|
On July 20 2012 22:22 Hapahauli wrote:
This is JingleHell's 4th game. His beliefs on roleblock notification aren't only influenced by game XX. I suggest looking at what the rules were regarding roleblock notification in his previous two games.
In Jingle's 1st game XVIII, unfortunately whether vanilla townies get roleblocked does not get mentioned, at least in the rules.
In Jingle's 2nd game XIX, this is also mentioned by the mod. I didn't not read the whole thread to see it is mentioned again by other players. He died on night 1 though, but I assume he probably read the list of the roles. Whether vanillas get roleblocked is not specifically mentioned, and but the writing of the rules should be reasonably interpreted as everyone getting roleblocked notification - as it does not say only power roles get the notification. Still, there is some room for misunderstanding, if this was Jingle's only game.
+ Show Spoiler +Skilled Bullshitter (Role Blocker) You are a skilled thread derailer, you have the ability to take any thread on TL and subtly derail it with complete bullshit. So subtle that no one notices, but effective enough that no one in the thread can have a coherent conversation and spend the entire night trying to refute the total nonsensical bullshit that you brought up. Each night you may choose one target of your choice to bullshit. That player will not be able to perform any actions for the night. Your target will be informed they were roleblocked. Roleblocks do not block passive abilities.
Jingle's 3rd game, XX, it had been mentioned ample of times by me and other players that vanillas also get roleblock notifications. But it is also mentioned by the moderator Radfield (I bolded the part specifying this):
+ Show Spoiler +On June 30 2012 05:27 Radfield wrote:
Things to keep in mind:
*The Godfather is immune to tracking.
*The godfather will return as Innocent, and a miller with return as Guilty to detective checks.
*The Miller will show up to tracking as visiting a random player.
*Mafia players will be tracked to the target of their roles, not to the kill target. In the event a mafia player does NOT use his role, he will be tracked to the kill target.
*Players will be notified if they are roleblocked, whether they have a role or not.
|
On July 20 2012 23:11 YourHarry wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 22:22 Hapahauli wrote:
This is JingleHell's 4th game. His beliefs on roleblock notification aren't only influenced by game XX. I suggest looking at what the rules were regarding roleblock notification in his previous two games.
In Jingle's 1st game XVIII, unfortunately whether vanilla townies get roleblocked does not get mentioned, at least in the rules. In Jingle's 2nd game XIX, this is also mentioned by the mod. I didn't not read the whole thread to see it is mentioned again by other players. He died on night 1 though, but I assume he probably read the list of the roles. Whether vanillas get roleblocked is not specifically mentioned, and but the writing of the rules should be reasonably interpreted as everyone getting roleblocked notification - as it does not say only power roles get the notification. Still, there is some room for misunderstanding, if this was Jingle's only game. + Show Spoiler +Skilled Bullshitter (Role Blocker) You are a skilled thread derailer, you have the ability to take any thread on TL and subtly derail it with complete bullshit. So subtle that no one notices, but effective enough that no one in the thread can have a coherent conversation and spend the entire night trying to refute the total nonsensical bullshit that you brought up. Each night you may choose one target of your choice to bullshit. That player will not be able to perform any actions for the night. Your target will be informed they were roleblocked. Roleblocks do not block passive abilities. Jingle's 3rd game, XX, it had been mentioned ample of times by me and other players that vanillas also get roleblock notifications. But it is also mentioned by the moderator Radfield (I bolded the part specifying this): + Show Spoiler +On June 30 2012 05:27 Radfield wrote:
Things to keep in mind:
*The Godfather is immune to tracking.
*The godfather will return as Innocent, and a miller with return as Guilty to detective checks.
*The Miller will show up to tracking as visiting a random player.
*Mafia players will be tracked to the target of their roles, not to the kill target. In the event a mafia player does NOT use his role, he will be tracked to the kill target.
*Players will be notified if they are roleblocked, whether they have a role or not.
Dear Harry, Remember this?
On July 13 2012 10:41 JingleHell wrote:Meh, I wasn't expecting some hidden easter egg shiznit, and it's my final newbie game, so I was just going to /in and go back to dig out the juicy bits.
