EPTTL Mafia LIV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On May 03 2012 07:39 johnnywup wrote: It's fairly natural to think "blue, power role" right away if you don't think about Blue vs Red flavor. is the thought process blubb went through then you should be backing up Matt because blubb was blue fishing. Your own reasoning makes blubb's actions scummy johnny, yet you attack Matt instead. ##FOS: johnnywup | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On May 03 2012 08:06 Blazinghand wrote: Indeed, if someone came in and said that in another game, I'd be quite confused. However, if I were a town player in a game where the name my role was BLU Depressed Soldier, I would not be confused at all. That's the point SA and I are making. This man is making sense. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
BM, your initial posts rubbed me the wrong way. I can't put my finger on it, but I definitely want to hear more from you. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
##Vote: Palmar | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
which can hardly be considered of much value. Palmar is a big boy. He can defend himself, and you should let him. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
How is fitting the definition of a chainsaw defense wrong? | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I have never played with Palmar before, but I do know he is a recognized player that people are going to listen to for no other reason than his name. If any unknown player was to post like Palmar has so far he would be tuned out until he starting making real contributions. The fact that Palmar is supposed to be a decent player but shows no interest in contributing is anti-town to me. As for shutting down conversation instead of promoting it. Marvel and Matt both tried to engage Palmar only to be deflected or belittled by him. It may be true, as you say, that Palmar playing anti-town has gotten me talking. But that is hardly the act of a townie. To intentionally act anti-town in order to draw people to attacking you is something I have only ever seen once before from a townie. It was bad then and got him killed. It is bad now if that is what Palmar is doing. The one point I will grant you is that I obviously have a read on Palmar (anti-town) or I would not have voted him. I'm just as guilty of holding Palmar to a different standard as the rest of you. The difference being that while I see some of you excusing him posting crap because of his reputation, I see someone who has the potential to lead the town but is instead acting against the town. That is enough for me to vote him. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
##Unvote: Palmar The 2 people I have been looking at as suspicious for a while now are Layabout and Katina. -Layabout caught my eye with his first post. On May 03 2012 08:04 layabout wrote: I just want to warn all of the "area 53" guys that policy lynching is no better an option in this game than it ever was before. I know that a few of you are currently feeling like we should place all lurkers and confusing posters into the fire. But the majority of those players will be town and lynching into them is likely to kill (admittedly useless) townies. We are going to be polite in this game. We are going to vote at appropriate times. We are going to act in town's interest's using methods that are simple and explainable. And we are going to destroy red. This post came largely out of nowhere. It seems like a very standard opener, but it had no relevance to the state of the thread at that point. And the addressing the few of us that wanted to put lurkers and confusing lurkers to death is also strange as none of those people had spoken up yet. This post sounded to me like Layabout was not comfortable chiming in on the current situation (attacking/defending blubb's play) and instead made this post which looks pretty standard and safe, but in context is completely out of place. However, even this on top of points others have made is not enough to earn my vote because of Katina. -Katina I believe I have caught in a lie. When I first read this post it rang a bell for me but it did not connect until I reread it yesterday. On May 03 2012 08:39 Katina wrote: Mr. Blazinghand I say this once and once only. I'm not mafia. Point your Blazinghand at someone who actually deserves it. I was reminded of this TED talk. Start just after the 7minute mark as that is what I am referring to.
