|
Jingle, iamperfection, tube... Can't be this easy right.
But again, it seems almost FASCINATING to me how three people in a row found THIS POST scummy!!
Iamperfection: "Isnt posting meaningless lists about every one in the game a way that mafia try to do to buy town cred. By being non commital you are trying to keep you options open so nothing can be used against you later. In fact the first guide that is posted in this thread states that what you just did is something scum do to try and hide. Why would a townie try and do something like that. I would say you are reading a diffrent section of the guide."
Jingle: "Your "contribution" is a giant summary post listing each person and a thought about them? Even tube's posting wasn't this bad, because it would have taken him about a week's worth of posting to provide this much clutter. My vote is in the right place, and going nowhere."
tube: "Many lengthy posts" doesn't indicate townie in any way [referring to Obvious.660's post]. You call this "clear reasoning"?
He still wants to lynch me because supposedly I didn't use enough quotes and should be read more carefully. -No analysis provided-"
|
Quoting Jingle: "Even tube's posting wasn't this bad"
This makes me partially doubt tube and jingle scum team. Straightforward defense of scum partner like this is not very common. But maybe it wasn't [i]that[/] straightforward and even if it was, they could still be scums together.
|
On July 18 2012 03:10 JingleHell wrote:
And because three people agreed in the public thread that somehow makes them the three scum? You're well into the "bizarre WIFOM" territory. I can't even see the slightest train of thought where we'd want to be in that position if we were scum.
Of course agreeing with something that is agreeable is not scummy. It is possible that towns can agree on something.
Agreeing with something that I do not find agreeable - that Obvious.660's post is a "meanginless" scummy post - in a very short period of time, with the common motivation to lynch the same person, is scummy.
|
On July 18 2012 03:31 tube wrote:
Why would someone blame you for a possible mislynch should Obvious get lynched. If it's not obvious, nobody was taking you seriously when you were randomly voting Obvious except Obvious himself. I only voted him once I actually started getting a read, as did Jingle and perfection.
Three people found it scummy because it's scummy, how's that fascinating?
I don't need anyone to distract the town away from me because nobody had any good reason to lynch me to begin with. If you think otherwise explain, not with some roundabout theory that bases itself on false assumptions.
Your reasoning that I may not be the person to be blamed if Obvious.660 lead to mislynch is logical. I agree that if I was away, and Obvious flipped town, I should not be the one to seem most scummy.. But even despite not providing any reason to vote Obvious.660, I did strongly push his bandwagon - mostly to see his reactions - which could seem scummy in many people's eyes. As you recently read, Hapha's accusation against me included this as my scuminess.
Also, I still fail to see how Obvious.660 personal reads of everyone in the game is scummy. At least when I play mafia, we frequently take turns to reveal reads on every player in the game.
|
On July 18 2012 03:47 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 03:42 YourHarry wrote:On July 18 2012 03:10 JingleHell wrote:
And because three people agreed in the public thread that somehow makes them the three scum? You're well into the "bizarre WIFOM" territory. I can't even see the slightest train of thought where we'd want to be in that position if we were scum. Of course agreeing with something that is agreeable is not scummy. It is possible that towns can agree on something. Agreeing with something that I do not find agreeable - that Obvious.660's post is a "meanginless" scummy post - in a very short period of time, with the common motivation to lynch the same person, is scummy. You're literally not making any sense. Scum all making the same point is beyond silly behavior. Like I said, you're taking us into useless WIFOM arguments here, but unless a situation is clutch, scum should be trying to avoid linking their fates like that. Especially in a D1 situation, where there's people making miniature cases every direction, the last thing scum should do is all be pointing the same direction. You're grasping at ridiculous straws, and not doing much to convince me of your innocence. Frankly, if obvious flips red, you and Hapa will be the first people I'll be looking at. Clearly a lot of people find him at least worthy of watching, if not a current vote, as evidenced by the many posts stating such.
Now you are tackling on a different point. Whether scums all making the same point is a silly behavior or not is WIFOM. If everyone in this game feels that it is silly for scums to all agree so openly, then it would be a GREAT strategy for scums to agree so they will not be suspected by people like you.
|
An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something.
|
Of course my reason for voting tube is based on something else, which I previously outlined.
|
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
I highlighted what I found scummy in red. His intro does seem like forced narration to seem pro-townie. I have no problem with rest of the post.
|
On July 18 2012 04:06 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 04:00 YourHarry wrote:
An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something. Actually it came from someone who was in on pressuring the change of style, right after they said welcome to the thread. That person was obvious, and is the reason for my vote on him, which you're using as a "case" against me. That's equally ridiculous.