Or was I casually setting up my own defense back then when I posted something humorously self-aggrandizing to explain missing that? Before I knew roles? If you'd like to make a case, please feel free to do so. Currently you're just making my head hurt.
|
On July 20 2012 23:15 JingleHell wrote:Dear Harry, Remember this? Show nested quote +On July 13 2012 10:41 JingleHell wrote:On July 13 2012 10:31 Hopeless1der wrote:
Yay you found it! Meh, I wasn't expecting some hidden easter egg shiznit, and it's my final newbie game, so I was just going to /in and go back to dig out the juicy bits. Or was I casually setting up my own defense back then when I posted something humorously self-aggrandizing to explain missing that? Before I knew roles? If you'd like to make a case, please feel free to do so. Currently you're just making my head hurt.
You should explain yourself a bit better. It took me a couple of seconds to understand what you are trying to say. The "easter egg" you are referring to is our mod's request that everyone type "I will be active". So, since you missed that part of mod's request, I think what you are saying is that you are likely to also miss other tidbits about the rules.
But you also say "I was just going to /in and go back to dig out the juicy bits" indicating your plan to read the details of the rules after you sign up for the game. So, if you actually do go back and read the details of the rules after you sign up in your previous games, you should have known that vanillas also get roleblocked.
I am not saying you are 100% lying about not knowing the rules regarding vanillas getting roleblocked notifications. I am just providing evidence that support the possibility of you having known the rules and lying about it.
And as I provided earlier, even if you didn't know the rules prior to this game, you should have realized the implications of mod's clarification to mean that I was not rolehunting.
|
I have an idea. You keep coming up with crazy theories, and if anyone has the balls to bring them up again after you flip red, I'll defend myself in the process of getting them lynched too? Deal?
|
Hapha, I would like to summarize my previous defenses for people to see and to further discuss them
Regarding your accusation based on meta game:
Scum Harry would have tried to match previous meta. Town Harry did not care to try to match his meta. Maybe I will regret this. Defense:
+ Show Spoiler +
Haph. Regards to meta. While I believe that meta is very useful in determining town/scum alignments, I do not think it's useful to simply compare the length of the posts. Scum Harry does know that people like you, jingle, and hopeless would keep his eyes on my posts to compare meta from our previous game. I would be motivated to emulate the types of posts I made in Newbie XX, to mislead you guys that I am, yet again, town. And it would be easy to do - especially, if the length of the posts is the one thing I need to emulate. Look for my motivation of the posts - which I admit is lacking - because I am not sure who is suspicious. But in my defense, I did read every post in this thread.
Regarding your accusation of my voting pattern:
Scum Harry would have controlled his voting. I argue that it is not that difficult to do. Another possibility is that I suck so much being scum. The defense taken from reply against calgar:
+ Show Spoiler +True. Is this a scum tell? Are you going to argue that scums, since they know everyone else is town, would have hard time coming up with arguments for their "fake" suspicion? If so, I would agree with it. But it would not be difficult to manufacture fake suspicions. And I personally know that making lengthy posts analyzing players' scumminess would seem very protown. Scum Harry would have spent the effort to engineer some of these "dedicated suspicion".
Sometimes, I may have somewhat strong scum reads by Day 1. In this game, I had fleeting suspicions on various players which is clearly outlined by my (albeit short) posts and voting patterns. Again, you can argue that this is suspicious, but scum Harry, wanting to fit in with town, would have controlled his voting. Be strong and dedicated in your read, scum Harry would have reminded himself. Always back your voting and explain yourself, too, scum Harry, so people would read you as town.
Incidentally, I do not blame people for finding me suspicious for being all over the place, often with little reason. I often get in this kind of trouble in my other games. And I agree that I should explain myself more, although this is sometimes hard because my suspicions are often based on things that are seemingly trivial stuff. So, while it would be better for the town if I explained myself better and kept myself away from other players' suspicion, if there is one thing I am NOT going to do as a town, it is to build a fake case or engineer plausible reasons that I don't necessarily believe to be true just to convince others to lynch a player I think is scum.
Hapha's further suspicion of me.
