The_Zen_Man
Its important to vote for a the scummiest player in a given round, and not a player who looks scummy. Hopeless1der has looked much more scummy than LazerMonkey. To prove this to you, I will analyze your case against Lazer below:
Zen's Case against Lazer (click for reference)
You open your case by mentioning Lazer's opening post and casting suspicion on it (quote and your commentary in spoiler below).
+ Show Spoiler +On July 07 2012 03:12 The_Zen_Man wrote:My analysis of Lazermonkey. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote:
YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie
On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here
1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true.
2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day.
While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue.
I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy.
Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons.
1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2.
2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more.
3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still.
We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him.
Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post!
This was his first post in the game. He start by making a big post and trying to look like someone who is helping town by giving them advice, such as this. I wont go into to much detail into this post, as it has already been talked about a lot.
Lazer made a similar post as a town-aligned player in a previous game. In addition, summary by itself is not grounds to lynch someone.
You then talk about Lazer's first accusation about Jingle:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote:I'm getting suspicious of Jingle. Show nested quote +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 Evulrabbitz1st 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 After a few post, when jingle starts to get suspicous of him, Lazer writes a very long case. It may look like it is big, but it has almost no substance at all. He simply states that there is no threat of bandwagoning. Mafia tend to want to do this, posting long cases but with little of worth, so that it looks good. .He also proceds to vote on Jingle. Lazer proceds to tunnel Jingle for the rest of the game. Here, he effectively turned the attention from him and to Jingle. Lazer also post some aggressive post to anyone who is somewhat suspicous of him.
You accuse him of posting a case without substance, despite it being the start of the game (no cases can have substance). Furthermore, he makes a legitimate attempt at analysis, is very confrontational, and overall shows a townie attitude to the game. You then accuse him of tunneling Jingle - this is simply not true. He has posted suspicions against multiple players so far.
You then attack him for a summary post off of my analysis of TMG26 and Mackin:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 21:09 Lazermonkey wrote:Some good analysis there Hapa. Although I can't really contribute anything on Mackin as his filter is just that long. I only find the first post of him to be intresting tho. I don't agree with my post be contradictory which I have already said a dozen of times. Yes, I did use bad wording but that's about it. Also look at the timing. Basically echoing what Hope had already said at that point. The other posts from him is indeed fluff, which is at best bad town play. As for TMG I wouldn't even call him a lurker, at least not in comparison to some other players *hint*. His posting has in fact been okay given that we have only played for <24 hours. But looking at his posts he has for sure being suuuper safe with his posting. He is really afraid of calling anyone scum. Going back and forth never taking a clear stance anywhere. The prime example: Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:38 TMG26 wrote:
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
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
So harry did the right thing.
Then he is still your prime suspect
Then it's all still too light, a lot of people still havent spoken.
Note the massive indecisiveness. Why do you care? You are fully capable to take on stance on Harry before everyone have posted. You are testing waters here instead of taking a bold stance.
Overall Mackin is kinda null for me although with the slightest scum vibes due to his first post. I consider him a lurker atm and he really needs to post more before I make a clear read. TMG on the other hand i feel is playing in a very anti-town way. I'd say he is my number 2 scumread after Jingle atm. Aside from his tunneling jingle, he agrees of what other peoples scumtells are. In this post, he basically repeats what Hapa said, and makes it look like it is somewhat orignal. Mafia often tend to agree with other players, so that those players like them more and agrees with them in a discussion.
Agreeing with people by itself isn't a scumtell, and is not enough to build a case alone. So far, your case is built on his opening post and him agreeing with me once. This is not enough to vote for someone.
You then call one of his attacks on you "scummy."
+ Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 05:08 Lazermonkey wrote:Zen_Man, I'd really appreciate if you put some thoughts about the other players. I think you are over reading Making. I would hardly call his first post an attempt to bandwagon. Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 04:33 The_Zen_Man wrote:When Hopeless later states that he had no intention of anything like a bandwagon on Lazer, Mackin quickly change his opinion again, not mentioning anything about Lazer again, as his bandwagon failed. Mafia tends to want to not have opinions alone, and rather have some other people to back them up, while town has no reason to not go after someone alone.
Your just making so many assumptions. Talking about how mafia will play is just impossible. Unless you are mafia.