2. Italicized- qualifying language. 3. Bolded- A 'stop wasting time' statement very similar to Pres. Clinton's in the clip. That is the core of my case against Katina but there are a few other things worth noting like this post: On May 03 2012 08:37 Katina wrote: This comes right before the above quote. It shows a pretty sudden change in attitude and tone as well as making a claim that does nothing to exonerate him. In this post it is all pronouns, a smilie, a statement designed to mollify BH. ("That's all I was getting at") Then, not 2 minutes later when Katina gears up to deny being scum we get the switch to formal language and a frustrated tone. O.o I think you are grabbing at air here. It's suspicious that he was quick to throw suspicion and blame. Mafia like to shift people's attention onto a person. That's all I was getting at. He also says this, "Mafia like to shift people's attention onto a person." This is an incredibly generic statement that serves no purpose. It could be said that this is exactly what Katina has done in these posts: (1)(2)(3) Which still does not mean anything because I'm pretty sure I could make a list like that for most the people in this game. So what is the point? To demonstrate that Katina is scumhunting? using a standard that would make virtually all of us guilty? ##Vote: Katina | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
You all seem to be avoiding having an opinion on the main part of my post. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On May 05 2012 04:46 layabout wrote: DoYouHas, how come you didn't notice that you thought that my post was scummy until two other people had literally just called me scum? I made note of that first post as soon as I read it, but it is hardly convincing by itself. Then I was busy going after Palmar. Other people going after you IS what prompted me to mention my own observation about you, but it is not what brought you to my attention in the first place. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I should have a new case ready for you guys before I go to sleep tonight. But for now I'm headed out. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Unfortunately I have a very busy day tomorrow that I need to get some sleep for. I'm not going to have time to rewrite or post my case until tomorrow evening (it is almost midnight here). I'll still try to check up on the thread but don't expect anything significant until then. Gnight. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Here is a summary of my points against PM: -His votes on Grush and BM were poorly justified. -He went after slOosh both when he was correct about sinani and when he was correct about Katina. -He repeatedly brought up BH's mistakes in past games which I think served to undermine the town leadership role BH was establishing. -Starting with this post Katina seemed like a buzzword for PM. Mentioning Katina seems to draw more attention from PM than is warranted IMO. Those were the highlights of why I find PM suspicious. Right now it seems as if most of the focus is going onto layabout and NT. Layabout earned the attention he garnered but at the same time I think he defended himself fairly well and is producing content. I'm not going to vote him unless someone produces a clean and convincing case or summary of previous cases against him. (I will admit that my thoughts regarding layabout have become a little muddled.) NT is also deservedly under threat. His play style seems so far off of what I saw from his Godfather play in the newbie I cohosted. I expected fairly spammy play from him. I would not be upset with him being lynched today in spite of his promises of more activity in the near future. Blubb I think deserves to be thrust back into the frontrunners for today's lynch. I intend to do just that with my next post. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I suppose I should start with far and away the scummiest of blubbdavid's posts and then tack on all the extras after to seal the deal. On May 07 2012 04:27 blubbdavid wrote: 1. Somethingawesome, still think I am not scum? 2. How about you lynch me, or are you too cautious because it could reveal your whole scumplan? I need action, not words. 3. You are buddying up with layabout instead of scumhunting. Cast your vote on the one you think is the most scummy player. You say that I know layabout's alignment (mind reading), BUT: Is my concern illegitimate? You are circling around the actual matter: Why did layabout push BM so hard? Come on, tell me. 4. Furthermore: BM was a lurker, and yes, a lynch on him wouldn't have been out-of-normal, but the intensity with which layabout has pushed BM surprised me. And I have been pushing on lay since I saw that he wanted to policy lynch BM although he vowed not to policy lynch. about Palm: Seems like the first option was true. grush: I may have sheeped on this vote, I admit but I didn't sheep with the vote of layabout I want to see some action of you, SA. 1. This is awkwardly phrased considering SA had just said that he thinks blubb is scum. 2. Daring SA to try and lynch you? Where is this coming from? For someone who has played the "my bad, don't hold it against me" card as well as a "I give up" defense this is extremely out of character and scummy. Not only that, he states his read that SA is scum because SA doesn't want to vote for him yet which immediately makes his next statement absurd. 