|
On July 07 2012 00:54 Lazermonkey wrote:
Jingle what info will we get from you, assuming you flip town? You havn't posted any scum reads(except for me I guess).
You'll get the info of who led a theoretical case against me based off of smoke and mirrors. I would have thought that was obvious, although it might be a bit too substantial for most of the people who took over the thread by screaming at anyone who posted.
You'll get the info of who votes where.
And you'll get the info that I'm still unimpressed by anyone who bases a case off of my (actually succesful) means of getting conversation started. Oh wait, that's been available for a while now.
But like I said, I'm not in the mood to slam repeatedly against circular logic, so I'm waiting to see how the D1 lynch goes, at which point there will be more info to make a read off of.
|
ebwop : not to the same extent though
|
On July 07 2012 01:06 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 00:54 Lazermonkey wrote:
Jingle what info will we get from you, assuming you flip town? You havn't posted any scum reads(except for me I guess). You'll get the info of who led a theoretical case against me based off of smoke and mirrors. I would have thought that was obvious, although it might be a bit too substantial for most of the people who took over the thread by screaming at anyone who posted. You'll get the info of who votes where. And you'll get the info that I'm still unimpressed by anyone who bases a case off of my (actually succesful) means of getting conversation started. Oh wait, that's been available for a while now. But like I said, I'm not in the mood to slam repeatedly against circular logic, so I'm waiting to see how the D1 lynch goes, at which point there will be more info to make a read off of. I am doing a case against you because I think you are scummy. I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that.
We will get vote count info no matter who we vote. It's not like your special in any way.
The third one is not even info. And I don't agree with that you were the person to get discussion going. Hope and yourHarry were imo the ones who did that.
|
I'm off to bed, hopefully I'll be able to get on my phone to check in before the end of day 1.
|
On July 07 2012 01:11 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:06 JingleHell wrote:On July 07 2012 00:54 Lazermonkey wrote:
Jingle what info will we get from you, assuming you flip town? You havn't posted any scum reads(except for me I guess). You'll get the info of who led a theoretical case against me based off of smoke and mirrors. I would have thought that was obvious, although it might be a bit too substantial for most of the people who took over the thread by screaming at anyone who posted. You'll get the info of who votes where. And you'll get the info that I'm still unimpressed by anyone who bases a case off of my (actually succesful) means of getting conversation started. Oh wait, that's been available for a while now. But like I said, I'm not in the mood to slam repeatedly against circular logic, so I'm waiting to see how the D1 lynch goes, at which point there will be more info to make a read off of. I am doing a case against you because I think you are scummy. I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that.
Playing badly? Like excessively prolific posts with "reads" based off of nothing, pointing fingers in a million directions at once, creating chaos, and picking and choosing what posts to analyze?
Yeah, you actually can be blamed for that.
|
On July 07 2012 01:15 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:11 Lazermonkey wrote:On July 07 2012 01:06 JingleHell wrote:On July 07 2012 00:54 Lazermonkey wrote:
Jingle what info will we get from you, assuming you flip town? You havn't posted any scum reads(except for me I guess). You'll get the info of who led a theoretical case against me based off of smoke and mirrors. I would have thought that was obvious, although it might be a bit too substantial for most of the people who took over the thread by screaming at anyone who posted. You'll get the info of who votes where. And you'll get the info that I'm still unimpressed by anyone who bases a case off of my (actually succesful) means of getting conversation started. Oh wait, that's been available for a while now. But like I said, I'm not in the mood to slam repeatedly against circular logic, so I'm waiting to see how the D1 lynch goes, at which point there will be more info to make a read off of. I am doing a case against you because I think you are scummy. I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that. Playing badly? Like excessively prolific posts with "reads" based off of nothing, pointing fingers in a million directions at once, creating chaos, and picking and choosing what posts to analyze? Yeah, you actually can be blamed for that. Yup, I will not be tunneling one player untill he dies unless I am 100% sure he is scum. There are more players than you who appear scummy than you. You are however most scummy out of these persons atm and therefore you have my vote.