[quote]Hapha wrote: Suspicious attitude on Calgar/Jingle:
[QUOTE]On July 20 2012 01:05 YourHarry wrote:
OH WOW. I THINK WE HAVE TO KILL JINGLE HELL........
JINGLE WHY DID YOU DRAW MAFIA..........
I WILL BE BACK LATER TO CLARIFY MY THOUGHTS[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]On July 20 2012 01:09 YourHarry wrote:
But....... Calgar today, i think. Jingle tomorrow maybe.[/QUOTE]
I am not sure why you find that suspicious, but if I had to guess it had something to do with of meta since I don't recall posting in that style in XX. After my suspicion of Jingle, I did outline what I was thinking:
+ Show Spoiler +Jingle, I am suspicious for pointing out the reason why scums targeted Evul. I also think that targeting Evul does not make sense AT ALL. Which brings me back to my third reason that I wanted to talk about earlier. Evul was about to get replaced out and there was no hint that he was a power role, so why target Evul? The only other explanation is: they targeted Evul to strictly to shift suspicion on other players in this game.
I also, like Jingle, thought that Hapha or calgar would be NK'ed, at least targeted. Not only people had strong town reads on these two players, on Day 1, which would make them good targets. But also from my perspective, I thought scum would try to target Hapha or calgar to support Day 2 lynch in me. This is because they were the two players who expressed strong suspicion of me on Day 1, so the story could be written that scum Harry wanted one of them dead.
Combining these two things, even if Evul wanted to shift suspicion on other players, I thought it would still be better for scums to target Hapha, for example, to strongly push for Harry lynch.
But the other explanation, posed by Evul, is original - that both Hapha AND calgar are scums. And scums thinking in this way, then, their night action would make sense if they can somehow establish that Evul NK = Hapha Calgar scum. Of course, I am not denying that townie is also capable of this kind of thinking. But I think this still renders some evidence that Jingle is more likely to be scum than before because his way of interpreting Evul's death makes sense in terms of mafia's motive.
In addition, Hapha, do you think this game matches Jingle's meta last game?
As for your second quote, are you suspecting me because even though I thought that Jingle was mafia, I wanted someone else (calgar) lynched today? My answer is that, while above spoiler is why I began to suspect Jingle again, I was still thinking things through. I openly and uninhibitedly posted my suspicions and plans of actions.
[quote]Hapha wrote:
"Desperation" to cast suspicion on JingleHell:
[url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=39#762]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=39#762[/url]
[url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=38#755]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=38#755[/url]
[url=http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=40#781]http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=351398¤tpage=40#781[/url]
[/quote]
While it is true that I think getting out of a lynch today is going to be very challenging, those are not desperation posts. In your first link, you can see the conflict in my thinking between suspicions on Jingle and lack of counter-claims. Your second link and third link further expresses my suspicion of Jingle and calgar. And although my actual case on Jingle and calgar came hours later, after I finished the re-read, this was what was going through my head when I was asking questions and casting suspicions on Jingle. And they would seem desperate if you have already made up your mind that I am scum making these posts.
|
EDBWOP (Please ignore my previous post, I reformatted it here):
On July 20 2012 23:55 YourHarry wrote:Hapha, I would like to summarize my previous defenses for people to see and to further discuss them Regarding your accusation based on meta game: Scum Harry would have tried to match previous meta. Town Harry did not care to try to match his meta. Maybe I will regret this. Defense: + Show Spoiler +
Haph. Regards to meta. While I believe that meta is very useful in determining town/scum alignments, I do not think it's useful to simply compare the length of the posts. Scum Harry does know that people like you, jingle, and hopeless would keep his eyes on my posts to compare meta from our previous game. I would be motivated to emulate the types of posts I made in Newbie XX, to mislead you guys that I am, yet again, town. And it would be easy to do - especially, if the length of the posts is the one thing I need to emulate. Look for my motivation of the posts - which I admit is lacking - because I am not sure who is suspicious. But in my defense, I did read every post in this thread.