Instead of actually responding to what happends in the thread you choose to FoS a player who basically havn't said anything yet. Then he post this. After i had only posted one post on Mackin, he makes it bigger than it is and says i am "overreading". Mafia often tend to blow stuff up, and make other people look bad (and therefore make themselve look better). He also says that talking about how mafia will play is impossibble, but that would in fact mean that analyzing is pointless. If we would follow his advice, no one should analyze. Very scummy.
Lazer made a provocative one-liner and pointed out some very justified criticisms of your post. You make assumptions about how this game's mafia will act ("mafia tends to want to not have opinions alone..."), and lazer simply criticizes it. His bit about "talking about how mafia will play is just impossible" is completely legitimate. After all, its near impossible to talk about how mafia will play from a day 1 townie perspective - we simply don't have enough information! Furthermore, he doesn't suggest analysis is pointless - you just put words into his mouth.
Lastly, you attack another of his posts agreeing with me (the Hopeless Case):
+ Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 18:53 Lazermonkey wrote:I must say Hope looks very bad atm. However I don't agree with all points of suspicion against him. Like the part when he ''lies'' about there being a case on Release. I think this sould be very explainable from a town point of view. He saw your long post about release and you were also questioning Release's view on me. Overall, there were a quite criticising tone in it. Call it case or not, I don't really see this as a scum tell. What catches my attention is his indecisiveness, especially compared to the other game he played. In that game he focused on the persons he thought was most suspicious. This game... Just look at this post. Show nested quote +On July 06 2012 03:59 Hopeless1der wrote:So while catching up, it looks like Release isn't making any friends. YourHarry has also disappeared after resolving his shouting match with Jingle. He's said he'll re-read for scum vibes and hasn't been heard from since. 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 Mackin on the other hand disappeared about the same time as Rabbitz: just before what I consider the 'real discussion' started. A very suspicious time to start lurking because they could very easily have been watching and just let the town shred itself so I'll be watching them both going forward for avoiding discussions. Not that they're both necessarily scum, but its definitely looks scummy to me. Rabbitz came back and had a read on Release that looks pretty good, but there are a couple other fingers pointed at Release concern me: + Show Spoiler +On July 06 2012 02:48 Hapahauli wrote:Regarding the FOS's on Release (by TMG26 and Evulrabbitz) Release's aggressive/FingerPointing play isn't grounds for suspicion; he is incredibly aggressive in his other games as townie. www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=345447&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII - Vigilante) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=342960&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XVI - Townie) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=337671&user=117960 (Newbie Mini Mafia XIV - Townie) In these games, he always picks an early target or two (for marginal, sometimes joke reasons) and relentlessly pressures them. Sometimes, this pressure goes on for far too long, but its done with good intentions. I don't wish to go and dissect all his past games, but I suggest you take a look through his past to get a feel for his town play. However, I would like to point out that Release's hard stance on LazerMonkey's first post is unusual given a previous mafia game they've played together. In Newbie Mini Mafia XVI, LazerMonkey makes a similar introductory post (clicky!) to the one he made in this thread. Release raises no objections with it in their past game, but he makes it a point to raise an objection on it in this game. Needless to say, LazerMonkey turned up town-alligned in the previous game. Hapahauli is doing a big backslide from his previous case on Release, after seeing + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote:On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote:
Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons.
While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. and just jumps all over it, building a huge case: + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2012 15:40 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 14:59 Release wrote:On July 05 2012 13:46 Hapahauli wrote:On July 05 2012 13:23 Khorrus wrote:
Sorry I'm a bit late. I notice I seem to have already missed sex toys and what looks to be the beginning of some mini bandwagons.
