|
On June 15 2012 03:32 s0Lstice wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2012 02:47 austinmcc wrote:Right now I would prefer a vote on Crossfire or Golden, either works. Crossfire may tend to lurk, but he's been active for 2 hours this game and didn't contribute much, if anything, during those 2 hours. 1/2 golden's activity was promising some giant omnibus post, which he immediately began to apologize for because it didn't mention some of the more recent topics at all. He failed to make good on his promise to talk to us soon. I no longer wish to be his lover, don't know about the rest of you. Moreover: + Show Spoiler +On June 13 2012 09:43 O.Golden_ne wrote:
Lets get the ball rolling and squeeze out the lurkers early so we can narrow things down later on. Looking forward to scumhunting, i'm happy with the deadline on this as its 10am for me in Aust, which means i'll be able to meet the deadlines for lynching in the mornings a little easier.
I'll try my hardest this game to meet these deadlines and to contribute useful information rather than filler.
Essentially i'm all for an agressive early game. I want to be able to establish some basic reads by the end of Day one, and if theres no-one who's appropriately scummy then we lynch a lurker.
Golden No help rolling balls. No help squeezing lurkers. Not being aggressive at all. THESE are contradictions that stick out to me. Taking a pro-town position, doing so strongly, and then never following up on that, in fact, actively doing the things he said he was going to combat. Solstice, as to heavonearth, I don't prefer him to other targets. I agree that him calling out Golden wasn't much of a case, but Golden's first post IS weak. On your second point about time, I read that post as him being confused because your post made it sound like the deadline was really, really close. The third point on his contradictory comments does look odd, but I don't want to lynch him off of that. Look at it this way - MJ got lynched in MTG because he looked scummy D1, yet he was townie. So his posts definitely looking scummy IS consistent with when he was townie, as stupid as that sounds. Go have a look at newb mini XIV. It may give you some insight on Golden. I built a huge case on him for day 2 based on many of the points you are making this game. He flipped town. I'm not saying he couldn't be scum, but I'm seeing similarities here.
I looked, and yes...it's freakishly similar. I'm reluctant to give someone a pass based on that, however:
- Granted he got replaced early in XV, but I don't remember him playing quite this same sort of game
- He played VERY different in XI (as town) (filter - http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=331498&user=92568)
- He says he's really going to try and improve. That's some sort of...meta promise? Not just within game.
- I don't want to excuse scummy behavior as someone's meta. Just as a policy, especially going forward, it's easier for everyone if we take a hard stance against lurking/scummy behavior.
Catching up on the last page or so.
|
EBWOP:
1. It's not that he is defensive. It's the way he's being defensive. He was extremely conscious of misinterpretations of his words in the beginning. He attacks his attackers. Despite feeling that throwing suspicions around was bad town play, he threw suspicions at roflwaffle to prove his towniness. I don't buy that his response was 'proof by contradiction', the tone is completely off.
I am playing this game seriously. I reason people WHO* don't PLAY SERIOUSLY* spoils the game, and that is both bad town and bad scum play. I know carelessly written post may lead to many different interpretation. I am trying to avoid that while struggling with the language itself.
My first mocked-up case against rolf was indeed me attempting a "proof of contradiction", nothing more. Believing me or not is a subjective matter so I won't comment more than that. I do agree I did intensify my tone when I defend myself, I can't deny that, and if I am offer a chance to explain, I felt challenged.
Also, attacking head on is NOT* defensive. I brought the spotlight to myself, trying to be as transparent as possible, believing it will establish my innocent.
Proof check after post -- Genius.
|
Questions
Are we allowed to post after the deadline, 4:30 hours later?