Also, scum will not slip or push their agenda in every post, that is for sure. So obviously I will only comment on things I see as scummy.
|
EBWOP: Where is my reads based on nothing?
|
On July 06 2012 20:02 Lazermonkey wrote:One player who have gotten mostly onnoticed so far is JieXian. His filter is quite short, I suggest you go read it. Half of it contains filler and the other half is crazy bad. Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 02:31 JieXian wrote:On July 05 2012 19:21 Hapahauli wrote:Un-FOS JingleHellAs I've taken some time to cool down a bit, I'm growing worried that this thread is going to turn into a giant post-bang between the four most active/reckless players on the thread so far (YourHarry, JingleHell, Release, LazerMonkey, and Me). Such a situation would be extremely harmful to the town and would let the Mafia sit in the shadows while we war over one another. Perhaps we can turn our attention to two suspicious posts by some lurkers in an effort to get them to speak up: TMG26His first post is rife with a desire to look helpless, lots of fluff, and indecision (my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler [First Post] +On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote:
It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1
Megafluff, and downplaying the importance of day 1 reads
With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable?
I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing
trying to look helpless
And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker
more helplessness
About what being happening here..
Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that
So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry
In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing
Note the language - "in my opinion" as opposed to saying it outright. Overly diplomatic and indecisive
My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused
But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken
Despite stating two suspects, immediately reverts to indecision When JingleHell replies to TMG26's passive accusation, TMG is apologetic, passive, and does not address the issue (commentary bolded again). + Show Spoiler [Response to JingleHell's Defense] +On July 05 2012 08:47 TMG26 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:41 JingleHell wrote:
Wait, so my actual reasoning is supposed to be an OMGUS, and Harry's suggestion that 23% is gambling odds is only equally suspicious as my case?
When my case was based purely off of suspicious behavior, and my defense was based on the lack of substance, which was the grounds for my accusation? Not only does that not make any logical sense, it also feels like exactly what you just accused me of doing. Sorry, dont know what OMGUS is, i will search An apology... says he will search instead of just searching for the damn thing. Fluff.About the 23% odds, i didnt read that..... because of the time that it took me to type, i'll will make sure to check new replies before i post something that took a litle bit of time to type Does not address JingleHell and posts irrelevant information - "I'll make sure to read before I post..." More fluff/half-hearted accusations. + Show Spoiler [Response to Harry] +On July 05 2012 09:02 TMG26 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:53 YourHarry wrote:
A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False)
B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably) Thanks for the welcome A: We cant know for sure what you are trying to do, a statment like "i'm not trying to mislynch" is worth notting... scum wont say they are trying to mislynch B: Well, there no eveindence that he wanted to start a bandwagon, there was only a acusation of lazer's contradiction, BUT you told us what you tought about it... thats your opinion, so its recorded nowWhat?! What's even the point of that.What i believe he condemns you most is for the "early" vote... And then you came with the odds not being bad..................... Further indecision Makes another overly diplomatic/indecisive/fluff post that points suspicions to JingleHell and Harry + Show Spoiler [Another Diplomatic/Accusatory Post] +On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote:
Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left
And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless
In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions I have less of a case on Mackin, but his first post is very very suspicious. Inaccurate/Bandwagon post on LazerMonkey. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 07:06 Mackin wrote:
Hey guys, just putting it out there Lazer is already on my FoS list and we're only just beginning, long contradictory post with almost too much effort put in. Underlined part is simply not true. The post only has one contradiction, and it isn't very long. Criticizing someone for putting "almost too much effort" into posting is a huge red flag. This sounds like someone who saw someone's criticism of a lone contradiction and immediately jumped on the bandwagon without any analysis. Very anti-town mentality.
His next few posts are comprised of one-liners and fluff: + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 07:17 Mackin wrote:
HellJingle, that's an interesting name... On July 05 2012 07:28 Mackin wrote:
On July 05 2012 07:22 Hopeless1der wrote:
Mackin give the poor guy a chance, he's just a little excited I think. I just wanted to give him a heads up so he checks his posts more carefully, that way we can narrow down our scum lists earlier rather than later.
