|
On March 01 2012 13:33 Probulous wrote:
@Misder
I am not advocating analysing a lie. We all agree that lieing is scummy. That is all I meant by using it as a piece of data. Town should not lie unless they absolutely have to and have damn good reasons for it. If you do, it should be counted as evidence towards you being mafia. That is all, just another brick in the wall so to speak. Your case should stand on its own regardless of the lie. If the liar can't show why they did it and they looked scummy already then yes they should be lynched, but be aware that is not a policy lynch.
Again, go right ahead w/ your analysis. If you believe that you can tell if scum is lying about having good reasons or even that town had good reasons to lie, fine.
|
On March 01 2012 13:28 Probulous wrote:
@Toast, did you read my response?
I have now :D
Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say.
On March 01 2012 13:25 Bluelightz wrote:
@TheToast
What do you think about how we should deal with lurkers?
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.
|
On March 01 2012 13:39 TheToast wrote:I have now :D Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say.
See this bugs me. It is the same for Pandain. I am trying to get people to post. I am actively pushing the thread along as best I can. What exactly do we have to avoid here? We are not on a track. I agree with Sandroba that policy talk is useless but it was brought up and I responded to those that asked me questions. However both of you guys are saying that I am spamming the thread with useless information. When I respond with my reasoning, neither of you acknowledge it. Pandain then ignores it and suggests that because I took "so long" writing it, I am hiding something.
How do those things go together? Pandain calls me out for posting too much, but I am hiding something? Does anyone else find this strange?
|
On March 01 2012 13:51 Probulous wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 13:39 TheToast wrote:On March 01 2012 13:28 Probulous wrote:
@Toast, did you read my response? I have now :D Pandain's point is valid none-the-less. We need to avoid getting sidetracked. That's all I was trying to say. See this bugs me. It is the same for Pandain. I am trying to get people to post. I am actively pushing the thread along as best I can. What exactly do we have to avoid here? We are not on a track. I agree with Sandroba that policy talk is useless but it was brought up and I responded to those that asked me questions. However both of you guys are saying that I am spamming the thread with useless information. When I respond with my reasoning, neither of you acknowledge it. Pandain then ignores it and suggests that because I took "so long" writing it, I am hiding something. How do those things go together? Pandain calls me out for posting too much, but I am hiding something? Does anyone else find this strange?
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.
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.
|
You said you agreed with Pandain, his accusation was that I am spamming. Hence you think I am spamming. What exactly are we getting sidetracked from? The only thing we can analyse is what people post. If people don't post, then we can't analyse. We don't have any defined targets, we have no direction, we have nothing right now.
As for Misder, I don't like policies, he did. We discussed it. We agreed to disagree. Problem? That is the only thing of substance in this thread so far.
Toast, I know you think logically. Do you find this post scummy?
On March 01 2012 12:57 Pandain wrote:
That took a long time to post. Are you hiding something?
|
On March 01 2012 14:15 Probulous wrote:You said you agreed with Pandain, his accusation was that I am spamming. Hence you think I am spamming. What exactly are we getting sidetracked from? The only thing we can analyse is what people post. If people don't post, then we can't analyse. We don't have any defined targets, we have no direction, we have nothing right now. As for Misder, I don't like policies, he did. We discussed it. We agreed to disagree. Problem? That is the only thing of substance in this thread so far. Toast, I know you think logically. Do you find this post scummy? Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 12:57 Pandain wrote:
That took a long time to post. Are you hiding something?
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.
|
Fair enough. I don't like how he was insinuating that I had something to hide when I responded to his accusation of spamming. He didn't have an issue with my reasoning (apparently) but he did have an issue with how long I took to reply (10 minutes, though I was responding to Misder at the time). You're right it is not enough to call someone scum, but it is worth noting.
Well work is over, I'll see you guys tomorrow. Happy scum hunting!
|
Hey everybody! 
Just got home from school.
The Probulous spam makes me laugh.
I am cool with lynching all lurkers. Hopefully this will be an active game, so we don't have to resort to such measures. I am excited to play with a few more vets in this game, than my previous games.
Quality of posts > Quantity of posts
|
Well, Sorry I went blank for a while >< Had to turn of the computer ><
Anyway, I gotta go now :3, See you guys back when I reach home.
P.S Also hope to see more people post!
|
On March 01 2012 13:02 sandroba wrote:
I'm kinda bore with Lynch all Liars/Lurkers talk. This game we shall try something new: Lynch whoever I tell you to lynch and win. It works wonders.
Your chances of surviving another night are now halved,sir.
Best way to start this is with a feeler vote, so
##Vote: Probulous
On March 01 2012 12:41 Probulous wrote:
Thanks for the reminder Adam. For reference
Player List:
1. Jackal58 - USA
2. Paperscraps - USA
3. Bluelightz - Indonesia
4. Probulous - Great Southern Land
5. Snarfs - Kanucksland
6. rgTheSchworz - Romania
7. Misder - Fairy Land AKA who the fucks knows
8. Pandain - USA
9. Palmar - Iceland
10. Sandroba - USA
11. TheToast - USA
12. Adam4167 - Land Down under
13. A Killer Cuppa Tea - Neighbours with Misder
14. deconduo - Ireland
This is what I have for countries based on profiles. Misder and Tea where are you boys based?