Are we allowed to post during the night?
|
Solstice, two things. I agree that HeavOnEarth does look bad after that last post. I'm also still worried about Golden, both for the reasons above and then reading over your comments on alan + Show Spoiler +On June 15 2012 03:14 s0Lstice wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2012 02:24 roflwaffles55 wrote:
What exactly in alan133's play made you suddenly change your mind? He reworded his arguments and continued to attack the two people who are putting pressure on him. He still hasn't brought anything new to the table, except for try to expand on this conspiracy theory that he has running between me and suki. He improved his wording, and he says he changed his playstyle. However, all he did was become more aggressive towards me... and suki...
His play maintains relatively the same. It's increasingly suspicious, I got called out for changing my play when the public opinion seemed to want me to, and then he does the same thing. If somebody considers outside information concerning their playstyle, recognizes its value, and makes changes, I consider it a good thing. Nobody should be tarred and feathered for changing their minds, provided they adequately explain their reasoning.
This is the rule of thumb by which I examine situations like these. In this situation, alan is accused for being neutral/passive. He recognizes the criticism, acknowledges it publicy, and begins making a change. This was the sequence of events..there is no contradiction here. Whether you like his reads or not, he DID double down on them and he DID pursue them more aggressively. On June 12 2012 20:55 marvellosity wrote:
I believe you were given a warning and not a game ban because you were apologetic last game, golden.
However you have been replaced in one game and modkilled in another, so it'd be nice to know you had the commitment to see this one through.
Crossfire responded to everyone. Not quite loving it, but that may be because last time I got aggressive with him, I accepted his defense and he later flipped scum. Gotta think and figure out how much that's clouding my vision here.
|
@alan113
I am satisfied with the reads that alan's posted. He's clearly gone through people's filters and comes up with solid reads.
In addition, I find his defense of my latest attack on him convincing. His initial defense of my case had a few holes, and I pressed him hard for those feeling that it might have been a way to brush off those points without addressing them. He has went over my points and answered them clearly, and I feel more comfortable attributing those holes to english not being his first language.
My primary points of suspicion against alan (the key points after his rebuttal) were his method of defence, his inconsistency of play and his lack of commenting on other players. I can rule out being extra-careful of his words and using an overly aggressive tone as part of his difficulty with english. It also helps that he has not been pro-actively defensive or sensational in the newest post where he outlines his suspicions.
As for his inconsistency of play and not pointing out scum motivations, he has now posted cases on a lot of players.
I concede that given his most recent post, I no longer hold my case as valid.
As the vote deadline is getting close I want to put in my thoughts now rather than waiting for later. Please excuse me if I'm a bit rushed in my analysis as I don't have much time during the day.
s0lstice
i like his play. Solid reads, very little fluff. A strong air of confidence that was also present in the previous game we played together. He posts his reads with conviction.
Because of this, I have decided to give HeavOnEarth's filter another look.
HeavOnEarth:
Okay, something really really sticks out to me in Heavon's first post, and it's not about golden.
It's this particular line:
also id like to point out crossfire is completely inactive, whereas in past games he was a pretty talkative little townie.
thoughts?
Above, I posted my opinions on Crossfire, where I had gone through pretty much his entire filter in his two previous games, and the big thing I noted was that Crossfire LURKED very hard in his first game as blue, and somewhat lurked in the second game as red.
HeavOn clearly is talking about Crossfire's game as blue, 'He was a pretty talkative little townie'. This is clearly wrong.
He continues his case against Crossfire later after sciberbia brings it up. This has already been labelled as suspicious. It's a big point against him that he waited until someone else pointed fingers at Crossfire, when he had so early established a read on Crossfire - a fairly in depth read as he had even looked at Crossfire's filters from previous games.
The thing is, the case HeavOn makes against crossfire disregards the previous game filters. Crossfire, as mafia, was assertive actively pushed cases against other players. He also lurked quite a bit.
As for golden i admit my analysis was pretty damn bad LOL , but he didn't really have any other posts for me to provoke him with, and i still feel its a strong play to accuse lurkers of being scummy, just to get them to talk. The way he went about replying though felt really odd to me. For example, i don't really care if you're taking a few mins to write up a post. Why tell me about it(unless you're about to be majority lynched or something). Just feels off.
