|
On May 30 2012 14:37 Mattchew wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 14:31 Mr. Wiggles wrote:On May 30 2012 14:13 Mattchew wrote:On May 30 2012 14:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On May 30 2012 09:00 strongandbig wrote:
Could Mattchew have been a vig shot? MZ and Foru make way more sense as scum kills but Mattchew doesn't make any sense there. This post to me seems to display no indication of knowledge of the night kills, just that your shot claim doesn't make sense as a scum one. and yours does? + Show Spoiler [WBG Filter Pre-night] +On May 30 2012 04:40 wherebugsgo wrote:
Catching up right now.
If anyone needs anything specific let me know, but it'll be a couple hours at the least before I can respond. On May 30 2012 06:26 wherebugsgo wrote:why I love supersoft Show nested quote +On May 27 2012 22:58 supersoft wrote:
PFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF TOADESSTERN :D my thoughts exactly whenever I read his posts LOL I come across first Toad post = oh god wtf On May 30 2012 06:34 wherebugsgo wrote:
Is there a particular reason Gambitx32 wasn't warned or replaced for not voting? I ctrl-f'd his name in greymist's filter and didn't find anything there either.
I have a scumread on him based on his only two posts in the thread. Both of his posts are massive walls of summarizing nothing. He also asks On May 30 2012 06:35 wherebugsgo wrote:
oh wtf it cut off.
He asks a bunch of people to state who they're going to vote and stuff but he doesn't vote himself. Why has no one questioned you about your claimed hit? He knew I was not hit by mafia, so he wanted to out the vig that shot me because thats what scum do when they don't know everything. They try to find it out Matt, I think you're grasping a bit here, and I disagree. Strongandbig wasn't asking for the vig to claim, he was just asking the thread if they thought you made sense as a vig shot. Frankly, you'd be a confusing mafia shot, since you hadn't done much in the thread, and people were suspicious of you. WBG on the other hand, may have been shot for bringing up a lurker who was scum (gambit), or he could have been shot on reputation alone to kill a vet when he'd be more unlikely to have protection or make an impact on the game. So, it makes sense to me for strongandbig to question your hit, since it didn't make much sense for scum to hit you. It made more sense for a vig to hit you. I don't think you can use that post as a point against him. Right now I'm trying to determine who I think is scummiest/want to lynch from kitaman/supersoft/zealos/gambit. God hindsight is 20/20 in this thread... Obviously now that people know I wasn't actually hit its super easy to say "omg you weren't a scum target thats so obvi duhhh" but before all the other hit claims no one said this except ET and SnB. And ET did not discount that scum shot me, he just expressed interest in it
man are you dumb? That was 90% of the reason I was calling you scum. Both SnB and I thought the hit claim you were claiming had to either be a lie or a vig hit. Obviously there was no way scum would shoot you.
Lying about it makes no sense as town, because you get situations like these. Now let's move on.
We lynch gambit man, since he still hasn't appeared and his first two posts are still the same shit they were the last time I read them.
|
The reason G32 is better than a phagga lynch is cause phagga didn't vote.
Most scum will vote just to stay alive but townies who go legitimately inactive won't usually vote without actually coming back to play.
|
we have 8? voters out of 28 players LOL
I'm fine with killing Zealos, it seems as if the arguments we're having indicate that they're either both scum or both so terrible that they shouldn't live anyway.
Zealos was saying he was going to be out till sometime through day 2 because of exams or something like that. I want to see what he says now that he's probably done with that stuff.
|
It is in 24.
Supposing that what Toad is saying is true then we shouldn't touch Gambit for now. I'm going to reread stuff again and see if anyone other than Zealos stands out.
##unvote
##vote Zealos
|
On May 31 2012 06:21 Toadesstern wrote:
I could be totally wrong and it's just a random thing he called me "mason recruited" instead of mason but as I said, that really made me think he might be a mason as well. But it was a thought and therefore I'd say we just wait to see if that was some kind of coincidence.