Fair enough point, but I just want to stir up some conversation to get people talking. Ain't that what Mafia's all about?  On July 05 2012 07:56 Mackin wrote:
@Harry We have a clever one here methinks. I'm going to put aside the babble between the loudest players who are having a stupid disagreement about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. TMG is clearly new, not a native speaker and deserves some BOTD. My FOS is on Mackin for trying to light up fires and disappearing as town burns. His thoughtless posting reminds me so much of mafia behavior. What is this? Stupid disagreement? This is like the strangest post ever. You first decide that all you the originall discussion is just a stupid disagreement, you don't even comment on it. Saying that all discussion before this post(page 10) is about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. is a lie. You are completely dismissing the case on TMG because he is 1.) new (played two games already) 2.) english is not his mother tongue(can you please show me where you had a hard time understanding what he was saying). None of these are actually arguments for why TMG is not scum tho. You then start to put pressure on Mackin out of all players. I don't see how his only few post atm left town burning. Noone even took notice of them untill later. Basically Mackin is a lurker at this point, why focus on him? Also what part of the posting reminds you of mafia behavior? You are trying to pull the action away from where it really matters and instead point it towards a lurker, an attempt to slow down town progress. Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote:
Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling More on Mackin. Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 18:14 JieXian wrote:
On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote:
I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again.
lololololololol you're right. I played NMMXIII with hopeless and this doesn't sound like him at all
#Vote Hopeless I'm not sure if this is a joke, but if it isn't... Bandwagon much? Overall, this guy has it all. Lurks, tries to kill discussion about scum hunting, WIFOM accusations against lurkers and bandwagoning(assuming he wasn't joking). The only thing that somewhat points towards him being town is that his teammates probebly would be kinda upset with such a bad play and thus told him to step his posting up...
ok this is funny I've never felt sleepy while being accused before.
The first 10 pages didn't have anything interesting for me to notice to make "reads" on.
Let me rephrase about TMG, I found his post hard to understand and I'd assume that says something about his comprehension, and hence I'm not going to jump on him yet until I have more information,
[b]This part got me curious. Tell me, where does the action "really matter"?
The more on Mackin would be part of the same post had I been able to edit.
You are a joke. It's a discussion. I read through his filter and found something that fits hapa's analysis.
|
On July 07 2012 01:24 Lazermonkey wrote:
EBWOP: Where is my reads based on nothing?
On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell
You target me for a laundry list of things.
A: You're offended that I blew off your rather annoying policy post that, you'll notice, nobody else liked either.
B: You don't like me saying that excessive lurking, in absence of clear scumreads, is a valid reason to lynch.
C: You don't have the capacity for sufficient critical though to realize that in a plurality lynch game, an early bandwagon can easily stick.
Your entire initial "read" against me was based on fluff, taking me out of context, and ignoring reality. Why should I bother paying any attention to you later, when you continue to tunnel me, while decrying tunnel vision?
|
got another post hold on.
btw ebwop: This part got me curious. Tell me, where does the action "really matter"?
|
Okay, I will go soon and may or may not be at home at the deadline. I will have my phone tho so I am able to check the thread and swap my vote if that is necessary. I will keep my vote on Jingle as of now, although that may change during the rest of the day. I will also change my vote to most scummy person in case there is a close voting. Here is my wish list for people I want dead:
1. Jingle.
2. JieXian
3. Hope/TMG
|
On July 07 2012 01:31 Lazermonkey wrote:
Okay, I will go soon and may or may not be at home at the deadline. I will have my phone tho so I am able to check the thread and swap my vote if that is necessary. I will keep my vote on Jingle as of now, although that may change during the rest of the day. I will also change my vote to most scummy person in case there is a close voting. Here is my wish list for people I want dead:
1. Jingle.
2. JieXian
3. Hope/TMG
Oh look, asks for an explanation, gets it, and says he has to go without responding. Almost sounds like Jiexian in XVIII a couple of times, where he posted in the QT for like 3 hours after telling the thread he was going to sleep. Did I mention he was scum in that game?