Regarding your accusation of my voting pattern: Scum Harry would have controlled his voting. I argue that it is not that difficult to do. Another possibility is that I suck so much being scum. The defense taken from reply against calgar: + Show Spoiler +True. Is this a scum tell? Are you going to argue that scums, since they know everyone else is town, would have hard time coming up with arguments for their "fake" suspicion? If so, I would agree with it. But it would not be difficult to manufacture fake suspicions. And I personally know that making lengthy posts analyzing players' scumminess would seem very protown. Scum Harry would have spent the effort to engineer some of these "dedicated suspicion".
Sometimes, I may have somewhat strong scum reads by Day 1. In this game, I had fleeting suspicions on various players which is clearly outlined by my (albeit short) posts and voting patterns. Again, you can argue that this is suspicious, but scum Harry, wanting to fit in with town, would have controlled his voting. Be strong and dedicated in your read, scum Harry would have reminded himself. Always back your voting and explain yourself, too, scum Harry, so people would read you as town.
Incidentally, I do not blame people for finding me suspicious for being all over the place, often with little reason. I often get in this kind of trouble in my other games. And I agree that I should explain myself more, although this is sometimes hard because my suspicions are often based on things that are seemingly trivial stuff. So, while it would be better for the town if I explained myself better and kept myself away from other players' suspicion, if there is one thing I am NOT going to do as a town, it is to build a fake case or engineer plausible reasons that I don't necessarily believe to be true just to convince others to lynch a player I think is scum. Hapha's further suspicion of me. Show nested quote +Hapha wrote: Suspicious attitude on Calgar/Jingle:On July 20 2012 01:05 YourHarry wrote:
OH WOW. I THINK WE HAVE TO KILL JINGLE HELL........
JINGLE WHY DID YOU DRAW MAFIA..........
I WILL BE BACK LATER TO CLARIFY MY THOUGHTS On July 20 2012 01:09 YourHarry wrote:
But....... Calgar today, i think. Jingle tomorrow maybe. I am not sure why you find that suspicious, but if I had to guess it had something to do with of meta since I don't recall posting in that style in XX. After my suspicion of Jingle, I did outline what I was thinking: + Show Spoiler +Jingle, I am suspicious for pointing out the reason why scums targeted Evul. I also think that targeting Evul does not make sense AT ALL. Which brings me back to my third reason that I wanted to talk about earlier. Evul was about to get replaced out and there was no hint that he was a power role, so why target Evul? The only other explanation is: they targeted Evul to strictly to shift suspicion on other players in this game.
I also, like Jingle, thought that Hapha or calgar would be NK'ed, at least targeted. Not only people had strong town reads on these two players, on Day 1, which would make them good targets. But also from my perspective, I thought scum would try to target Hapha or calgar to support Day 2 lynch in me. This is because they were the two players who expressed strong suspicion of me on Day 1, so the story could be written that scum Harry wanted one of them dead.
Combining these two things, even if Evul wanted to shift suspicion on other players, I thought it would still be better for scums to target Hapha, for example, to strongly push for Harry lynch.
But the other explanation, posed by Evul, is original - that both Hapha AND calgar are scums. And scums thinking in this way, then, their night action would make sense if they can somehow establish that Evul NK = Hapha Calgar scum. Of course, I am not denying that townie is also capable of this kind of thinking. But I think this still renders some evidence that Jingle is more likely to be scum than before because his way of interpreting Evul's death makes sense in terms of mafia's motive.
In addition, Hapha, do you think this game matches Jingle's meta last game? As for your second quote, are you suspecting me because even though I thought that Jingle was mafia, I wanted someone else (calgar) lynched today? My answer is that, while above spoiler is why I began to suspect Jingle again, I was still thinking things through. I openly and uninhibitedly posted my suspicions and plans of actions. While it is true that I think getting out of a lynch today is going to be very challenging, those are not desperation posts. In your first link, you can see the conflict in my thinking between suspicions on Jingle and lack of counter-claims. Your second link and third link further expresses my suspicion of Jingle and calgar. And although my actual case on Jingle and calgar came hours later, after I finished the re-read, this was what was going through my head when I was asking questions and casting suspicions on Jingle. And they would seem desperate if you have already made up your mind that I am scum making these posts.
|
On July 20 2012 23:50 JingleHell wrote:
I have an idea. You keep coming up with crazy theories, and if anyone has the balls to bring them up again after you flip red, I'll defend myself in the process of getting them lynched too? Deal?
