|
Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 02:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
sweet jumping jesus on a pogo stick
Debears: First off I like your posts about atreides. But on to a momre striking observation, I think the only single thing that you have said different from me were 1) the rethos stuff and 2) when you voted for killing where I voted for drazak. (but even that's something I said I would have done) Now that the pattern has continued for so long I'm really starting to see how strange your posting looks. You seem to like coming into the thread after I've given a read and giving the same exact read. I'd been dismissing it so far because I can't really blame someone for having the same read I do especially just during D1, but now that you come in all over atreides after I have just done the same thing really points to you not wanting to come up with original ideas so FOS debears.
The funny thing here is, thrawn, is actually I was onto Atreides before you. Here is your first post about Atreides. Look at the timestamp.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 22:31 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 09:16 Atreides- wrote:I wasn't around after my last post, and I mixed up the voting deadline by an hour (thought it would be an hour from now, my bad). Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 15:10 Atreides- wrote:
I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. Atreides, I'm not satisfied about the context of your 1-minute-after-deadline post. In that post you said a no-lynch would have been the best choice, and later when asked about the no-lynch thing you said you didn't know about it until a mod confirmed it as real in the thread. Which means that before you made that after-deadline post, you had been following the thread closely enough to see when marv confirmed no-lynch. Marv's post happened at this time. However 14 minutes after marv's post Keirathi posted a vote count and specified the exact lynch time in big bold blue text. People had also been talking about lynch time because there was some confusion about it. So to me it looks like you really weren't reading the thread. You have also said that "weren't around after my last post" which reads as you saying you weren't reading the thread. Clarify the context of all that please.
Now look at the timestamp from my first post about him.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012[ 12:40 debears wrote:I have a couple of thoughts from reading through all this craziness. First, this jumped out at me. Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 09:01 Atreides- wrote:
God damn this thread blew up fast. I would've went with a no lynch over Drazak but it doesn't matter now. Why would you want a no lynch? Even though the mason claim caused confusion, there were two reasonable candidates in drazak and KillingTime who had been lurking with scummy tells. All a no lynch would have done is keep lurkers around. @SDM + Show Spoiler + Sonic Death Monkey Sweden. September 20 2012 11:20. Posts 403 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 20 2012 10:45 thrawn2112 wrote:
Also, the Cubu mason claim just looks way too convienient... all throughout the last half of D1 he is asking us to trust him abhout things we have no possible way of confirming and if he's mafia then cubu is the safest townie to lie about. At the point when he dropped the cubu claim I didn't think and I don't think anyone else thought that cubu was going to ever post again.
I was thinking about this at the time, but it kind of felt far fetched because Cubu hadn't cast his vote and it seemed weird that he would assumed Cubu wouldn't be back to the thread at least for voting. And if Cubu is in on it, he's basically given up 2 scum. I think looking closer at the exact timing of the various claims he's made may be important. The "outing" of Cubu came late, although it seemed to me the set-up of Cubu as his fake mason buddy would've to have been planned in advance. I will get back on this. His timing can be explained by town and mafia motivations. Town - He waited until the final hour (if i am correct) when he had 6 votes on himself. His back was against the wall and if he is mason it preserves an important part of us. Mafia - By waiting until the end, he sent us into some confusion. We were stuck in a situation where our biggest bandwagons were gone, as Kush said. And, it ended up pushing our focus on lurkers and a mislynch. I have not been able to go through any filters yet to look at everyone's reasoning for their votes. From a first glance, there was good reasoning for most of us for voting who we voted for. Still, I will check more in depth.
Oh wait, another post about Atreides from me. Look at the timestamp.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 16:02 debears wrote:Show nested quote + Atreides- United States. September 20 2012 15:10. Posts 71 PM Profile Quote #
filter
I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. If I had, I would've suggested it quite a while ago. I'm assuming that voting for a no-lynch works the same way as voting for a lynch, in that we just need a majority of votes (and not every vote like you said). Maybe I'm wrong on this.
There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens".
So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else. Where do you get that this was the consensus. There is a reason why they showed up as targets. Although they posted, their posts did not contain much. They voted for other players without stating their own reasons. One thing has just now came to my mind. Show nested quote +The instant bandwagon against him is pretty interesting, and it's obvious now that the mafia had a strong hand in it. Is that why you wanted a no lynch? Show nested quote + The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. The problem with this logic is that you could have said the same for drazak if you don't look at the situation with hindsight. Drazak and Killing did similar things. In fact, any lynching can be due to mafia. Who do you feel is the most mafia right now? Also, mafia can essentially bandwagon on a no lynch also. A no lynch makes it alright for everyone to prevent taking sides on arguments "because no one has strong feelings one way or another". The mafia can hide behind it.
Looks like you came in after me on Atreides. Yet, you come out and lie saying that you accused him first. Then you say I continue to cockride you?
FOS Thrawn
Also, did anyone notice that although I specifically asked Atreides who he thought was the most mafia, he did not acknowledge the question one bit?
|
@thrawn
However debears did point out that marv posted about the no-lynch a minute after his last post before deadline so it's not a 100% confirmed lie but I don't buy that he wasn't lurking in the thread
I didn't point out that marv's post was 1 minute after atreides last one before the lynch. But now that you bring it up I do see that is true.