|
On July 07 2012 01:28 JieXian wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 20:02 Lazermonkey wrote:One player who have gotten mostly onnoticed so far is JieXian. His filter is quite short, I suggest you go read it. Half of it contains filler and the other half is crazy bad. On July 06 2012 02:31 JieXian wrote:On July 05 2012 19:21 Hapahauli wrote:Un-FOS JingleHellAs I've taken some time to cool down a bit, I'm growing worried that this thread is going to turn into a giant post-bang between the four most active/reckless players on the thread so far (YourHarry, JingleHell, Release, LazerMonkey, and Me). Such a situation would be extremely harmful to the town and would let the Mafia sit in the shadows while we war over one another. Perhaps we can turn our attention to two suspicious posts by some lurkers in an effort to get them to speak up: TMG26His first post is rife with a desire to look helpless, lots of fluff, and indecision (my commentary is bolded). + Show Spoiler [First Post] +On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote:
It's a 13 player game, and only 3 mobsters, so there is still a room for a litle mistake on day1
Megafluff, and downplaying the importance of day 1 reads
With a random vote on day 1 the probability of hitting scum is low, but missing wont be that dangerous, the question that i want to make is: With this low ratio of scum, does the nolynch becomes more or less viable?
I'm still a newbie in mafia games, thats one of the reasons of asking this questing
trying to look helpless
And sorry about my bad english, i'm not a native speaker
more helplessness
About what being happening here..
Lazer was not clear on what he said, Hopeless stated that, and yourHarry immidiatly voted Hopeless for that
So, in my opinion if we want to catch the scum we have to confront them, so i Hopeless did the right thing...But so did yourHarry, what i find funny was JingleHell jumping in to declare FoS on yourHarry
In my opinion Hopeless and yourHarry did almost same same thing
Note the language - "in my opinion" as opposed to saying it outright. Overly diplomatic and indecisive
My main suspects right now fall to yourHarry and JingleHell, because your acusations seammed more like a counter acusation after a "scum teammate" being acused
But is all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken
Despite stating two suspects, immediately reverts to indecision When JingleHell replies to TMG26's passive accusation, TMG is apologetic, passive, and does not address the issue (commentary bolded again). + Show Spoiler [Response to JingleHell's Defense] +On July 05 2012 08:47 TMG26 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:41 JingleHell wrote:
Wait, so my actual reasoning is supposed to be an OMGUS, and Harry's suggestion that 23% is gambling odds is only equally suspicious as my case?
When my case was based purely off of suspicious behavior, and my defense was based on the lack of substance, which was the grounds for my accusation? Not only does that not make any logical sense, it also feels like exactly what you just accused me of doing. Sorry, dont know what OMGUS is, i will search An apology... says he will search instead of just searching for the damn thing. Fluff.About the 23% odds, i didnt read that..... because of the time that it took me to type, i'll will make sure to check new replies before i post something that took a litle bit of time to type Does not address JingleHell and posts irrelevant information - "I'll make sure to read before I post..." More fluff/half-hearted accusations. + Show Spoiler [Response to Harry] +On July 05 2012 09:02 TMG26 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:53 YourHarry wrote:
A. He thinks I am trying to mislynch. (False)
B. I am not participating in case based on substantial evidence (True, but not my fault probably) Thanks for the welcome A: We cant know for sure what you are trying to do, a statment like "i'm not trying to mislynch" is worth notting... scum wont say they are trying to mislynch B: Well, there no eveindence that he wanted to start a bandwagon, there was only a acusation of lazer's contradiction, BUT you told us what you tought about it... thats your opinion, so its recorded nowWhat?! What's even the point of that.What i believe he condemns you most is for the "early" vote... And then you came with the odds not being bad..................... Further indecision Makes another overly diplomatic/indecisive/fluff post that points suspicions to JingleHell and Harry + Show Spoiler [Another Diplomatic/Accusatory Post] +On July 05 2012 10:49 TMG26 wrote:
Even if it is Plurality Lynch, there's still 40 hours left
And its again funny to see that Hopeless jumped on your defence... After you had already voted harry after harry voted hopeless
In my mind, you and harry are the prime suspects..but only a few hours have passed, and i dont want to jump into bad conclusions I have less of a case on Mackin, but his first post is very very suspicious. Inaccurate/Bandwagon post on LazerMonkey. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 07:06 Mackin wrote:
Hey guys, just putting it out there Lazer is already on my FoS list and we're only just beginning, long contradictory post with almost too much effort put in. Underlined part is simply not true. The post only has one contradiction, and it isn't very long. Criticizing someone for putting "almost too much effort" into posting is a huge red flag. This sounds like someone who saw someone's criticism of a lone contradiction and immediately jumped on the bandwagon without any analysis. Very anti-town mentality.