My reason for suspecting you is based on your finding Obvious.660 latest analysis of everyone in the game scummy, not based on your suspecting obvious.660's post that accused tube of scumslip. This and two others players quickly joining Obvious.660's bandwagon based on the obvious.660's analysis of the players. Which I found hard to understand.
Obvious.660 may be OK lynch now that I think about it. But, while it is hard to grasp how a townie player could mess up so bad as to interpret change of writing style as scum slip, it is ALSO hard to accept that scum would make this obviously non-sense conclusion...
|
On July 18 2012 04:07 calgar wrote:
I’m inclined to change my vote to yourharry now. I would like to go with my read but I realize my single vote isn’t going to matter if no one else feels the same way. Here’s why:
1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points.
2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam.
3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town
4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case.
##Unvote
##Vote YourHarry
1. I responded against hapha's case. Please read it and let me know what you think.
2. I pissed you off by posting one liners! LOL. Anyways, is it anti-town? Hmm, I guess putting in more thoughts and reasoning behind the posts would serve the town better. But after I read the posts, I did not have a strong opinion. So I posted one liners to incite some reactions. Either way, is it a sign of scum? I don't particularly see a reason why scum would want to bring attention to himself by posting spam one-liners to piss people off.
3. Because I voted for someone you strongly think is town, does it make me more likely I am scum? Yes, but only a little bit. Players have different perspectives and and a post some townies may deem scummy could seem protown to others.
4. Yes my posting styles changed after I am accused by Hapha. But if you look back, I was accused and voted by Jingle earlier on, which I responded in one liners. But why does it matter? Am I suddenly becoming anxious as scum that I am going to get lynched? I was never close to being lynched. I think the max votes I had on me was 1, at a time... although people did express some suspicions.
|
Jingle, regarding the "under the bus" comment, you would have to be totally careless to make that kind of scum slip.
And I know doing this will make me scummy, but I will anyway because my opinions changed 
Vote Obvious.660
|
EDBOW: Above post would may look scummy because I changed my opinions many times and even defended Obvious.660 quite a bit. And now I suddenly change my vote. Also, it comes after calgar's vote on me, so some people may argue that I am jumping on the bandwagon that looks most promising.
But I think while two scummy points that Jingle pointed out below are almost ridiculously careless, but I have experienced at least a couple of games where too obviously scummy to scums turned out to be indeed scums.
1. Obvious.660 suspecting tube's change of writing style to be scum slip
2. Obvious.660 making "under the bus" comment
|
And calgar, how could you! After I defended your "wait and see" comment 
|
On July 18 2012 04:07 calgar wrote:
1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points.
2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam.
3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town
4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case.
OK. How should i have played if I wanted to lay low, LOL. I am BTW not claiming blue here LOL. WIFOM LOL.
Are you role hunting here?!!
|
On July 18 2012 05:18 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 04:34 YourHarry wrote:And calgar, how could you! After I defended your "wait and see" comment This is the kind of stuff I’m talking about. What is the point of this post? You defended me, so what, I don’t owe you any loyalty when you have been posting like you have. Act pro-town and you’ll earn my trust.
OK... Wait a sec. I obviously was joking here...
|
|
|
OK first time I forgot the ##. Here I go again:
##Unvote
##Vote Obvious.660
|
Of course he should have claimed. Though claiming may or may not have saved him, since this is semi-open set up. I am probably going to guess that he would have lived.
On the positive side. I AM POSITIVE THAT FULLA IS TOWN.
|
And, I want you guys to be convinced that if tube is town, so am I.
|
On July 18 2012 07:10 Fulla wrote:Where the hell is obvious? Sigh.. It seems it's all down to me, I hate it when this happens. Let obvious be lynched or vote tube and force a no lynch. Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 06:16 JingleHell wrote:
Fulla, when he made that post, he was leaving his vote on tube, and also called me suspicious. Does that make us the fourth and fifth scum in that list of three you're accrediting to him?
Good point, I overlooked that. Let's see what he flips then. ## Vote Obvious.660
This vote was made 50 minutes before the deadline. At this time, Obvious.660 had 6 votes vs. iamperfection's 3 votes. Fulla could have voted on someone else or not voted and the Obvious.660 lynch was VERY IMMINENT. There is no way scum Fulla would have risked looking suspicious knowing that he will be a part of a mislynch that was going to happen ANYWAY.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