So it is very possible that he knew about the no lynch right after he posted. If so, why did he wait to bring it up right after the night started? He already knew about the drazak lynch at the deadline so he had to have been reading the thread. I'm not sure if you covered this part yet and I don't want to read through your filters right now.
The other possibility is that he didn't see the no lynch post. Still, he knew about it at the exact time of the deadline and got the post about the no lynch in. Thus, he must have been reading the thread
I bring up this again to illustrate that, either way you look at it, he had to have been looking at the thread. His excuse about mixing up the times has no ground.
This does also bring up a better question.
@Stutters
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 06:08 Stutters695 wrote:Sorry, not sure why that submitted when I hadn't pressed enter or used my mouse. Reread the rules, this is plurality voting not majority. Even if you hold a majority you won't die until the day ends. Also when you unvote you don't say a name after. Just would like a clarification for future reference since the rules don't mention it one way or another; Are we allowed to vote no lynch?Now moving on to this trainwreck: Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:47 Sharrant wrote:
@Thrawn
The Mason set up I'm used to has all masons being able to talk to each other, as opposed to pairs of masons that speak only to their partner.
With that information in mind, rethink about what plans I might have had, and I think you'll see what I was bread crumbing for you and debears to do if you were both mafia.
For now, Thrawn, I'm ready to concede that you're town. There are still things that don't add up in my eyes, and those are the things involving debears.
@debears
Killing came back into my sights a few pages ago. I dropped him again after his post mentioning Atreides that you quoted. You're right though, I thought he would have made more posts since I came back.
@SDM, @debears
I'm going to have to agree with you two at this point. At this point my vote is going to be going to killer, Stutters' recent posts have put him on good footing, and Cubu is still just an unkown quantity.
unvote Stutter695
vote KillingTime
@Rethos you have missed things. Thrawn picked up on it, but he's unsure whether or not he believes me.
Since this is piling up so much, I guess I'll be the one that has to claim today, although it's already pretty obvious.
I'm Mason, I was trying to bread crumb debears and Thrawn into claiming Mason under the assumption that all masons are aware and can talk, rather than just pairs. That's why I brought up the fact that they could be masons several times either directly our roundabout, to give them an easy way out of looking scummy that matches what they had already done. If we had voted debears up and he had claimed mason, we would have immediately had two mafia members. But this was before I knew that Masons were pairs and that there could be multiple pairs.
@Drazak
... You honestly had time to got hrough every single post and then voted me with a single sentence completely lacking any justification AND you did it in such a way that you look like you're only suggesting that you might be voting for me. AND you commited the cardinal sin of putting someone at L-1 without giving them warning.
You just reached my number one spot.
##unvote KillingTime
##vote Drazak
You're scum, and you just had the most obvious bandwagonning in the world. Who is your mason partner and why haven't they backed you up? Where are your breadcrumbs? Quite frankly I don't believe you. If you really are a mason you should say your partners name and they should speak up as well. Should one of you die, that leaves the other as a confirmed town. If you really are a mason you shouldn't have claimed but since you have you need to make the most out of it. ##unvote##vote Sharrant
Why did you bring up the no lynch? You still voted...
|
This is really annoying....There are so many questions right now and a bunch of lurkers/semi-lurkers not around to answer.
@KillingTime
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2012 04:11 KillingTime wrote:
I have had an awful irl afternoon so I haven't had a chance to read much in detail in this thread except the mason confirms.
ofc that means Sharrant is effectivley a confirmed towny (and the new guy too I guess). Scumhunting I want/need to look closely tonight/tomorrow at debears's posting from before and after flip and see if my scumread on him still holds.RemedySC's
play has also been super lurky from what I can see and has dropped off the radar. His play reminds me of imcasey in the last game, making a single weak case and then shutting up. Hopefully we don't lose two players overnight.
This post came off odd to me. Here you state you have a "scumread" on remedy. Yet, your reasons for your scumread are behaviors that you have exhibited this game. You have dropped off the radar other than 1 post after night saying that you hope we don't lost anyone. Also, the only "cases" you have made are against cubu and me. Cubu's case wasn't anything new. He was lurking hardcore. Not much to add. Then, in your case against me, you gave weak reasons, voted for me with weak reasons, and even said this:
As
far as "My" case (not really "my" case - but my vote) on Debears goes I still prefer him slightly over sharrant.
So you haven't actually made a case against me. And the one against Cubu had nothing to explain behind it. Do you have a genuine read to contribute to us?
I am looking into remedy. And I happened to find you on him along with jacob and thrawn. Still, your post came before thrawn sent out his 2 larger ones with the case against remedy. However, that does not excuse your justification for your suspicion
|
Hey guys I'm back. One thing has stood out to me.
On September 21 2012 09:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
for the record, I got a pm from marv saying I was roleblocked
On September 21 2012 10:59 Keirathi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 10:28 kushm4sta wrote:
When the jk gets killed does his rb still go through? Yes.