While I can't quite determine what's going on with the YourHarry, Hopeless Situaation, Lazermonkey's post seems off many words to flip flop and not say much of value. You've just posted a list of four names while saying nothing of value yourself. Rather scummy behavior. That's just grasping at straws, which is one of the reasons Lazer is my top priority lynch. And as far as i can tell, he hasn't even had a thorough reading of the thread yet. way too over-eager to point out every little flaw. Exactly what has Lazer done to be a "top-priority lynch?" According to your filter, you have two posts detailing cases against Lazer. The first is an analysis of his first post: Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 08:58 Release wrote:I think YourHarry is Grush's new alias. On July 05 2012 06:39 Lazermonkey wrote:
YOYO GUYS. I AM Vanilla Townie
On a more serious note, we want this ship rollin' as fast as possible. Discussing policy is not scumhunting but it does at least help us get the discussion going. First off, something we want to avoid as town is Vanillas claiming blue roles. In both my last game and Newbie Mini Mafia XVIII there were Vanillas who claimed blue roles(DTs). Both times town ended in an bad spot (although not as bad as it could've been due to luck). But this should still be avoided at all costs as it can cause massive damage to town. Why? Well let's say a vanilla townie claims DT, and then the real DT claims because the vanilla is lying. As it doesn't make sense for vanillas to claim blue roles, we must assume that one of theese players is scum and the other one is the real DT.Two following scenarios can occur here
1). The townie gets lynched. which means that the other person is probebly the real DT, this must however not be true.
2). The DT gets lynched, which means that the vanilla townie will 100% get lynched the next day.
While 2 is far worse than 1 they are still both very bad for town. There really isn't a situation you want to fakeclaim as a townie. If you don't agree with this please let me know. If noone disagrees I will assume that no townie is ever fake claiming a blue role. Obviously there are situations where you might want to claim as blue.
I will also copy a part of my first post from my last game(where I was DT) since I am lazy.
Regarding lynches: I really really dislike nolynching for three reasons.
1. because the information that we are able to get out of it is very limited. Yes, we avoid a potential misslynch but on the other hand scum will score a more or less a free-kill during night. Essentially, we are back on D1 but this time we are in a 6-2 instead of a 7-2.
2. If we agree to nolynch then what is there to discuss? It's like asking for people to lurk even more.
3. With no vigilante in the game the only way we can win is to lynch scum. Kinda obvious but still.
We require 5+ votes in order to get a lynch done. With that in mind I hope that people are willing to vote for someone who isn't their top 1 scum. Obviously, if you REALLY don't think there is any chance that the person that is about to be lynched can be scum, then sure, don't vote him. But if it seems like your target hardly gets any votes and your second highest scumread is at 4 votes with 30 minutes untill deadline, then I think you should swap your vote onto him.
Lurkers!: There are two types of lurkers. The ones who doesn't post anything and the sneaky ones, who posts ALOT but nothing of value. The first category could either be bad town play or scum play. But the second category is almost exclusivly scum play. If you are a townie, speak your mind, don't make a super duper long post when you could've said it on just a few lines. Keep it simple. With that being said, post!
Ignoring the copy-pasted policy stuff for now, Why on earth did you even post that scenario stuff about a VT fake-claiming a DT or blue? There was absolutely no indication that anyone had even planned on that (especially considering you had the first post). If anything, you have just shown people something they can do (to the detriment of the town). And why go through the casework? It's just fluff and you know it. This is very much a post looking like a contribution, while being a non-contribution, or even an anti-contribution. Im pretty sure, again, that no one was even remotely close to voting in a way to force a nolynch. I love the bolded line; you could have kept this post simple and concise. But you decided to make it "super-duper long." ##vote: LazermonkeyYourharry, you should do more than OMGUS. You are definitely rivaling, for scumminess, against lazer. Fos: yourharry
Fos: lazermonkey It's worth saying that Lazer's first post was made 12 minutes after the game started. I'm not sure when the mafia separate forum-thingy goes online (at the start of the game or when the role PM's are sent out?,) but his message seems innocent and hardly "an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies" - as you call it in a later post. Him warning about townie fake-claiming is a legitimate concern, as it led to the downfall of the town in one of his previous games. While this may seem common-knowledge to the both of us, it is clearly not obvious to some players, and thus is worth mentioning. While I agree his post is "fluffy," it does not seem like an attempt to "brainwash" townsfolk, and his actions can be seen as having a pro-town mentality. This is hardly FOS material. Your second case against Lazer is a response to his case about JingleHell. Show nested quote +On July 05 2012 