And obviously when I was referring to the gay-phone-session from AC I am referring to a phone-session without killing in the end. I'm not that mean.
are you a mason recruiter or just a mason?
If you're not a "mason recruiter" then I don't see why gambit should be considered town.
|
actually as this is a normal game I see no reason to speculate about the possibility of there being a phone booth in this game.
|
if we're going to lynch into vets I'd much rather kill kita over VE.
On May 31 2012 06:31 EchelonTee wrote:^ tons of us weren't in that game. What's differnece btwn mason and mason recruiter? I can't honestly believe that all of: Wiggles, Kita, MZ, VE, BH, WBG are ALL town. That would be like. OP. If I can't build a case on any of you, then I would support lynching one of Manason, G32, or Zealos, but I feel like going for a controversial lynch would yield bigger dividends. Higher risk, higher reward.
MZ and I are basically confirmed town unless forumite took two shots. Also, I shouldn't truthfully be on a list with vets because I replaced in for a really inactive new townie.
So that leaves Wiggles, Kita, VE, BH and probably a couple others (like kenpachi, you, marv etc)
Out of those players I find a kita lynch the most acceptable. BH's activity has dropped off quite a bit and so he doesn't look as good as the others but kita looks by far the worst. He plays a very good scum game and it makes sense that the reads on him are only by feel, but there are specific things that I came across when reading his posts that made me question his alignment (though I failed to write them down)
When I go back and read through the thread again later tonight I'll put up my thoughts on the matter. For now though I think lynching into Zealos or Gambit is fine.
|
I take back what I said earlier about the mason thing:
Not all of these roles will be in the game, but all roles in the game will either be on this list, or be variations of roles on this list.
I suppose it is possible. Toad you need to be clear about this. Are you a mason recruiter or just a mason? If you die do you leave behind a QT that the people you add can use?
Also on SnB: I agree with what ET just said, I don't think SnB's attitude is indicative of him being scum. Mattchew you're just tunneled too far IMO. We could be wrong but I don't think a mafia SnB would be as bold about his opinions as he has been so far. That's a pretty rare characteristic even among experienced scum.
|
oh there's supersoft, I forgot he's playing this game.
probably town though
|
On May 31 2012 06:44 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2012 06:38 VisceraEyes wrote:
MZ like Kitaman, your case is misinterpretation of my actions and exaggerating the importance of me not wanting Toad in office. Please do better sir. Please. If this is the halfway point, the other half better be REAL good bro. The first part is enough to hang you, the second part will just be icing on the cake. Also btw everyone, that's what an analysis looks like. I frankly do not give a shit how so and so acted in some game from 2 months ago. I want you to tell me why so and so is scum THIS GAME. Meta is a useful tool, however I see a lot of people with no idea what they're doing trying to base entire arguments off of meta which is ridiculous. I don't care how someone is acting compared to the last game. Unless you can give relevant and referenced examples of their play in another game I'm not even going to pay attention (and no, just blindly linking someone's filter doesn't count, you have to explain why it's relevant). Town has been playing like shit so far today, not because people are playing bad, just because they're playing lazy. If you wanna talk about previous games then know this, lazy townies lost the last game I was in. I will not stand by and repeat that. So next time you accuse someone, you better have a damn good reason.
the last game wasn't lost by lazy townies, it was lost by people not using their brains.
I agree that we shouldn't be lazy but let's not fearmonger, yeah? I don't agree with your VE case and I don't think it's a very good idea to be trying to kill him right now. VE's play is fairly hard to read and he tends to do things that other players do not as town. He's fairly active and bold as both alignments and so what we need to do is force him to take sides on issues that matter.
I.E, if he's scum we need to force him to bus all of them.
|
On May 31 2012 07:18 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 18:34 Zealos wrote:
Right so, here are my thoughts:
SnB - He's seemed "Fishy" this game so far, and I would be happy to FoS him, however, I don't think there is enough there to say it is a good lynch. I'd like to see him post more thoughts though.