Did anyone else get roleblocked? If not, it is likely that Sonic roleblocked thrawn. Seems unlikely though, since I don't recall Sonic ever calling out thrawn.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2012 14:34 JacobStrangelove wrote:Ok this was my kush case from last night (the one that I was unsure about) I will post it in a spoiler so you can see what I was thinking. + Show Spoiler +I’m getting more and more tired again however I will move onto kush. I don’t think anybody denies kush is hard to read. But I will list the things of meta that I know about kush. He posts a lot he tends to be spazzy and is highly illogical. That said don’t know what his mafia meta is like (I imagine it would be similar) and he seems to be more so strange than usual. For one he is more bi-polar than usual. (last game he was pretty sure on his reads and I had to force him to change) I am tired to I will just copy paste. I am looking to step up my play this game. Last game was quite humbling for me. I made a lot of bad calls, and d1 caused a mislynch >< IM SORRY CUBU Very next post If you write 1 post a day but it's a brilliant epic post then that's cool with me. I can be realistic about people's busy schedules. And that is WAY better than a few little posts with no content. .. and I'm looking at you STUTTERS, DRAZAK, and ESPECIALLY CUBU who were all town last game but pretty trash town. While this isn’t a read it goes from Sorry to YOU’RE TRASH. But I will get to the actual reads now. Oh lol, just ran into this by kush.
You call me insincere because at first I say sorry cubu for bandwagoning him last game, then I call him out for lurking?
I am not going to make a case against him for lurking, but I think a COUPLE words saying so and so are lurking we still need a post is fine.
And yeah I will say cubu played really really bad last game. I wont apologize for saying that. I'm still sorry for lynching him.
I was not trying to start a flame war for with cubu, I was just trying to get him to post. I think encouraging lurkers to post by calling them out or asking them questions is productive. Making cases against lurkers is not productive.
(this part is from today) So with this I kinda stopped because his filter was large and I needed sleep, I still didn’t end up sleeping for a while after but in anycase. Ok this is where I left off my kush thoughts however now I will continue from a point I can analise just before the mason claim. Before the mason claim you write this. Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:34 kushm4sta wrote:
OK so as I see it here are our options atm: Sharrant, cubu, killing.
Killing is not that much of a lurker. He's not lurker enough to even be considered a lurker IMO.
Killing is scummy looking to me, but he looked that way last game too. Then when he realises another bandwagon is needed he says Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 07:22 kushm4sta wrote:
we need an alternate bandwagon and we need it fast. I like debears if people really don't want to lynch a lurker. I like another lurker as the best choice though I'm not sure which one I would pick now. drazak maybe? I want to here what other people think.
we need an epic swift band wagon of justice or we are going to get a no lynch He dropped his killing idea entirely he said it was because he didn’t have time to read killings filter but assuming he didn’t leave there is a hour gap at least before the vote. Killings filter isn’t that large. and if he thought he was scummy before surely he wouldn't need to read that much filter to catch up...Also he says this Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 09:14 kushm4sta wrote:
yeah i don't consider drazak to really be a lurker. and yeah the only reason i voted for him was total 100% bandwagon ill admit it lol When just before he mentioned Drazak maybe? There must be some reason for this... He probably made a hint at a bandwagon and then pretended he jumped on it 100% bandwagon style because he “had no say in the matter” He didn’t jump on the bandwagon he planted the seed... He said to go for drazak over killing, The only mention I could find before this was sharrent saying he would go for drazak but then saying killing or drazak. So my theory is kush sees this jumps on drazak with the one line instead of killing (why?) Are they both scum? Who knows but in anycase it worked sonic went on drazak and sharrent went on drazak.
Sharrent was on him already but he is almost 100% confirmed town now, sonic is confirmed town and kush looks to be the one who jumped in on the flow of things.
This is some odd behavior on Kush. I did not notice him dropping his killingtime case because of "filter length".
Some of your stuff has already been brought up.
@Kush
I would like to know why you are attacking thrawn for putting focus on lurkers, whom you have been adamant of lynching since the beginning. Even if remedy isn't scum, putting some pressure on him can get him involved and make him prove his innocence.
Currently, thrawn is our strongest poster. Despite a few things that he has said today that seem scummy, I am willing to put that on hold to put some pressure on these annoying lurkers. Lynching him would be a deathblow to us.
Let's stop arguing so much among ourselves and focus on these lurkers to get some more out of them. We are just attacking each other at this point because they aren't answering any questions themselves.
Atreides and KillingTime stand as my most scummy lurkers. Rethos, Remedy, and Stutters are still lurky.
|
Alright very interesting development with rethos.
Here were my problems with him:
1. On day 1, I called him out a couple of times. Both times, he had limited and poor posts before I called him out. Then, once he finished refuting them, he disappeared into darkness again.
2. He says he purposely lurked as a test
Believe it or not I was actually making a test to see how much leniancy lurkers get in this game. It seems to me that it's a lot. I mean how much did people take to realize that I was not posting ANYTHING?
