|
On September 23 2012 08:55 Atreides- wrote:
@debears, I didn't really see much substance in your case vs Dandel. A lot of it was based on your case against rethos (which I disagreed with)
and all thrawn really did was point out the stupid things that remedy said. Again, I can't see the difference here between town mistakes vs mafia intentional bad posting.
Then u don't understand the remedy Case, it's not about quality of posts it's about his likely motivations behind his posting
|
Well that leaves dandel out of my reads. Gonna get back once I'm back on laptop
|
On September 23 2012 09:06 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2012 09:05 Atreides- wrote:
So it looks like 3 town and 6 mafia still alive? Not including the possibility of SK
I know that was most likely a typo, but it really does look like that.
LOL
|
Also according to my logic case kush is scum, or the mason claim is false, or no scum voted drazak, or I hallucinated while reading my role pm
|
I don't know why a scum kush would have tried so hard to change everyone's vote to stutters(green). Remedy(green) was already looking very likely to be lynched yet kush fought hard to change people's votes.
|
I'll do it in a couple hrs when I'm off from phone posting
|
ok kush, i'm back. prepare for an epic post soon
|
First, kush's case against jacob and whatever I think while reading his filter:
The first accusation you make is that he's an active lurker (a weird phrase but I know what you mean) and that he doesn't take stances. So I'm gonna talk about some of his reads.
Here's the first read he makes: (here) It comes in at a time when sonic and I were going at it pretty strongly and his opinion on the issue is, well I don't really know. He doesn't give it. He does sorta talk about the issue but does not come out and say if he thinks either sonic or I look more scummy, and in his next post he has this to say about the issue: "I am going to stay mostly away from the thrawn kush sonic debacle for the moment it’s not as clear as it should be." Jacob what was so unclear about it that caused you to not want to discuss it? Later in that same post he talks about the debears/thrawn issue and ends up saying this: "Both are plausible I will need more time to work out which is which" but he doesn't end up posting that read. Those are the two most dramatic issues of the start of the game but he doesn't want to talk about them or he needs more time to work them out but ends up not doing so. What I remember most from jacob's posting was the rethos stuff. So, rethos comes into the thread saying that he had a lurking plan. Jacob asks him this:"Wait you were lurking on purpose? That is your entire reason for lurking? "Hey guys don't lynch me I was lurking on purpose" Why would you do that? What do you gain from it? (apart from a social life) Please elaborate". He does question rethos but if there is any suspicion contained in those questions it is very faint. Then after rethos responds jacob makes this post and he never commits too strongly to believing or disbelieving rethos. It's a bunch of sentences and each contain very slight reads that are in contradiction with the read of the other sentences. He finally commits to a scum read on rethos in this post:
On September 21 2012 18:47 JacobStrangelove wrote:
I don't see comfirmation bias in that, in the space of about 4 posts he has lied several times. One he lies about being bored. Two he lies about his defense not being based on intentinal lurking and he admits to lying about having the plan in this first place.
Scum have plenty of reason to lie, town don't. Just say he was town.. he wouldn't see himself as more a target than anyone else who is lurking. I think guilt gave him away. Also if he is town and lies.... then he is playing the game very wrong...
He points out that rethos lied several times. This was something that I pointed out first, and something that jacob did not even seem to think was happening before I posted about it. And at the end of the post there's the "if's he's town" part where he could be leaving himself an out.
Here are some posts that are representative of what I'm talking about when I say his posts don't contain reads:
On September 19 2012 13:54 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Oh cool stutters is here *waits* Funny how you show up right after I make a statement about you but it could be coincidence.
So.... did what stutters did make him suspicious or not?
Another similar post:
On September 19 2012 14:03 JacobStrangelove wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 13:58 KillingTime wrote:
I just woke up - yeah I meant to post more last night but couldn't for irl reasons. Sorry I know that looked bad. Yeah it looks really bad, that said assuming you are mafia you would probably do everything you could to get a post out to avoid this... (as in last night although you would probably also do a post like this anyway)
Once again I by the time I finish reading the post I have no idea what his final read was.
Go read his filter and a lot of it's similar to the two above quotes. After reading a jacob post you are left with a often weak and sometimes dizzying notion of what jacob's actual read is. When he gives reads a lot of times he'll throw in one of these: (but here's something that could make my read the opposite of what it is)
Another one of your points about him is that it's not the same jacob from last game. I went through his filter from that game and he does ramble on a lot but he does no where near the amount of providing himself outs for his reads.
So yeah I'd say jacob looks scummy.
Now onto your other questions specifically addressed to me:
On September 23 2012 11:55 kushm4sta wrote:
What caused you to drop your suspicion of dandel/rethos? Because it came totally out of the blue.
I did not drop my suspicion. My decision to not lynch dandel was given here:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 23 2012 03:09 thrawn2112 wrote:
For the people who think dandel's posting is scummy, consider this:
A lot of the stuff he has said looks scummy, but it only looks scummy if you already think rethos is scum. He's being accused of trying to deflect attention onto remedy, but lets look at the motivations behind that. Yes, he could do it if he is scum, but would he be so obvious about it? Also if he was trying to deflect onto remedy then wouldn't the other mafia try to pitch in and help deflect? Now if he is town, then of course he will be super aggressive about trying to get other people to comment on his reads. That's pretty much a townie's primary objective if they think that they are gonna be mislynched. If they know they will die then the most helpful thing they could possibly to is to try and get people discussion their reads so that when they flip green then town will have a lot to look at.