HeavOn votes for Golden despite saying that his case against Golden is weak. He doesn't back off however, stating that the response was scummy and that the scummy thing about it was how golden was commenting on the time it would take to make his posts? Seems like a very strained argument to make.
I see clear scum motivation in voting for golden. In my previous game as mafia, I harped on Miltonkram for his early vote against sciberbia. Even when my argument was convincingly rebutted, I continued to press my case against him finding any sort of scummy intent I could make up. Why? Because I didn't want to be wishy-washy.
HeavOn's case against golden is that golden 'just feels off'. This makes Golden a 'solid lynch' to him.
I'm out of time, but that's my insight into HeavOn. I feel that there can definitely be scum motivation behind his posts. I haven't had time to closely look at other people but for now HeavOn is clearly a scummier target than alan.
##unvote alan113
##vote HeavOnEarth
|
Oops, slept in a bit later than I'd planned. s0Lstice, I'm inclined to agree with you. HeavOnEarth looks like the best lynch candidate.
Everybody, I'd suggest you take a look at him. His filter is not particularly long, but I think there is enough scummy behavior there to warrant a vote.
##Vote: HeavOnEarth
|
I noticed already that his play was scummy, however I felt like it was the easy way out, I was hoping to nail a more influential scum D1, but I guess that's just new player optimism... If he flips scum, I'm not sure what kind of information we're going to gain from it as his posts don't seem to link him to anyone.. and if he flips town then all we really know is that he was a poor townie.
I'll go with the flow because he's fairly blatant with his scumminess (real word?) but I'd like to keep an eye on Crossfire, as well as keeping Mouldy Jeb in mind for a D2 lynch.
##unvote Crossfire99
##vote HeavOnEarth
I'm not sure if I'll be on tonight, I'll do my absolute best to be on in case there's a swing of opinion.
|
Ok it's time we start consolidating lynch candidates. Right now it looks like people are interested in lynching Heaven,Crossfire, and maybe Golden. Am I correct? I think those are our realistic lynch candidates at this point. I'd suggest everyone limit their votes to these three players unless you think I'm overlooking something huge.
|
@ Heaven
There are a lot of people jumping on your case really quickly. Not gonna lie, it's making me a little nervous. Please post some sort of defense or at the very least what kind of reads you have on players whenever you have the time.
|
Milton, it SHOULD make you nervous. He looks scummy, but we've got 4 votes on him towards the end of the day, after he's announced that he's gone. I really don't like the italicized bit, because it makes him a very juice mislynch target given that there's been suspicion on him and he may not be back to respond.
Crossfire, going to hold you to this:On June 15 2012 03:28 Crossfire99 wrote:
Let me know if I didn't respond enough for your liking. I'll be gone for a few hours and then I'll be back for the deadline to respond more and vote.
You responded to all the concerns about you, but that was it. I'd like to see something proactive from you. When you vote, please give a decent explanation of whom you're voting for, more than just "He looks scummy/cases on him look good." I'd also like you to give a scum read outside of the current 3 candidates for lynch. Who else is suspicious to you?
|
Looks like i'm going to have to do a little defence before the end of this day
I'm not really impressed with the case on me, if i get bussed off by the mafia and you see i flip scum i ask you consider HeavonEarth as a prime candidate or lynch. While i'm not happy with the case made against me (it doesn't really feel that solid) HeavonEarth jumps on the bandwagon very easily.
Bragging to much IMO about his task of writing stuff. He states that he wants write a summary for himself. Dude, you are not playing alone, you have 8 any other people doing the same thing, and the only way is by working togheter.
In response to my 'bragging' accusations, just LOL. I had a post all typed up after 2 hours of reading and writing. I was one of the first explaining why i feel Alan113 is innocent. And then i refresh and see he is still posting about the same subject, it was just frustrating because i don't like these guys tunnelling eachother. Can you not see that i was asking Alan113 to stick around to see that someone else in the thread thought he was innocent (alteast for now)? Or are my contributions not important?