My problem with this is that testing lurker leniency is not something a town would do if they are trying to win
If he is mafia, it would makes sense that he would try to "test the leniency" to avoid the spotlight if he was trying to win.
Then, when the spotlight was on him, he blatantly lied and called for a replacement. Why would he do this as town? He leaves us with a hard to read person since the new guy has not read the thread and followed the game in detail. He has caused confusion now. If he was mafia, he could bail out his teammates and use the confusion to prevent the lynch on himself(now Dandel).
3. His claim of being bored
Someone pointed out his excitement in the pregame with the picture deal. So, lets say he was hoping he'd get the blue role or a mafia role. If he is townie, yeah he could be bored. However, why did he wait til his back was against the wall, arguably a time when he shouldn't be bored, to say he was bored and quit?
If he was a blue role, I don't understand why he would be bored since he would be a key part of the town.
If he was mafia, he wouldn't be bored since he has to think clearly and watch what he posts and try to sway people whom he knows are town against each other.
To me, this gives strong evidence that the boredom claim was indeed a lie.
|
thrawn2112 United States. September 21 2012 18:24. Posts 1186 PM Profile Blog Quote #
filter
I'm looking through your filter and I don't see boredom. You do stuff like ask mods to fix killings filter, you make a post saying "don't let conversation die down" and you do a manual vote count.
Didn't see your vote count argument....why would you do a vote count (boring as hell in my eyes) if you are bored lol.....
Oh and this post right after the manual vote count
On September 19 2012 23:08 rethos wrote:
I think people should post their votes as soon as possible so the town knows where it stands. Random last minute voting is bad. People that have not voted (I can be bothered to go check who they are) show your side. Looking into stutters right now.
Dandel, this situation reads too strong of scum to just let it fly.
Vote##: rethos/Dandel Ion
btw Who do we specify in our vote out of the two?
|
|
|
@Atreides
+ Show Spoiler +On September 22 2012 07:50 Atreides- wrote:@thrawn: It's stutters right now but I'm waiting to see his reply to everything that has been going on. And yeah agree with your above comment, I had that typed up but I take so long to post you beat me to it. I don't think the association argument is very strong, more of an observation that I wanted to point out and observe how it carries forward. I do have some suspicion on debears / thrawn (I believe that one of the two are likely to be mafia) but this is just my feeling atm and I'll try to elaborate on it. Debears simply mentioned stutters in a list of lurkers. Nothing substantial at all. What I meant by mentioning stutters would be something similar to this: Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 01:20 KillingTime wrote:
Stutters seems scummy to me, I might support a lynch on him. He has not added anything to the game beyond attacks on kush all of day 1 which he knew would prove nothing and not get taken up for the lynch - he then says he is dropping them for now because there are bigger fish to fry. Now he has dropped off the planet and not posted since. This is when he should be frying that big fish. Stutters, do you still think Kush is scum?
Will be back in 2-3 hours
It's not that I don't acknowledge that stutters has been lurking. It's just that its useless to spread my focus on you, Remedy, Rethos, KillingTime, and Stutters.
I've mainly targeted you and KillingTime lately, and then Rethos when his whole fiasco came up. Right now, after reading over Killing's filter, it seems like he is becoming more active. His posts are a little better.
One thing I do want to give Killing credit for
+ Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 16:15 KillingTime wrote:
I obviously know that lynching me would have been a mislynch aswell. For me, I left the thread with 2 votes on debears, and several people who had previously felt that he looked scummy... and instead drazak got lynched. Herp derp - before I think too much about the endgame hour though I think we need to sort out this cubu/sharrant mason thing asap given that some are still not convinced. Obviously Cubu is not going to help.
Is it allowed to ask Sharrant to post a link to the mason quicktopic to prove his claim?
I am asking the mods first because I feel like it might not be, but it wasn't clear in the rules (it says you can post your role pm and the sample role pm makes no mention of not being able to post the quicktopic link to the thread if you choose)
His idea about the qt helped back up sharrant's claim big time and potentially saved the most likely mason. He is coming off less scummy than before.
Right now though, I'd say my biggest scumread is Rethos and you, Atreides are also up there.
You, Atreides have failed to address posts that wanted to here more of your side of your earlier comments after the lynch.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2012 01:35 debears wrote:@sharrant The evidence backing the mason claim is good, as pointed out by thrawn and sonic, and with sharky's confirm. Show nested quote +Debears is still a slightly scummy read from me, last nights incident didn't really help my read on him. He wasn't particularly involved aside from in a swing in, swing out post. SDM, and Thrawn I have very strong reads on from that, you both easily could have pushed a bandwagon on me very hard, and it likely would have stuck. So neither of you strike me as red because you had the perfect opportunity to lynch a fairly active person claiming mason, and both dumped it. I stated early in the morning that I would not be there for the lynch due to practice (and I play for a D1 baseball team, I don't really have a choice for scheduling. I also stated that I had classes until 5 (the last one was a physics lab in which I have to be active). Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 14:15 debears wrote:oh and heads up. Besides classes through 5, I have practice at 6 PM CST.  I won't be here for the 2 hours up to and for a while after the lynch , unless my coach changes his mind. I will post what I can in the morning and lunch. I had to do a quick in and out because I was in a rush and there was a lot to read. @Atreides Unfortunately, there were a lot of us absent at the time of the lynch. One person does stand out from the crowd of us absentees, Atreides + Show Spoiler +On September 19 2012 11:55 Atreides- wrote:
In defense of Sharrant -
He's in a similar position to debears - bad decisions do not necessarily mean scum. Think about it - what could a mafia hope to gain by this? Getting a lynch is far too ambitious, and a role claim isn't worth getting so much attention to yourself.