His next few posts are comprised of one-liners and fluff: + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 07:17 Mackin wrote:
HellJingle, that's an interesting name... On July 05 2012 07:28 Mackin wrote:
On July 05 2012 07:22 Hopeless1der wrote:
Mackin give the poor guy a chance, he's just a little excited I think. I just wanted to give him a heads up so he checks his posts more carefully, that way we can narrow down our scum lists earlier rather than later.
Fair enough point, but I just want to stir up some conversation to get people talking. Ain't that what Mafia's all about? On July 05 2012 07:56 Mackin wrote:
@Harry We have a clever one here methinks. I'm going to put aside the babble between the loudest players who are having a stupid disagreement about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. TMG is clearly new, not a native speaker and deserves some BOTD. My FOS is on Mackin for trying to light up fires and disappearing as town burns. His thoughtless posting reminds me so much of mafia behavior. What is this? Stupid disagreement? This is like the strangest post ever. You first decide that all you the originall discussion is just a stupid disagreement, you don't even comment on it. Saying that all discussion before this post(page 10) is about getting people to talk vs how it's useless fluff. is a lie. You are completely dismissing the case on TMG because he is 1.) new (played two games already) 2.) english is not his mother tongue(can you please show me where you had a hard time understanding what he was saying). None of these are actually arguments for why TMG is not scum tho. You then start to put pressure on Mackin out of all players. I don't see how his only few post atm left town burning. Noone even took notice of them untill later. Basically Mackin is a lurker at this point, why focus on him? Also what part of the posting reminds you of mafia behavior? You are trying to pull the action away from where it really matters and instead point it towards a lurker, an attempt to slow down town progress. On July 06 2012 02:37 JieXian wrote:
Let's focus on lurkers like Mackin ATM. I know I might qualify as one but I have nothing to add to the lazer/hapa vs hopeless/release/jingle babbling More on Mackin. On July 06 2012 18:14 JieXian wrote:
On July 06 2012 10:55 Hopeless1der wrote:
I get how my claiming it was a huge case pissed you off and drove you to attack me back, but the issue was still fresh and I didn't want it getting brushed off for being a weak/half-assed read. I don't get how its anti-town to point out things I find suspicious. How else are we supposed to hunt scum if no one makes a read on different people? Do you think you've got all 3 scum locked down already or something? Maybe I should never contradict anyone ever again.
lololololololol you're right. I played NMMXIII with hopeless and this doesn't sound like him at all
#Vote Hopeless I'm not sure if this is a joke, but if it isn't... Bandwagon much? Overall, this guy has it all. Lurks, tries to kill discussion about scum hunting, WIFOM accusations against lurkers and bandwagoning(assuming he wasn't joking). The only thing that somewhat points towards him being town is that his teammates probebly would be kinda upset with such a bad play and thus told him to step his posting up... ok this is funny I've never felt sleepy while being accused before. The first 10 pages didn't have anything interesting for me to notice to make "reads" on. Let me rephrase about TMG, I found his post hard to understand and I'd assume that says something about his comprehension, and hence I'm not going to jump on him yet until I have more information, [b]This part got me curious. Tell me, where does the action "really matter"? The more on Mackin would be part of the same post had I been able to edit. You are a joke. It's a discussion. I read through his filter and found something that fits hapa's analysis. I find it a bit funny that you didn't find anything on the first 10 pages that were intresting but you were able to accuse Mackin even tho he only had 1 minor post really.