11:08 Release wrote:On July 05 2012 09:54 Lazermonkey wrote: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 are you outing Jingle as your scumbuddy? or maybe trying to drag him down with you? YOU ARE SO CONFUSING. OMGUS. Why are you promoting your first post as a discussion starter? It isn't. It is an attempt to brainwash unsuspecting townies and get us talking about useless things. I commend him for shutting your down your post with this authority. If you are actually using the discussion of sex toys as a reason to call him scum, you really are just grasping at straws for lack of any real substance. In terms of day1, i don't think setting a tone on lynching lurkers is necessarily a bad thing. should we decide on lynching a lurker, the lurkers will feel a need to speak up in order to avoid getting the lynch. In other words, saying "let's lynch lurkers" promotes discussion. And "to make a point" states exactly that. "speak up or die." Jingle should probably reply to the next part, but as far as i can see, it goes - OMGUS OMGUS OMGUS ##vote -##vote x 10 - no discussion, the guy who got OMGUS'd has nothing to attack/defend. Checkmate. Turns out, he was VT o.O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ That being said, Jingle has only made very light commitments and commented on very obvious/easy things. Lazer, you still look worse. What ever his stance may be, he clearly took the time to read through JingleHell's post. He's also taking a firm stance against a player, and making a clear attempt at analysis (even if it is only day 1). You spend half your post talking about his first post, then address one of his points... then the rest I don't even understand. You have very strong feelings about Lazer, care to solidify your case for him to be a "top priority lynch?" He pushed him for a bit, and then finally let up once everyone else had suspicions on Release. His change of stance is well timed to distance himself from his provoking, but he still leaves himself an open avenue to target Release later on based on his meta from a game where Lazer played the same but got a different response from Release than this game.. The other thing that I found scummy about him was his reason for suspecting Jingle in this case: On July 05 2012 11:37 Hapahauli wrote:
--SNIP--
In conclusion, FOS on JingleHell. His actions regarding D1 voting are contradictory, and he's taken a very suspicious stance on anti-bandwagnoning so early into day 1.
I don't get how being anti-bandwagon can be seen as suspicious. Bandwagoning is terrible and I completely agree with Jingle's stance on it, seeing as I was the victim of a D1 mislynch in XVIII. Scum don't have to push for a majority vote this game, they can let us rile ourselves up and can vote with little risk of getting themselves caught in the mislynch votecount. FoS: Hapahauli So let's see. That is a whole total of 5(!) people who you cast some dirt on in just one post. YourHarry, Mackin, Evul, Release and Hapa. Except for Hapa, all you are doing here is very softly pressuring them. And I'm not even sure you can call it that. You havn't said anything about these people since you posted this case, why? You say they look suspicious but yet you don't follow up with more pressure. It's like you prepare to jump on the bandwagon here. I kinda want to hear your response tho before I decide to vote you or not. Hapa has somewhat overwhelmed you with suspicion atm and you havn't even been close to be able to defend youself. Here, Lazer states his support for yet another person who seems scummy. As i said before, agreeing with everyone is a way for mafia to win favor among town. Lazer then goes on to a back and forth post with Jingle, with not posting much of worth. But something that was really scummy for me in that post was this.
Again, you attack him for summary. You also conveniently ignore the other three original accusations he made around this time. This is not true.
Your final attack is based on a "scummy" one-liner of Lazer's:
+ Show Spoiler +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. 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. This post had a really scummy sentence, "I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that". This is an excuse mafia use often when they are pushing a mislynch. Often, it is not because bad play but because mafia manipulated the game. Lazer then says that he leaves and continues posting from his phone. As of now, i am equally suspicous of Lazer as i am Hopeless, still unsure of who to vote for. Other players opinions are welcome. But for now ##FoS Lazermonkey
Lazer's quote: "I will push people I think are scummy. If they flip green because they play bad, i can't be blamed for that." That's not scummy. That's a perfectly legitimate townie attitude. He wants to push people that are scum. He's not making excuses for mislynches at all.
In conclusion, your case on LazerMonkey is based off his first-post, one or two instances of summary posting, and a not-so-suspicious one-liner. Your evidence champions summary while ignoring Lazer's posting tone and authoritative accusations of several other players, including yourself.
Compare this to Hopeless1der's behavior, who built a case on lies, has been wildly different from his townie meta, who has shown well-established scumtell's throughout his defensive posts. There's no way LazerMonkey is a better lynch than Hopeless.
The case against Hopeless again for reference:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=12#230
|
EPT