Mafia wouldn't want to aggressively pursue targets, they want to passively follow the crowd. Sharrant rode hard on debears, and has shown that he's willing to use his vote freely. I think that trying to get a role claim is a bad idea (debears will claim vanilla town no matter what role he is, this tells us nothing) but I don't see what's scummy about that. He's actively scumhunting, and both of his ideas (kush being SK, pressuring on debears) are original.
Someone mentioned the possibility of debears+thrawn being masons, which is something I didn't think of. The bromance between the two is pretty apparent since the beginning. Both have said that they believe the other is town, and they've used FOS (against sonic) and vote (against Sharrant) in unison. Thoughts?
I don't see a strong case for both debears and Sharrant right now. I'd be more inclined to vote for KillingTime if anything. At that point, there wasn't anything concrete, so your judgement passed. Now, for his next post related to sharrant + Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 06:41 Atreides- wrote:
Oh man, what an interesting situation. Some possible outcomes:
1) We decide to lynch Sharrant, he then outs the other mason. Pretty bad outcome as the mason will simply die.
2) Sharrant outs a mason, he confirms, and we lynch cubu or killing. At this point it's very unlikely for both Sharrant and his ally to be mafia, and more likely for both to be masons. Relatively strong outcome.
3) We lynch Sharrant without him revealing the mason. If he was bluffing and flips red, this is a huge win, but it's a stretch. If he flips mason, we're in trouble.
4) Sharrant doesn't reveal the mason and we lynch cubu or killing. This seems like rolling the dice, as we wouldn't have any idea if Sharrant is lying or not, and it's very possible for us to lynch a townie on top of that.
I'm leaning towards 2) as an option right now unless something changes.
From the description it sounds like masons come in pairs, and it'd be extremely unlikely for there to be more than 2 masons in any case. If I'm wrong on any of the game mechanics here please correct me.
I feel that both Killing and Stutters are slightly scummy/lurky but cubu sounds like a strong vote as well. I was hoping for him to post by now.
##unvote
##vote cubu You fail to mention any of the stuff between that and the mason claim. Sharrant had 6 votes, and had said things that didn't make any sense until the claim. Next, you don't post anything until 1 minute after the deadline, citing the preference for a no lynch. + Show Spoiler + Atreides- United States. September 20 2012 09:16. Posts 72 PM Profile Quote #
filter
On September 20 2012 09:09 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
Show nested quote +
What is this? You don't post ANYTHINBG productive for 48 hours and then you conveniently drop by 1 minutes after deadline to chime in you think drazak is a mislynch. Is this hunting for cheap townie points before drazak is flipping green?
I wasn't around after my last post, and I mixed up the voting deadline by an hour (thought it would be an hour from now, my bad). Your last sentence is a pretty moot point since it'd look equally bad for me if he flipped red. I find it odd that you happen to just "mix up the deadline" and yet check and post at 9:01 about the no lynch even though the thread was "blowing up". That means you must have been looking at the thread. And that means you must have known about the deadline's correct time. + Show Spoiler +On September 20 2012 15:10 Atreides- wrote:
I didn't actually know about the no-lynch until the mod posted about it. If I had, I would've suggested it quite a while ago. I'm assuming that voting for a no-lynch works the same way as voting for a lynch, in that we just need a majority of votes (and not every vote like you said). Maybe I'm wrong on this.
There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak. The consensus was "eh, he's kinda scummy, and kinda lurking, and he's kinda the best option, let's kill him and see what happens". The problem with choosing between killer and drazak is that, like I meant earlier, mafia has a lot of power here. If killer turns out to be mafia, his team can go for a drazak vote and the bandwagon easily follows because nobody has strong feelings one way or the other. The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this.
So yeah, as a principle I'd support no-lynching (on day one only) versus doing a half-assed lynch on someone else.
I'm mostly waiting for Cubu / his replacement to comment about the mason thing, as that's the key factor to Sharrant's innocence. When he made the claim he had no idea whether or not Cubu would end up posting and voting, which makes lying an amazingly ballsy play.
Will be around again tomorrow afternoon.
Yet again, you cite that there weren't any strong cases again. You are indecisive. You were purposely lurking at lynch deadline. Show nested quote +The time constraint and confusion was really perfect for something like this. Do you really expect every lynch to be easy, with laid out proof and someone screaming out "I'm mafia"?...c'mon man
You went awol for quite a while, and now that someone else is under heat you pop up in the thread
|
@Dandel Ion
I couldn't resist this:
On September 21 2012 22:21 Dandel Ion wrote:
I only casually followed this thread on the side, so I'mma have a ton of readings to do.
deBear with me, like a true comfort woman debears a child.