Thoughts on Mayor: If possible, would the best mayor be the one that chooses the day1 lynch based off of a vote from town? Seems like this would be the most pro-town play?
Pardoner: Whoever agree's not to use the power ever seems to be the best bet. Yes, in some select scenario's it might be good to use it, but that seems to just be giving an excuse to any mafia player that could convince people that make him pardoner to use the power.
Now some of my reads: Toad - Seems to be very town provided he can prove it using his "mason" powers. If not, we can lynch him tomorrow.
BE - Leaning on town. His arguments earlier were annoying, but nothing that led me to think he's scum.
Hyaah - ???? Lurker, could well be scum, want to hear what he has to say about the game so far.
If I were to kill someone now: Sinesis - Been said before, but he's tunnelling very hard and doesn't seem willing to add anything to conversation except kill Grush. Who are your other scumreads? Who are you voting for as mayor and why?
I'd also like to note - I'm pretty lurky Day1 atm, I'm pretty busy, however, I'll have finished my last exam come midway through day2, and will become a lot more active then. Bugs I want your thoughts on this post, the bolded in particular. Here are mine. There's a cognitive disconnect between the "Toad seems to be very town" and "provided he can prove it using his 'mason' powers." The first part seems to indicate that he thinks Toad is town based on how he's posting (" looks very town"), while the second part seems to indicate that he does NOT think that Toad looks town and requires the proof of Toad's mason-target claim would provide (" provided he can prove it using his mason powers"). What do you think?
I don't think that you can come to your conclusion based on that because he doesn't really suggest anything in other posts nor even in this one that he finds Toad to look town. It could be a semantic thing where he just thinks that Toad is town if he can prove he's a mason and if he's not he's lying scum. The dichotomy is obvious to anyone and I don't think this sentence in particular means anything.
More interesting to me from that post is his sinensis sheep and how he calls out SnB but isn't willing to vote him and how he is aware of his own lurkiness.
|
ok VE just did two incredibly scummy things.
First of all supersoft pointed out something very valid: VE was all for pushing zealos but not actually putting his vote where his mouth was.
Five minutes after supersoft posts this, VE makes a post unvoting gambit and voting Zealos.
That's scummy thing #1.
Scummy thing #2 is when some random guy comes in the thread and calls Hyaach scummy. VE immediately lets go of his Zealos vote and then votes Hyaach.
It's like he has no sense of consolidation and he's just going with the flavor of the moment. This is what he did in LI where I came in the thread and said "hey hassybaby is scummy" and then VE voted hassy after I voted him, and kept saying how he was willing to kill him but changed his vote later anyway.
The only problem is that in recent games VE has been willing to put together a bunch of names as scum all at once and he hasn't been afraid of calling them all out regardless of how strong the actual cases are (though he himself feels strongly about them, I suppose) usually though he tunnels at least one of the players. Right now I'm not feeling like VE has any sort of real conviction, and at the very least town VE has balls.
|
On May 31 2012 12:35 VisceraEyes wrote:
I have balls Bugs...they're huge.
The thing is this: it's almost a whole day from the lynch as opposed to the lynch being today as I thought it was. There's plenty of time for consolidation, and I intend to consolidate when the time comes.
Why is my willingness to lynch scummy lurkers more suspicious than MZ and Kita's lack of vote Bugs? Can you answer me that?
Did you forget that MZ actually took a hit?
So unless you consider MZ to be lying about taking a shot to the face, I don't even know why you're asking me about him.
Yeah, I find kita scummy, but lack of a vote isn't actually as scummy as the constant change of vote onto the flavor of the moment. If you're going to constantly change your vote based on whoever is being called scum at any given moment why even vote at all?
|
On May 31 2012 12:38 VisceraEyes wrote:
Because Probulous' case on Hyaach is better than yours on Gambit Bugs, get over it.
I'm not even voting Gambit anymore.
Or are you forgetting that you voted Zealos as well?