Don't worry, that won't happen. I promise.
I did propose what seems like a crazy theory, but I clearly provided evidence in why I think this theory may be true.
About 8 hours before deadline, I think it's about time for me to claim: vanilla townie
|
By the way, in case anyone thinks I'm just being dismissive...
If anyone feels the need, and has the ability, feel free to translate Harry's "case" against me into something I can understand without controlled substances, and I'll happily refute it. So far, the parts I've understood best have been the ones where he's suggested I'm involved in some overly complex, grandiose plot because my memory isn't perfect.
|
EDBWOP: hopefully a miller
|
On July 20 2012 23:04 calgar wrote:
@hopeless
You said you wanted me to make a case. What is your read now that you have read my huge explanation?
I've read through the responses you have and the biggest thing is you got Jingle to move his vote off you. At present, I am still reading into the case on YourHarry as I have yet to go through his filter. For who I'd want to lynch, coming after you is probably not going to happen until after iamperfection at this point in time since Hapah and Jingle seem to agree that you aren't the scummiest read right now.
Your tone has drastically changed and you are significantly less argumentative. As usual, this can be spun to look like scummy behavior, as with anything else. I initially found the timing of your breadcrumb and then calling Jingle out for his own breadcrumb a little off - Why reveal we have a blue role? - But since the mod clarified that you never even received a roleblock PM, this looks much better in your favor as his actions could have looked suspicious from your end.
I'm satisfied that you've maintained a stance that iamperfection is your strongest scumread. To be honest, I still have my suspicions that you're both scum and are bussing one another, but iamperfection has a more obvious scum feel to his filter, by which I mean he contributes very little to town.
I need to complete reading up on the case on YourHarry before I decide if I want to try to defend him in order to get iamperfection lynched today. Calgar, you're off the hook for now in my book.
|
On July 21 2012 00:05 JingleHell wrote:
By the way, in case anyone thinks I'm just being dismissive...
If anyone feels the need, and has the ability, feel free to translate Harry's "case" against me into something I can understand without controlled substances, and I'll happily refute it. So far, the parts I've understood best have been the ones where he's suggested I'm involved in some overly complex, grandiose plot because my memory isn't perfect.
What do you think about my case on calgar? Him not suspecting you even though he didn't get "roleblocked" notification from the mod?
|
Harry, to quote myself, since you're "Roleclaiming"...
On July 18 2012 08:28 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 08:27 calgar wrote:On July 18 2012 08:24 JingleHell wrote:
Why would you claim vet, though? It totally negates the value of it as a role. You would claim vanilla townie so as to not negate the value. Oh, great idea. Ok, since we can trust anyone who claims townie, let's just ask. Guys, who's scum?
Also...
On July 21 2012 00:06 YourHarry wrote:
EDBWOP: hopefully a miller
Harry says he HOPES he's a miller? Trying to discredit potential DT investigations or something? Yeah, ok scum, byebye.
|
LOL. Haha, really....... I expressed my hope to be a miller because I want to discredit potential DT investigation... WOW.
I hope if I die, I am a miller, which would be better for town than if I were NOT a miller.
|
On July 21 2012 00:08 YourHarry wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 00:05 JingleHell wrote:
By the way, in case anyone thinks I'm just being dismissive...
If anyone feels the need, and has the ability, feel free to translate Harry's "case" against me into something I can understand without controlled substances, and I'll happily refute it. So far, the parts I've understood best have been the ones where he's suggested I'm involved in some overly complex, grandiose plot because my memory isn't perfect. What do you think about my case on calgar? Him not suspecting you even though he didn't get "roleblocked" notification from the mod?
I don't understand your "case" on Calgar, either, actually. It seems to require the same sort of mental yoga that made me sprain my cerebral cortex trying to read your accusation against me.
|
On July 21 2012 00:13 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2012 00:08 YourHarry wrote:On July 21 2012 00:05 JingleHell wrote:
By the way, in case anyone thinks I'm just being dismissive...