Now for the serious part. Your play has come off weird at the start.
+ Show Spoiler + Dandel Ion Austria. September 21 2012 22:57. Posts 1813 PM Profile Quote #
filter
Yeah, I know rethos looked a bit scummy, but I do think that prior to the whole "I don't give a shit h4h4h4h4"-debacle, he was 100% following the bad-newbie-town semi-lurker path. What part of the debacle are you talking about? Site a specific post please so I know where your reference post begins.
Also, some LOGIC about the roleblock and nightkill to start things off:
On September 21 2012 13:10 thrawn2112 wrote:
Show nested quote +
If the reasoning behind that is that he is trying to save his strongest town read then it would have gone to either of the 2 confirmed masons. Anyway there are tons of possible explanations of the roleblock and no reason to believe any of more than any other so I'd rather not speculate about it.
SDM probably roleblocked you.
In fact, IF you have been roleblocked, it was SDM.
Reasoning: It was redundant for him to roleblock one of the masons.
You all treat the masons as confirmed town, but they really are not. As long as none of them flip, there will remain some doubt.
And it could possibly surface at a very bad time for town. It would be incredibly stupid for scum to shoot one mason, and leave the other in the game. During Night 1, that is.
I wouldn't exactly call it stupid. Having 2 masons who can privately communicate in the game are more powerful than you think. For instance, although Sharky is not posting much, it is possible him and Sharant are building up a huge case on their own. That is also most likely why SDM would have protected them if he did.
Now the thing is, scum got lucky and hit the jailkeeper, which means they could possibly kill Sharrant and Sharky during the next 2 nightphases.
In another post
I'd also be down for lynching Stutters, Killing or Atreides, but all of them are mostly policy about lurking/non-conributing, and less about actual scumreads.
I do think, however, that getting rid of lurkers one way or the other is absolutely necessary looking towards MYLO/LYLO. If there's only 1 or 2 lurkers, that could be easily solved with a vig shot, but we have 3 (4 counting the late rethos), and possibly no Vig at all. Which sucks.
I absolutely hate when people mention vig shots, especially when it comes to lurkers early game. Xatalos did last game and he ended up a mafia. When I was reading over the game, Xatalos' post screamed out mafia, and yours here is similar. It gives me the feeling that you are saying "I'm mafia. Please shot 'X' lurker so that I don't have to worry about you mr. vigilante. We can lynch the lurkers. Mafia in the mid and late game, when they are active, can be deadly and sometimes can't be lynched.
Then, about remedy
Now, I don’t know if his post between that was his “better argument”, but it doesn’t look like it to me
(For reference:+ Show Spoiler +)
He keeps promising posts/activity, but you should get what I'm saying by now. Just read through his filter, it's not a long read.
But that’s just side notes. The real issue I have with him is how he “scumhunts”.
He just quotes shit and then slaps a one/twoliner or some random questions onto it.
The funny thing is that Rethos did that same thing throughout d1 when I called him out for it. I am assuming you at the least read through your previous identity's filter to know what he said. If not, please look at my argument against him.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 19 2012 14:05 debears wrote:Show nested quote + Sharrant Canada. September 19 2012 12:15. Posts 15 PM Profile Quote #
filter
@Atreides
That was me that mentioned the possibility of them both being masons.
@Kush I agree with you about lurkers at this time. I'm ready to bury the hatchet on both debears and thrawn in order to get rid of one of our hard lurkers. I will be able to post an argument on you and Kush tomorrow, most likely in the morning. In the lurkers, there is one that still has my attention, Rethos. Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:33 rethos wrote:
@thrawn2112 since the whole debears affair, your conflict with SDM seemed to have been left in the air. What is your current read about SDM? Do you have any other reads that the town might want to know about? This was his last post. Although he is posting, his posts are not beneficial. Most of the latest ones contain questions. He hasn't directed accusations at anyone. Show nested quote +Why, if he is town, is he trying to convince people he is right? What does that do? How does that help? Is it just bad town play? This is just a sample of what he does. Three questions in a row that he did not post an answer for himself.
Most of his other posts follow a similar format. He just directs the question at someone. I understand the difference in time zones affecting the amount of posts. However, the quality is poor. He isn't taking a stand on anything. Looks like he is trying to look active without provoking anyone.
Then, this post
+ Show Spoiler +On September 22 2012 03:43 Dandel Ion wrote:
Also, please don't just vote me and go brainafk.
Even if I did replace a scum (which I did not blablabla), there's still more scum in this and just going "yep lynch this guy, see you in two days" will not help.
Just saying.
If you want to lynch rethos (aka me), go on ahead, but don't be idiots about it. That's all I will say about the whole rethos matter.
I don't like how you are just dismissing the case against Rethos/you. There are clear scumtells in his writing that we can't ignore.
And then your next two posts set off two alarms in my head.