NOW Austinmcc honestly its people like you that make me not want to play this game. In regards too my "BROKEN PROMISE TO CONTRIBUTE MORE". I fail to see where it is broken? I'm here; I'm contributing. Its damn frustrating when you commit a few hours of your life to something and then they just grill you for it. Losing a lot of motivation to play. The last few posts have been so cynical and sarcastic about my 'absence'. And i don't appreciate the whopping big red text. anyone can do it bro.
austinmcc is unimpressed with my contribution
perhaps i'm taking this a little too strong.
also, if we're too take a hard stance on lurking behaviour. Perhaps we can focus on someone with a smaller content count than myself? Worth a thought mang.
in regards to HeavonEarth.
In relation to my:
a) knowing i'm town.
b) Him trying to bus me one the grounds of "seems like a solid case".
c) lacklustre contribution and no rebuttle to any arguments.
i feel like he see's a bandwagon forming and jumps on straight away.
#VOTE: HeavonEarth
i still maintain a #FOS on MouldyJeb
i still owe the group a comment on Crossfire99 but i honestly dont have time for it before work.
|
comments:
i like suki's approach to the situation, she's changed it up and she's added some new content to her vote which is refreshing. We'll obviously need to keep an eye on Alan113 just because everyone needs to be pressured several times during the course of the game, i just never found him to be as scummy as say HeavonEarth is looking atm.
SOOO much angleshooting from peoples previous performances in other games. Keep it relevant is all i'm saying.
|
Lynch Candidates based on everyone's stated convictions
HeavOnEarth
interested in lynching(8): suki, me, s0lstice, roflwaffle, milton, alan, austin, golden
no comment(3): trackd00r, crossfire, MJ
Many people want to lynch him and nobody is actually defending him at the moment. There is much less consensus on the other candidates (see below).
Crossfire
interested in lynching(5): me, austin, trackd00r, milton, heavOnEarth
not convinced(4): s0lstice, golden, alan, suki
no comment(2): MJ, roflwaffles
Some people find him suspicious. Others remain unconvinced. I don't think it makes sense to lynch him over HeavOnEarth because some people actually don't find him suspicious.
Mouldy Jeb
The argument for lynching him is extreme lurking and unhelpfulness. I'm not against lynching lurkers if we don't have any good lynch candidates. But in this case we do: most people find HeavOnEarth scummy. In addition, we get little information from MJ's flip, whereas we get quite a bit from heavOnEarth.
golden
I haven't gone through the filter, but I just don't get the feeling that there is enough suspicion on him to warrant a lynch over HeavOnEarth.
IN SUMMARY
HeavOnEarth seems like the consensus lynch target. Personally, I think he has a good chance of flipping red. I'll detail my thoughts on him in a subsequent post. Overall, seems like the sensible player to lynch.
@heavOnEarth
It looks likely that you will be lynched today. Please post a defense and more importantly give as many reads as you can.
@trackd00r, crossfire, MJ
Please post your opinion on HeavOnEarth as soon as possible. It's important that everyone weighs in on the lynch candidates, especially the one that looks most likely to be lynched.
|
On June 14 2012 19:31 O.Golden_ne wrote:
honestly i can't believe i missed sciberbia's case on Crossfire99. FML maybe i got the totally wrong read on him. Ima refresh my mind on HeavonEarth and Sciberbia and then post after i mull their feeds over a game of SOTIS. Talk soon lovers.
GauldenWahn
You were going to refresh your mind, mull 2 filters from D1, and talk soon. The broken promise to contribute would be not doing that.
On June 15 2012 06:27 O.Golden_ne wrote:
in regards to HeavonEarth.