Cool rephrase. Owait, it wasn't. Why did you even say that in the first place then? You could have
A) Ignored the issue
B) Argued
For example TMG/YourHarry/Hope/Jingle/Me were people under some fire during those 10 pages.
|
##Unvote
Hopeless' defence makes sense
|
On July 07 2012 01:34 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:31 Lazermonkey wrote:
Okay, I will go soon and may or may not be at home at the deadline. I will have my phone tho so I am able to check the thread and swap my vote if that is necessary. I will keep my vote on Jingle as of now, although that may change during the rest of the day. I will also change my vote to most scummy person in case there is a close voting. Here is my wish list for people I want dead:
1. Jingle.
2. JieXian
3. Hope/TMG
Oh look, asks for an explanation, gets it, and says he has to go without responding. Almost sounds like Jiexian in XVIII a couple of times, where he posted in the QT for like 3 hours after telling the thread he was going to sleep. Did I mention he was scum in that game? The amount of WIFOM in this post in beyond possible. It's friday evening in sweden atm. Yes, I am going soon.
|
On July 07 2012 01:38 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:34 JingleHell wrote:On July 07 2012 01:31 Lazermonkey wrote:
Okay, I will go soon and may or may not be at home at the deadline. I will have my phone tho so I am able to check the thread and swap my vote if that is necessary. I will keep my vote on Jingle as of now, although that may change during the rest of the day. I will also change my vote to most scummy person in case there is a close voting. Here is my wish list for people I want dead:
1. Jingle.
2. JieXian
3. Hope/TMG
Oh look, asks for an explanation, gets it, and says he has to go without responding. Almost sounds like Jiexian in XVIII a couple of times, where he posted in the QT for like 3 hours after telling the thread he was going to sleep. Did I mention he was scum in that game? The amount of WIFOM in this post in beyond possible. It's friday evening in sweden atm. Yes, I am going soon.
Well, don't forget to leave your scum buddies instructions to try and save you at the last minute in case people notice my points here.
|
On July 07 2012 01:29 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:24 Lazermonkey wrote:
EBWOP: Where is my reads based on nothing? Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell You target me for a laundry list of things. A: You're offended that I blew off your rather annoying policy post that, you'll notice, nobody else liked either. B: You don't like me saying that excessive lurking, in absence of clear scumreads, is a valid reason to lynch. C: You don't have the capacity for sufficient critical though to realize that in a plurality lynch game, an early bandwagon can easily stick. Your entire initial "read" against me was based on fluff, taking me out of context, and ignoring reality. Why should I bother paying any attention to you later, when you continue to tunnel me, while decrying tunnel vision?
A: No, you don't read. I offend you bacause talking about sex toys is 100x worse than talking about blues/policy in regards to scum hunting
B: How you cannot how scum reads at this point is impressive.
C: No, not with 48 hours untill lynch. Right now, yes probebly. But not then.
You contradict yourself. in your last post you said I accused everyone. Now you say I tunnel you.
|
See you guys some time. Will go now...
|
On July 07 2012 01:42 Lazermonkey wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2012 01:29 JingleHell wrote:On July 07 2012 01:24 Lazermonkey wrote:
EBWOP: Where is my reads based on nothing? On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. On July 05 2012 06:43 JingleHell wrote:
So, since Lazer already opened with the pre-requisite long-winded "Please don't lynch me" post, I'd feel silly making a similar one, so instead, I'm going to open by asking Evulrabbitz why his name references a sex toy. After that question, of course, it suddenly feels awkward, but unless he can answer it well, FoS Evulrabbitz 1st post. Instead of commenting on my post he starts to ridicule it, effectivly killing discussion about it. Instead he is the first one to start shit up the thread with sex-toy w/e. Also, instead of posting his own reads he says I'd feel silly making a similar one which doesn't make any sense at all. I'd much rather have a post about your thought's on scum hunting rather than sex toys. At least when we are playing mafia... The next couple of posts he is effectivly fills half the thread with his talk about Evul being a perv and what not. On July 05 2012 07:56 JingleHell wrote:
Well, Hopeless, since you're at least talking, I don't think you're scum yet. However, if day1 lurkers start causing trouble, I'm all for just throwing the dice and lynching one just to make a clear point.