+ Show Spoiler +Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 05:45 Dandel Ion wrote:
Both of you are just repeating the same thing over and over now.
This isn't constructive. Talk about something else pls.
Like my Remedy case.
I like my Remedy case.
Who else likes my Remedy case?
Who doesn't like my Remedy case?
Pls include reasons.
Also, Sharky lurking even harder than Cubu (#1 replacement (I'm only #2 cuz I wasn't insta"confirmed" town, so I'm automatically worse)), Stutters not posting and Kush & Thrawn repeating the same arguments over and over.
This all and more in this episode of "Bitches in the Brothel" On September 22 2012 05:56 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 05:52 kushm4sta wrote:
k you are right dandel.
I'm dropping it. What do you think about Remedy?
I wanna talk about Remedy so bad
You mention sharky lurking hard in this post (and later ones also), although right before you state that you are 99% sure he is town. Although he may be lurking, he may be privately working with sharrant to catch up. Also, why should we put pressure on a (99% according to you) townie for the sake of making him post? We are pressuring people to get information and correct reads.
+ Show Spoiler +
But I know you were the only one that replied to the Remedy case. I just want other people to comment on it too. Or on somebody else they think is scummy. Doesn't matter at this point.
This thread has too much pointless bickering, and next to no scumhunting.
And no, saying "we lynch rethos ggyo, vote" is not scumhunting.
Yet again, same point I've shown from previous posts. You have zoomed in on Remedy as desperation to take the pressure off yourself. You cannot just dismiss the case against rethos/you. You came into the game with immense pressure on you and your response is sweep it under the rug. Rethos had a short filter. Most of the case against him was made after the lynch, which you definitely should have read first thing. You are also making weird statements back and forth on the masons, which are pretty clear by now. Go find the couple of hours before the lynch if you must read it in depth. And finally, the vig shot post...ew.
At this point, you have added to the scumminess of rethos in my eyes
|
ugh just realized there are a couple of quote mark things messed up. let me know if i need to clarify what i said in the post due to those
|
@kush
read my post with an added case on Dandel please and give me your thoughts on why his guilt is "crazy"
|
@kush
Not sure about the vig shot. Is it a bad strategy to save town a lynch by killing a lurker? I haven't really thought but i think it could be a good idea. What if the vig waits till the end to use it but he is killed then it goes to waste? I don't think mentioning that is scummy.
My main point in that is that lurkers will have a harder time defending themselves from a lynch than an active mafia (assuming that there aren't major scumslips). Right now, I don't see an active with strong evidence. There are signs. The lurkers have had freedom for a little too long.
And for the vig scenario, that is his feel on the situation. It's pointless debating it because its not exactly predictable. A lynch and a shot are equal in value in terms of going after lurkers (i don't know if you'll get what I mean here). However, in terms of going after an active mafia, I feel the vig shot carries more power than a lynch the later the game goes. That is all I want to say on that topic because discussing what roles can do in depth is not something I like.
It screamed at me from Xatalos, and it's screaming at me from him
|
I actually pointed it out first  thus i win
On September 22 2012 11:15 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2012 11:13 JacobStrangelove wrote:On September 22 2012 11:05 thrawn2112 wrote:
I could switch to remedy. I've been thinking over the fact that my #1 scumread (rethos) is most suspicious of my #2 (remedy) scumread but I don't really know what to make of it, at least until 1 of them flips.
Yeah I just pointed this out  uh... noted? lol
|
@Dandel
+ Show Spoiler + Dandel Ion Austria. September 22 2012 20:00. Posts 1815 PM Profile Quote # filter On September 22 2012 10:12 debears wrote: Now for the serious part. Your play has come off weird at the start. Show nested quote + What part of the debacle are you talking about? Site a specific post please so I know where your reference post begins. I mean the part where he stops being just bad, and starts being a retard. Open his filter and start with this post http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=367548¤tpage=33#641Shouldn't be too hard to find.
Alright. Thanks for the clarification. It seems to me that, in that post that you are claiming the start of his "I don't give a shit" parade, he did still care. He made a lot of short posts before that, and then comes in with a longer post when we suddenly say that we should focus on lurkers.
+ Show Spoiler +So a bad scum I don't know in a newbie game I didn't play in said something about Vigs during the game.
Now clearly, the most logical thing for you to do is to jump on me (the "easy target") with a horrible association case that you base off a random guy?
Oh wow, if you really think that's scumhunting, then good luck.
You come into a game past the d1 lynch, have to catch up on a lot of posts, then have a good enough read of the situation to call out who we should vig shot? It's not an association case. It's a read that I have incorporated into my play based on my observations from last game. In fact, most of my reads are based off of other games, guides, and such. Wouldn't that be logical instead of saying, oh it happened last game, it won't happen again. I bring up Xatalos to remind the other guys who did play last game of it.
+ Show Spoiler +What are you trying to say here, hmm?
That rethos behaved just as Remedy did, but for some reason you think Remedy is town(?) and rethos is scum, or what?
It doesn't make sense for you to use this argument, because if you were honest about it, you should have had a town read on rethos too.