3. This is the part that really got me wanting to lynch blubb. Let us think about this ridiculous scenario that blubb has put forth between SA and layabout. Supposedly at this point blubb believes both SA and layabout to be scum, or at the very least highly suspicious. So in what world does it make sense that one scum(SA) is going to 'buddy' ANOTHER SCUM(laya), another scum who just happens to be under a fair bit of scrutiny atm. Even forgetting the scrutiny part it doesn't make sense. In blubb's attempt to defend against SA's claim that blubb seemed to know people's roles he slips again and gives us this buddying scenario. The only way that it can possibly make sense is if blubb KNOWS that layabout is town. 4. Didn't sheep the vote of layabout, true, but then there is this: On May 05 2012 06:49 blubbdavid wrote: For someone who has been fixated on attacking others (mainly layabout) for pushing a BM lynch you were awful ready to jump on the train to secure the lynch. Ok thx. So I won't switch to BM. Part 2 On May 05 2012 02:54 blubbdavid wrote: I am also willing to lynch BM if there's no majority on grush. But: What even more important is than lynching scum D1is obtaining information. A BM lynch wouldn't us give much info, assuming he is scum. I still want to see panda's take on grush before I set my vote in stone. And lol, there's no way BM is going to be modkilled. Seriously, obtaining information is more important than lynching scum D1 according to blubb. This is the reasoning he uses to say that BM was a bad lynch. This is just so incredibly wrong from a town POV. Lynch a lurker scum d1 you get all the info of the people fighting/pushing the lynch + the chance to get rid of a scum power + YOU JUST KILLED SCUM, CMON. On May 06 2012 19:50 blubbdavid wrote: I see, Blazinghand is switching cases so it looks like he doesn't sheep l10f. Well, jdup has made a good post regarding layabout's behaviour It took scum by surprise that Kat was modkilled. blubb quotes JW's good post on laya's behavior and then does what? Reinforce a point(s) he liked? no. Expand or provide further analysis? no. What we get is this statement, "It took scum by surprise that Kat was modkilled." What purpose does this serve? This statement isn't, "I also think it took scum by surprise that Kat was modkilled." or "If it took scum by surprise that Kat was modkilled then...". I think that the lack of relevance paired with the certainty on something that shouldn't have been able to go past speculation makes this likely to be a scumslip. Part 3 Inconsistencies and WIFOM: On May 04 2012 19:31 blubbdavid wrote: I have no read on Nova, he is pretty neutral atm. And I will stop tunneling grush for the time being, maybe he will come up with something useful. Still, I would be interested in papapanda's opinion. And katina, do some scumhunting. What is your opinion on grush? blubb calls out Katina which normally would mean that blubb would have taken note of Katina's past posts as well as be waiting for a response to this call out. Then we get this: On May 05 2012 05:36 blubbdavid wrote: ^yeah, everyone will probably jump a wagon. and layabout, you seem to be very very defensive, considering the fact that you only have 2 votes on you. I have to look into katina yet. This is after I made my case and slOosh had switched his vote. A consistent blubb would already have been up to date on Katina and this comment would have been either been accepting, refuting, or critiquing my case instead of playing at being ignorant. WIFOM: On May 05 2012 05:55 blubbdavid wrote: I have a suspicion: What if BM is scum, but doesn't want to play/ doesn't have time, so he sacrifices himself for the other scum? There are a few more examples of each I could pull for this section, but I feel like I would just be diluting my argument. TLDR: blubbdavid is scum, scumming scum ##Vote: blubbdavid | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
On May 08 2012 03:37 Mementoss wrote: I am here, will re-go through Nova and Blubbs cases. Is there any specific reason why you would think Blubb is worth lynching over Nova? Personally, I feel my case against blubb is stronger than those I have read against Nova (not that those cases are wrong) and so a blubb lynch is more likely to be a scum lynch. I think both are scummy. I suppose it makes sense to lynch blubb first because Nova has stated that he is about to have much more time to commit to the game. I'm willing to see what comes of that. I would need to reread all the hubub surrounding Nova to give you more concrete reasons, and I'm just not up to that before this deadline (tired). Layabout - Votes stand even at 5-5 on Nova and blubb. If you genuinely think blubb is the better lynch like I do then stick with it. We need to see how the next hour to hour 1/2 play out before we compromise in order to get a lynch. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
I feel pretty comfortable picking our next lynch from the group of Johnny, layabout, nova, and KP. I'm going to need to do some serious reviewing before I know which I want to lynch over the others though. I know that a number of you have already picked your pony for d3 (probably because I usurped you with the blubb train) but I would really appreciate it if we could present complete cases for d3 to work from. Even if that means you are repeating points from earlier in the game. The recent posts on Johnny and layabout are a nice step in this direction. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
Gogo town, make me proud. | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
 | ||
|
DoYouHas
United States1140 Posts
| ||
| ||
