to hide something", and that I'm playing scummily. And yet overall, I'm not a good enough vote? Seems a bit of a paradox there.
Allow me to quote myself, as you apparently didn't read this the first time:
Pandain, right now I still don't think there is enough evidence against you to make a scum call;
Doesn't mean your not scum. Just means I can't prove it yet. The part about you trying to refocus attention has more to do with the fact that you still haven't responded to probe or sandro's posts against you.
|
On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:
Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't.
Excuse me? thats bullshit. I saw something scummy and pointed it out, My reasoning is sound, and your misrepresentation of me does you no favours.
|
On March 02 2012 09:29 Probulous wrote:
My logic is simple really. You insinuated I was spamming/hiding something and but never followed it up. Hence it was a fish. Those that jumped on it are trying to push and discredit me, thus they go on my scummy list until they do something that redeems them.
Bah, you know what, you're pretty blatantly just derp.town at this point. ##Unvote. Did it not occur to you that you were called out on it by multiple people because it was scummy? Its alright though, you're no longer focusing solely on mechanics, and have decided to scumhunt, albeit misguidedly.
|
On March 02 2012 10:46 A Killer Cuppa Tea wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2012 08:49 Probulous wrote:
Tea however jumped at the opportunity to call me scum when everyone else who pushed me, never did. RG clearly didn't believe I was scum or he would have pushed much harder but tea sheeps. Then he tries to explain his sheep with the worst possible logic available. He could be townie who doesn't know what is going on, but if that is the case why jump at me? He wants to look like he is contributing when he isn't.
Excuse me? thats bullshit. I saw something scummy and pointed it out, My reasoning is sound, and your misrepresentation of me does you no favours.
OK maybe you can explain this then, your first post (klicky) doesn'st actually state why you voted for me. I assume it is because of the list. Your point about policy has nothing to do with what you quoted hence my assumption. If you didn't like my policy discussions, as Adam pointed out why me? You even agree with my stance on policy.
On March 02 2012 03:23 A Killer Cuppa Tea wrote:
Also, I'm voting Probulous because of a hunch that basically arose from "we should lynch all lurkers" and then proceeding to spam it up. Looks like it could potentially be scum diverting attention from himself, like
...
EBWOP: also, the majority of his posts had been town-sounding mechanics/theory posts which are incredibly easy for scum to make to help themselves look a lot townier (it's a good strategy!), but very little in the way of actual scumhunting, so they don't have to worry about statements that can come back and haunt them later.
Certain things are always "correct" in a game of mafia. Lurking benefits mafia. No Lynching is bad. Etc... You can't fault a guy for saying something along them lines. But if he Coles out today and says "wow, X is so totally townie"'and X later flips scum, it'll be held against him. By actively posting "correct" mafia theories, it's easy townpoints to be gained.
I opposed LAL so I never said we should lynch lurkers. Your accusation is based on me spamming which I explained earlier, you just ignored that. So far nothing you have written has any substance. Then you say that I am pretending to be town by saying townie things. How that makes sense I have no idea. The only thing you have done this game is actively discredit me with no substance behind it.
I mean what was your actual reason for voting for me?
|
My reason for voting you was a high concentration of Mechanics post coupled with very few Scumhunting posts (at the time). I made that clear in my 2nd post when i realised that it might not have been obvious to everyone that that was what i was getting at (was pretty damned hungover at the time of making that first post). I've explained that its not so much the mechanics/policy posts that are the scummy part, its them at the absence (or infrequency) of anything else. Since then you've started scumhunting proper, which pretty much negates my reason for voting you, and a couple of other things have convinced me of your towniness. Successful probing, imo.
Incidentally, i'd like to stress again that its not your policy that i had a problem with. It was the discussion of policy with a lack of anything else. Its another reason why i dont like discussions on policy alone - too easy for scum to hide there.
|
On March 02 2012 11:26 A Killer Cuppa Tea wrote:
My reason for voting you was a high concentration of Mechanics post coupled with very few Scumhunting posts (at the time). I made that clear in my 2nd post when i realised that it might not have been obvious to everyone that that was what i was getting at (was pretty damned hungover at the time of making that first post). I've explained that its not so much the mechanics/policy posts that are the scummy part, its them at the absence (or infrequency) of anything else. Since then you've started scumhunting proper, which pretty much negates my reason for voting you, and a couple of other things have convinced me of your towniness. Successful probing, imo.
Incidentally, i'd like to stress again that its not your policy that i had a problem with. It was the discussion of policy with a lack of anything else. Its another reason why i dont like discussions on policy alone - too easy for scum to hide there.
Would you vote for misder then?
|
EBWOP: you know what, rereading my post i can totally see where you coulda got the impression that spamming was the problem i had with you. It was a very disjointed post. The reason i (meant to) gave with that post was "People are talking about how lurking is bad. Probulous spams it up, potentially as a result of this anti-lurker sentiment".
It is important to note that often when using one's vote, one acts more sure than one is - otherwise its not much of pressure. I had a scumread on you, sure, but it was a very slight one - and oen that you have since alleviated.
|
ROFL
"People are talking about how lurking is bad. Probulous spams it up, potentially as a result of this anti-lurker sentiment".
That's some serious mental gymnastics. Especially since we have played together before and I posted a lot then too. Anyway, from your response I think you just didn't think through your vote clearly.
##unvote
|
Upon rereading his Filter, yes. yes i could most certainly get behind Misder pressure - in fact, he's doing pretty much exactly what i accused you of doing, but worse (posting a lot less).
##Vote Misder (have i got the syntax right?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