Also, just as wonky meta, compared to your D1 play in XIX, I'm pretty sure you're town here. You're not afraid of prolific D1 posting, among other things.
Actually, I'm VERY suspicious about YourHarry's lightning fast vote. Could be a throwaway effort to get a bandwagon started, since D1 voting is nonsense in newbie games. In the case of a mislynch, it would be easy to argue away. If you would write this as a first time player I could be somewhat cool with it. But you are not. We want to lynch scum, not lurkers. And we absolutly don't want to roll the dice. And I really don't see how you are very suspicious about the vote. There were ~50 hours untill deadline when he threw the vote. How is this even close to start a bandwagon? Like wtf? On July 05 2012 08:05 JingleHell wrote:
EBWOP: And Harry, don't try to turn my logic around on me, my vote was based on your suspicious vote.
Your quote on Hopeless wasn't what I'd call a real reason to vote for someone who's at least being active, and not particularly suspicious.
Voting for him that way makes you look scummy, considering you've said nothing of real substance yet. But at this point you only had one minor post of substance as well. On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. I don't get this post. I may be missunderstanding this but if there is no substance to the case then why would that even be considered a case? And why on earth would someone ever get lynched by such a ''case'' On July 05 2012 08:13 JingleHell wrote:
I couldn't care less how many games you've played on mafiascum. As it turns out, in newbie games on TL, D1 bandwagons have a tendency to be lethal, particularly if there's no substance to the case to defend against. As such, it's better to target someone who's being either actively or passively useless, not somebody who's at least jumping into the deep end.
In particular, compared to his play in a different game, where he seemed painfully scummy, Hopeless1der seems like he's heading for direct contribution. Once again, there is no threat of a bandwagon at all. Why do you keep saying that? What I find maybe most intresting is how you start the game by shitting up the thread and literally don't post a single usefull thing. When the first vote get thrown tho, You go ''WTF DUDE, VOTING IZ NOT COOL''. No, I agree that the reasoning behind the vote to begin with was verrrry vauge but I don't really see why you get so upset about it ESPICIALLY since it's not even on you. ##Vote JingleHell You target me for a laundry list of things. A: You're offended that I blew off your rather annoying policy post that, you'll notice, nobody else liked either. B: You don't like me saying that excessive lurking, in absence of clear scumreads, is a valid reason to lynch. C: You don't have the capacity for sufficient critical though to realize that in a plurality lynch game, an early bandwagon can easily stick. Your entire initial "read" against me was based on fluff, taking me out of context, and ignoring reality. Why should I bother paying any attention to you later, when you continue to tunnel me, while decrying tunnel vision? A: No, you don't read. I offend you bacause talking about sex toys is 100x worse than talking about blues/policy in regards to scum hunting B: How you cannot how scum reads at this point is impressive. C: No, not with 48 hours untill lynch. Right now, yes probebly. But not then. You contradict yourself. in your last post you said I accused everyone. Now you say I tunnel you.
Uhm. How I can't have scumreads NOW? I do have some now, including you. I didn't back then. Funny how you try to make points B and C not work on the same timescale, specifically, in the context of the time those posts were from.
This is blatant tunneling, horrendous contradiction, terrible analysis, and scummy as all hell. I rest my case.
|
dude ..... not all arguments need to be essays. I've already stated my point >_>
Lol why do you seem to want me to focus elsewhere? Some babbling was going on and there was nothing I could get a read out of, unlike the recent pages.
Sorry if you're pissed that I downplayed the "fire".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