Care to explain why you're calling nonvoters like kita scummy when the number of nonvoters is something like 18? You think they're all scum, or that all of the scum are in there?
(and I think kita just ninja voted, or at least it's a ninja vote till he explains it here)
|
On May 31 2012 12:35 VisceraEyes wrote:
I have balls Bugs...they're huge.
The thing is this: it's almost a whole day from the lynch as opposed to the lynch being today as I thought it was. There's plenty of time for consolidation, and I intend to consolidate when the time comes.
Why is my willingness to lynch scummy lurkers more suspicious than MZ and Kita's lack of vote Bugs? Can you answer me that?
On May 30 2012 09:53 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 09:48 wherebugsgo wrote:
Shut up Toad you're not worth a mafia bullet. You cause so much disruption regardless of alignment it's no wonder everyone calls you hypnotoad.
We kill gambit man today. He ninja voted ET yesterday and he's said nothing. Eat shit and die, scum.
##vote Gambitx32 Whoa there buddy, we don't lynch lurkers here...we shoot scummy lurkers with holy bullets of townie fury....not hang them. How about we lynch someone who's posting so we can get information with our lynch?Ya? No? I like your target other than the fact that his lynch will net us no new information.
On May 30 2012 10:00 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 09:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
No, I lynch scum and scum exist indiscriminately of their posting activity.
If we had no vigis and all 6 scum lurked, by your plan none of them would ever die. Can't have that, now can we? We absolutely can't, and if I were convinced that all 6 scum were lurking I'd definitely be down with lynching a scummy lurker...but as it stands, D2, I personally would rather find active scum. You can count on my support if it's needed though Bugs... Gambit has definitely gotta go one way or the other.
On May 31 2012 06:32 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2012 06:30 Toadesstern wrote:On May 31 2012 06:25 VisceraEyes wrote:
The more I think about it the less that makes sense Toad. Think about it - two phone-booth circles going on simultaneously? I can't even wrap my brain around the implications, and if that's the case I'm going to literally eat my hat. I know, I thought the same but I'm not sure  Maybe there's some variations idk How many games (Outside Responsibility) have you heard of that include different variations of the same role? I mean, is it possible? Yeah...obviously anything is possible. Probable? Meh. MEH. I don't think so sir. I think Gambit is a fine choice...Bugs, don't get buyer's remorse. Gambit is a fine lynch.
On May 31 2012 08:29 VisceraEyes wrote:
##Unvote: Gambit
##Vote: Zealos
No I can get down on this lynch. I think they're both scum at this point, and I think this is the motivation behind this VE push.
On May 31 2012 09:46 VisceraEyes wrote:
I support a lynch of Hyaach....in fact, I agree that his flip will be more telling of important parties based on what I'm seeing in your case, so hell yeah.
Everyone in town should read Probulous' case because it's actually good.
Something to note Probulous is the fact that Kitaman promised to take a closer look at Hyaach specifically BECAUSE he chose him as his random candidate. I wonder what the fruits of those observations has been.
##Unvote: Zealos
##Vote: Hyaach
On May 31 2012 12:38 VisceraEyes wrote:
Because Probulous' case on Hyaach is better than yours on Gambit Bugs, get over it.
Other than those last two posts there's almost no mention of hyaach in your filter at all.
You know what you're doing, VE? You're letting other people do work, then sheeping them. Sheeping the flavor of the moment. That's what scum do, because if they create cases they have to take responsibility for those cases. It also involves work.
Scum are lazy. They like pulling the strings from the shadows because when townies get lynched the people who take the fall are the ones out in the open doing the dirty work.
You're not doing any of the dirty work, VE. You're not making cases and you're not pushing lynches. You're sheeping them, and you've openly admitted that the sole reason you're not voting Gambit nor Zealos is because Probulous seemingly made a "stronger" case on Hyaach.
Clearly you have not thought about a hyaach lynch nor did you even pay attention to him before. There was no indication of that in your filter.