If anyone feels the need, and has the ability, feel free to translate Harry's "case" against me into something I can understand without controlled substances, and I'll happily refute it. So far, the parts I've understood best have been the ones where he's suggested I'm involved in some overly complex, grandiose plot because my memory isn't perfect. What do you think about my case on calgar? Him not suspecting you even though he didn't get "roleblocked" notification from the mod? I don't understand your "case" on Calgar, either, actually. It seems to require the same sort of mental yoga that made me sprain my cerebral cortex trying to read your accusation against me.
I will summarize it here:
1. Calgar accepted my incorrect explanation of the rule that vanilla townies also get roleblocked notifications
2. Calgar believed Jingle was the JailKeeper and that Jingle jailed Calgar on N1
3. Calgar did not receive "roleblocked" notification
=> One of these do not make sense. When calgar realized that Jingle jailed calgar, he have tried to confirm the rule OR not believe Jingle's claim that calgar was jailed. Calgar does ask the moderator the conditions of roleblock notification, but only much later when I was interrogating him - when my intention of asking the question becomes reasonably clear.
Of course, calgar's "I did not receive any notification" is the perfect answer. Scum calgar SHOULD have said that "Yes, I got the roleblocked notification". But, there were minutes of pause between my first asking calgar whether he received the notification and his answer. Unfortunately, this fact makes my case against him weaker, but I do think that calgar clarified the rules with the mod via PM or QT which is why I asked:
+ Show Spoiler +On July 20 2012 09:14 YourHarry wrote:
If someone asks a question to mod in QT or via PM, would you answer them via QT or PM?
|
On July 21 2012 00:25 YourHarry wrote:I do think that calgar clarified the rules with the mod via PM or QT which is why I asked: + Show Spoiler +On July 20 2012 09:14 YourHarry wrote:
If someone asks a question to mod in QT or via PM, would you answer them via QT or PM? I don't really know if this is outside the scope of the rules/game or not, but if it isn't then the mods will confirm that I received no mod PM regarding the issue in between my posts, which is what you are suggesting.
|
Show me, exactly what you're talking about, from the filters. Burden of proof is on the accuser. Show me quotes, in context. Because if I remember the thread correctly, you're misrepresenting the hell out of that whole chunk of conversation.
|
EBWOP My last was directed at harry.
|
I actually remember facepalming every time Harry tried to "help" my case against Calgar while I was making it, because I didn't want guilt by association with Harry.
|
OK Jingle:
1. Calgar accepts my incorrect explanation the rules:
First, he thinks that vaillas do not receive roleblock notificaiton:
On July 19 2012 09:03 calgar wrote:
You were joking about defending me earlier. Asking people to claim? There's #12 on my list. "I do not want to disclose that right now." --> anti-town play. #13
Then, after he reads my post:
On July 19 2012 09:02 YourHarry wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2012 08:59 drwiggl3s wrote:On July 19 2012 08:57 YourHarry wrote:
Also, it would be interesting for people who were roleblocked to claim roleblocked. Are you saying we should tell the mafia who our blues are already? Vanilla townies also get roleblocked. So do scums 
He accepts that vanillas also get notification and withdraws suspicion #12 from above:
On July 19 2012 09:05 calgar wrote:
EBWOP I see your point, I retract #12.
He later clarifies this further:
On July 19 2012 21:19 calgar wrote:
In response to YourHarry, I made point #12 very quickly at the end of my pre-typed post. I was confused about what you were suggesting by claiming that people should claim role-blocked but you guys clarified it by the time I posted so I withdrew the claim because I understood what you meant.
2. Calgar believes that Jingle is Jailekeeper, who claims he Jailed Calgar:
Jingle: You know this happened right? Do you want me to provide quotes for this?
3. Calgar did not receive roleblock notification:
On July 20 2012 09:07 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 20 2012 09:00 YourHarry wrote:
calgar, if you don't answer this immediately, this is going to make you very suspicious. I didn't receive a notification. Under what conditions is someone notified if they are RBed/Jailed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