Like I said I've thought dandel's posting was scummy but that scum read is only based off of me thinking that rethos was scum. And one thing I haven't considered about rethos is that if he was lying about being bored he could still be town. Also it is somewhat accepted that you are supposed to give replacements a decent amount of time to play before you lynch them. So for all of those reasons I don't like the idea of lynching dandel today. I think more time is needed to get a read on him.
Therefore, ##Unvote
So now I want to lynch either remedy or stutters. I think both are very good options. I've talked a lot about remedy but basically nobody outside of the people who share reads on everything have shared their reads on him.
Rethos was still my primary scum read. (rethos...not dandel, very important) I had thought that dandel had said some suspicious stuff and I was still prepared to lynch him, but then I realized that how dandel was acting could also likely be how a town player would act and that I might have been influenced by confirmation bias by already thinking rethos is scum. When players get replaced you almost always want to allow some time to make a read on them because the person they replaced might have been just an awful player. So for those two reasons (the confirmation bias possibility, and giving replacements time to make reads and vote) I decided to hold off on lynching him. I did not change my read on rethos... I was deciding to hold off on dandel because of policy.
On September 23 2012 11:55 kushm4sta wrote:Your plan originally was to vote for dandel then change your vote to stutters if it became clear dandel wasn't getting lynched. Why did you abandon your plan for remedy?
I'm assuming you mean abandon my plan for stutters? My position was always that remedy was my #2 read behind rethos, at lowest it was tied with stutters for #2. When you began pressuring me to vote stutters, your argument was that the remedy lynch had happened too easily. Then you were pretty aggressive about trying to get stutters lynched. So for the same reason you said you didn't like the remedy lynch, I was distrustful about your aggressiveness concerning stutters. Now that they've both flipped green it actually makes you look town because there'd be no reason to try so hard to get town to switch their votes from one mislynch onto another.
|
That case does influence my read of jacob to be more townish than I previously thought. Not because of the quality of the arguments (i'll let you know what I think about the actual case when I finish reading it) but because of the sheer amount of work he put into it and how he is actually very clear with his accusations which was my (and kush's) problem with his previous posting.
I'm starting to think that the interactions and accusations between me/jacob/kush (all varying degrees of the more active posters in the thread) suggests that there could be a large portion of mafia among the lurkers.
|
Kush what's your read on killing?
|
Ok jacob while reading your post, something that stuck out is how has killing been called scummy by pretty much everyone yet nobody ever makes cases or tries to start a lynch on him? As far as my memory serves me debears has come the closest by voting for him. This point has actually been brought up several times by several people but somehow killing always gets swept under the rug. People were talking about killing a lot at the start of the game but since then it's died down to almost no conversation about him.
|
On September 23 2012 23:08 kushm4sta wrote:
so I just read killing's filter for the first time in like 2 days. I thoght that there were specifically 2 things kilLing did that made him look really town. Now I can only find one.
He initiates the plan to check the mason chat.
this doesn't guarantee him town.
but I read his filter and honestly it just does not seem that suspicious to me.
granted he has been quite afk. I would say its a town leaning null read atm.
Only 1 thing that makes him look town, but it doesn't guarantee him town, he doesn't seem that suspicious and is a town leaning null read?
Can you look at it again and post a read that is more logical and explained? I don't see how you can read his filter, find less things that make him look town that you originally thought did, decide that the one thing you found doesn't guarantee him town, and then come to the conclusion that he's a town/null read.
|
Sharrant are you around? You are seen as practically confirmed town mason so you should be sharing reads since your reads are most trustworthy.
|
If I have to pick between kush and killing because of the "kush is soft defending killing argument'" I think killing is the best lynch. Now kush has been on my radar the same way he was in our last game. First it's very hard to get a strong read on him if you're judging off of his reads, they are often pretty wild. Early on in the game I decided to consider him null read because of those things but there have been several points afterwards where I've thought he was town. Combine that with me not understanding why a scumkush would justify crusading so hard to switch the lynch from green remedy to green stutters... Town-kush is what I think. Killing on the other hand has somehow managed to avoid the spotlight forever. I and everyone else was suspicious of him D1 but since then I can't remember him being talked about in-depth till just recently. Look at his vote for rethos. (just saw kush pointed it out) Looks like his vote isn't based on much reasoning other than a lynch-liars policy. I don't see any reason he votes him other than that, he even says his read on the situation is a null read. Null-read on someone you're voting for is a big gamble.
|
|
|
On September 23 2012 23:18 Dandel Ion wrote:I was saying Killing has a "higher chance", meaning I have less of a town read on him than I have on Kush. It's a direct comparison.
I don't currently think Killing is too scummy, but I aknowledge the possibility that he might be. He's pretty null to me though.
I don't think Kush is scum. In other words, I think Kush is town.
Now that your past reads except for debears are gone, what are your current scum reads? I haven't seen you give any since the lynch. You discuss the possibility that killing might be scummier than kush but your read on him is null.
|
Killing those reads are very non committal, which of those do you feel most strongly about?
|
ok nvm about the question, I see your preferred lynch is dandel. Still though, even that was a very non committal stance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