In relation to my:
a) knowing i'm town.
b) Him trying to bus me one the grounds of "seems like a solid case".
c) lacklustre contribution and no rebuttle to any arguments.
i feel like he see's a bandwagon forming and jumps on straight away.
#VOTE: HeavonEarth
No read on crossfire. A couple minor thoughts on HeavOn. The frustration seems genuine, however.
|
Yea the way the votes fell gives me a sinking feeling. I'm trying to remain optimistic, the way his case gained momentum would make bussing an option that scum would have to consider if he is indeed scum. Suspense is killing me.
Austin and suki had both asked me questions iirc. I'll answer those next time I get a chance after the flip.
|
My thoughts on HeavOnEarth:
I was originally somewhat suspicious of him for throwing suspicion onto a handful of easy targets, and then becoming wishy/washy about it. He has since made me more suspicious with his response and attitude towards golden.
On June 14 2012 20:15 HeavOnEarth wrote:
As for golden i admit my analysis was pretty damn bad LOL , but he didn't really have any other posts for me to provoke him with, and i still feel its a strong play to accuse lurkers of being scummy, just to get them to talk. The way he went about replying though felt really odd to me. For example, i don't really care if you're taking a few mins to write up a post. Why tell me about it(unless you're about to be majority lynched or something). Just feels off.
First of all, he admits that his case was "pretty damn bad" and LOL's about it. I see this as slightly scummy. He is being ingratiating and agreeable, rather than firm, objective, and analytic. This is more typical of mafia than of townies.
Next HeavOnEarth says that there were no other posts to provoke Golden with. The question I'm left asking myself is: why did HeavOnEarth feel that he had to attack Golden at all? He says it was strong play of him to "accuse lurkers of being scummy", but at the time of HeavOnEarth's accusation, golden didn't look lurky. Golden made 1 post in the first 4 hours of the game, and then HeavOnEarth accused him. 1 decent-sized post in the first 4 hours isn't lurky. Why was HeavOnEarth looking for a reason to "provoke him"?
Finally, heavOnEarth refuses to back down from his suspicions of golden, and even ends up voting golden, but doesn't give any good reasons. He just says that golden's posting seems odd. Odd =/= scummy. It looks like he just arbitrarily picked a target to attack at the beginning and now won't back down.
Overall, I think he has a good chance of being mafia and I'm happy with lynching him.
##Vote HeavOnEarth
|
1hour until deadline. On iPad because Internet is down in Copenhagen (wtf) so hopefully I'll get vote count right in this dumb ass safari piece of crap excuse of a browser. Yo.
|
@miltonkram, @s0Lstice, @austinmcc
I'm not too disconcerted by the near unanimous voting. If HeavOnEarth is scum, there are only 2 more scum out of 11 other players. 3 players have yet to comment on HeavOnEarth at all, and there could quite possibly be some bussing going on. As s0Lstice said, scum could probably see the writing on the wall. Are you guys actually less suspicious of heavOnEarth due to the voting or are you just being pessimistic? How do the votes affect the likeliness that heavOnEarth is mafia in your eyes?
I want to reiterate some of the things I said earlier, because the thread has been relatively quiet in the last hour, and right now is a very important time for activity.
@heavOnEarth
You are very likely getting lynched today. Your posting right now can only help town. If you are townie and are looking at the thread, you should definitely be posting reads right now.
@trackd00r, crossfire, MJ
If any of you are in the thread right now, you should take the opportunity to state your opinion on heavOnEarth before he flips rather than after, in the interest of giving town more information.
|
Yea it's just nerves pre-lynch nerves sciberbia. I have confidence in the strength of the read, but the bar was set pretty high (thanks to you and ange  ) last game with the scum hit on day 1. I'm badly wanting a repeat, and I got mad jitters. Also I thought the deadline was 7EDT so FML with this suspense.
|
Also, I count 7 votes on HeavOnEarth. though golden didn't format his properly so it may not count... thank goodness for only needing 6 votes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