Arguing with Misder about lynching liars and lurkers is unproductive.
We all knew beforehand that most players were gonna be US-based, so why bother with a list?
Besides,duh, its in the profile, and we only have 14 players, not veery hard to remember.
This ,,friendly chat,, provides the opportunity for scum to blend in perfectly.They arent forced in any way to react scummy, and can just sheep the towniest around.Your spam, Probulous, doesnt inspire me, because indeed it is spam.If we are gonna discuss strategy, then let it be based on names, which we can hold accountable on further days.
If not, just vote between posting. A feeler vote D1 is absolutely justified,as long as you are willing to change who you are voting for once you have a strong suspicion.It provides pressure on normally presureless D1 s for scum.Waiting for scum to fuck up is lame, lets make em fuck up.
Ive randomed a purely awesome role this game.
|
On March 01 2012 16:28 rgTheSchworz wrote:Show nested quote +On March 01 2012 13:02 sandroba wrote:
I'm kinda bore with Lynch all Liars/Lurkers talk. This game we shall try something new: Lynch whoever I tell you to lynch and win. It works wonders. Your chances of surviving another night are now halved,sir.
Why is this?
Granted hes trolling, but I don't see why this statement would make anyone any more or less likely to kill him.
|
yo guys, I rolled Vanilla Townie.
Also, I think sandroba's plan is actually excellent.
|
like seriously, if sandroba or I turn out to be town, you should probably just do whatever we tell you to do.
|
On March 01 2012 18:55 Palmar wrote:
like seriously, if sandroba or I turn out to be town, you should probably just do whatever we tell you to do.
You roll scum this game Palmar? If you were town, you would know it. You wouldn't "turn out to be town".
@rg. Ok you have felt me. Honestly what is a feeler? Call me when you're serious.
|
Do you think that's a valid question Probulous? Do you honestly think I would scumslip? The obvious (and correct) explanation was that I meant post-death. ie: if I get shot and flip, please re-read what I said and consider that I may have been right.
However, the fact that you jump on it is interesting to me, and why do you do it in such a soft way? Do you actually think that I might be scum because of this? Or are you just looking for an easy opportunity to discredit me?
|
OK, how are we meant to do whatever you tell us to do if you meant after your death?
Do you plan on communicating from beyond the grave?
|
On March 01 2012 12:41 Probulous wrote:
Thanks for the reminder Adam. For reference
Player List:
1. Jackal58 - USA
2. Paperscraps - USA
3. Bluelightz - Indonesia
4. Probulous - Great Southern Land
5. Snarfs - Kanucksland
6. rgTheSchworz - Romania
7. Misder - Fairy Land AKA who the fucks knows
8. Pandain - USA
9. Palmar - Iceland
10. Sandroba - USA
11. TheToast - USA
12. Adam4167 - Land Down under
13. A Killer Cuppa Tea - Neighbours with Misder
14. deconduo - Ireland
This is what I have for countries based on profiles. Misder and Tea where are you boys based?
I'm from the UK. I'm also preeeeeetty fucking hungover right now. Drank way too much last night.
As for policy talk, it's not only non-productive, it's also potentially harming in that it may help scum figure out how we scum hunt and use that information against us. If you have your own personal "policies", sure, but don't lynch based purely on them.
In fact, the only policy that i am even willing to discuss is "Always Lynch/NoLynch is Bad (except in MYLO).
Finally, Vote: Probulus
|
I know you're just going to reiterate what you already said 'please reread what i said and consider that i may have been right'
But doesn't that just go without saying? Isn't that what everyone does when a townie flips? consider that they may have been right
|
That's dumb.
No, what I mean is that for some reason it's still a viable strategy for mafia on TL to shoot good townies because the derp townies will ignore what the good townies had to say once the good townies are dead, and pursue their own bad ideas. What I am suggesting for this game is that whenever a townie, especially a recognizable good town player like myself or sandroba, flips, people go back and re-read their suspicions and concerns.
Mafia needs to not be able to get away with just killing the people who happen to be right, and then relying on the rest just being wrong and derping their way to a loss.
|
On March 01 2012 20:34 Adam4167 wrote:
I know you're just going to reiterate what you already said 'please reread what i said and consider that i may have been right'
But doesn't that just go without saying? Isn't that what everyone does when a townie flips? consider that they may have been right
That's what should happen, not what usually actually happens. Remember xlviii where syllogism the vigilante flipped and it was basically certain that he tried to shoot annul (the mafia who claimed taking a hit) during the night. I read syllo's posts and saw that he was most likely correct about annul, however rest of town simply ignored the case, and syllo wasn't alive to help me push it.
Honestly, the most help I got that game in support of my theory that syllo was right was from sandroba (the scum) who felt that he had to agree to me because disagreeing was so dumb that it'd give him away. Thankfully for mafia, the rest of town WERE THAT DUMB, and the game imploded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