You also contradicted yourself and are trying to make others look bad instead of yourself. It's like you don't like the attention all of a sudden.
So, all of MZ/kita/hyaach/zealos/gambit look bad, eh? Why is it that you seem to have no confidence or drive to actually make a proper read of any of these players?
|
On May 31 2012 12:41 VisceraEyes wrote:
Because they actually have CASES Bugs. They're both gunning for me and only NOW want to vote for me? That strikes me as hella odd considering one of MZ's main contentions with me was my lack of vote on Kita early D2.
yes, as opposed to you; you have no cases.
lol. Kita gives me scummy vibes and I can't pin it for now but it doesn't make you any better. I truly have no reason to defend your play given how you are acting right now; you don't seem to be concerned at all with finding scum.
|
On May 31 2012 12:48 VisceraEyes wrote:
BECAUSE YOU STUNNED ME INTO SILENCE ABOUT MY READS IN MTG BUGS
kk this is all my fault.
I get it.
|
On May 31 2012 12:51 VisceraEyes wrote:
No it's not, it's mine...I let you mind-fuck me hard in that game (regardless of your alignment which is still unknown)...to the point where I'm not even sure if this is the game for me anymore.
It's not your fault, but it's a direct result of your actions against me in that game. It's destroyed my confidence in my reads and even myself.
ooooooookaaaaay.
we can't really discuss that game but it's irrelevant since I'm town in both. That's all I'll say. Your play was still mind boggling and I still don't understand it.
Moving on, right now the problem is that you're sheeping cases and you say MZ and kita are suspicious for not voting you but you think I'm suspicious of you because of your apparent willingness to lynch scummy lurkers.
That's not the problem. The problem is that you jump ship every time a new name comes along. You ask irrelevant and distracting questions (like why am I not focused on scummy MZ over here) when it's public knowledge that the primary reason MZ is not and probably never will be suspicious is because of a game mechanic (his shot claim)
|
I realize the "this is the problem" "this is not the problem" part came out really weird but I don't think it needs any further explanation.
|
On May 31 2012 13:08 Probulous wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2012 12:54 wherebugsgo wrote:
That's not the problem. The problem is that you jump ship every time a new name comes along. You ask irrelevant and distracting questions (like why am I not focused on scummy MZ over here) when it's public knowledge that the primary reason MZ is not and probably never will be suspicious is because of a game mechanic (his shot claim) @WBG, what makes you think MZ is scummy? This looks like a pretty townie post to me. Show nested quote +On May 30 2012 04:43 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:On May 30 2012 04:22 supersoft wrote:On May 30 2012 04:10 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:
hey supersoft, do something useful and write an analysis on me and wiggles. what is this? "write an analysis" I already posted what I think about you an wiggles. Why don't you tell me what you think about wiggles? Do you think it's normal townbehaviour, to be elected to chose the lynch and not participate at the final discussion about it?And another question: Do you REALLY think I am scum?! Or do you even know I am not. I really don't care about wiggles behavior before the lynch and since you didn't bother taking any strong actions before the lynch you're just as bad as he is so stop whining. And no I don't think you're scum, unlike you I've been reading between the lines and I've picked up things. What I'm trying to do now is make sure you don't do anything stupid. I don't think MZ is scummy, that was a paraphrase of what VE said here: Show nested quote +On May 31 2012 12:35 VisceraEyes wrote:
Why is my willingness to lynch scummy lurkers more suspicious than MZ and Kita's lack of vote Bugs? Can you answer me that? As for Hyaach, I'm not as confident in him flipping scum as I am zealos or even Gambit (ignoring the mason thing) What Toad is saying might be meaningless about gambit, but in terms of the tone and type of posting I think Hyaach's tone and attitude come across less scummy than both Zealos and Gambit. Between Zealos and Hyaach I'd much rather kill Zealos. Seems odd to notice supersoft's craziness for what it was and then point it out in the thread. If he was scum, supersoft would be dead right?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