Double standard much?
Lol. Blatant lie. I have NEVER said remedy is town. I have put little focus on him, seeing as thrawn and others are looking into him. Instead, I have seen you and Atreides saying stuff that calls immediate attention.
I made the same argument against killing.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 21 2012 06:43 debears wrote:This is really annoying....There are so many questions right now and a bunch of lurkers/semi-lurkers not around to answer. @KillingTime + Show Spoiler +On September 21 2012 04:11 KillingTime wrote:
I have had an awful irl afternoon so I haven't had a chance to read much in detail in this thread except the mason confirms.
ofc that means Sharrant is effectivley a confirmed towny (and the new guy too I guess). Scumhunting I want/need to look closely tonight/tomorrow at debears's posting from before and after flip and see if my scumread on him still holds.RemedySC's
play has also been super lurky from what I can see and has dropped off the radar. His play reminds me of imcasey in the last game, making a single weak case and then shutting up. Hopefully we don't lose two players overnight. You have dropped off the radar other than 1 post after night saying that you hope we don't lost anyone. Also, the only "cases" you have made are against cubu and me. Cubu's case wasn't anything new. He was lurking hardcore. Not much to add. Then, in your case against me, you gave weak reasons, voted for me with weak reasons, and even said this: Show nested quote +As
far as "My" case (not really "my" case - but my vote) on Debears goes I still prefer him slightly over sharrant. So you haven't actually made a case against me. And the one against Cubu had nothing to explain behind it. Do you have a genuine read to contribute to us? I am looking into remedy. And I happened to find you on him along with jacob and thrawn. Still, your post came before thrawn sent out his 2 larger ones with the case against remedy. However, that does not excuse your justification for your suspicion
Same reasoning as I made against you.
So why are you putting words in my mouth?
Here's a quote on earlier.
debears United States. September 22 2012 09:10. Posts 35 PM Profile Quote Edit #
filter
@Atreides
+ Show Spoiler +
It's not that I don't acknowledge that stutters has been lurking. It's just that its useless to spread my focus on you, Remedy, Rethos, KillingTime, and Stutters.
I picked the two most scummy looking: you and Atreides. And now I am examining you in closer detail. Just beca.use you don't say someone is scum doesn't mean you don't have a scum read on them.
And it's funny you bold a little part of my sentence and ignore the stuff written in the rest of it.
I never told anyone they can't vote for me (like anyone would listen), I only want you to TALK about something different.
Even if I was scum, there'd be two more.
And when I flip green, you see that you're gonna have to find three more.
So I suggest(ed) looking into that. But it seems you are not interested. Why not?
Yet, again. I have talked about others. I've talked about KillingTime, although he is off my radar atm, and Atreides besides you. Yet you say I am not looking into possible scum and I'm not talking about something different. Another lie. See a trend in this?
Oh wow, way to not read my filter!! Good job! I was already asked (kinda) about this and answered it. It's true, I'm even linking it, otherwise you might not find it in my massive one-page filter! Here! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=367548¤tpage=38#749I am putting pressure on him in a way, yes. Because he's being SUPER useless while being "confirmed" town. And that makes me mad. Cause if he keeps that up when Sharrant gets shot (and Sharrant WILL get shot soon, since he's the only mason that actually does ANYTHING), it ain't gonna be pretty.
Your point about Sharrant being shot and him being useless is valid if him and sharrant aren't talking, which is a big assumption. Maybe sharky hasn't posted much so that he can focus on reading the thread a few times to get an accurate read of the situation, so he doesn't end up making piss poor reads and lie. I understand you wanting to be active.
Oh, I know a case exists. But I want you to meditate, find your inner center, and tell me how I should treat the case instead.
And stop being hypocritical about me not reading or whatever - I read the thread, I read all the filters. But you yourself seem to have conveniently skipped over some of my posts (in one case even over the sentence you were quoting from), just to rehash some concerns that have already been answered.
You even mention the mason thing, which was a stupid misunderstanding that thrawn STILL pointed out AFTER I ALREADY explained it without anyone even asking. Okay, okay, maybe a mistake by him (though scum thrawn is looking more likely by the minute), but WHY do you feel the need to bring that up again?
This sentence alone makes me think you're just trying to appear like you're "scumhunting", when you actually don't*. So you call my post "weird" to discredit me.
I brought it up because you brought sharky's lurking up when, 1. He's a mason and can talk privately with sharrant
2. You're only case is against remedy, who is trying to make a case against you, and me, when I am making a case against you.
Oh, and about your remedy case
*This is not just about this one sentence, your whole "case" is rehashed garbage you could've answered yourself if you actually read through the thread/my filter to really scumhunt, instead of picking a few posts out of context, ingoring the explainations I already gave, etc.
"rehashed garbage". Hmmm when you're main arguments against me and him are that we don't "scumhunt". I believe Thrawn already addressed that part of the remedy case. And maybe if you read more into my argument, you could have seen my stuff added in with the "rehashed garbage"
Your only original contribution is the assosiation "case" with Xathalos. And that is so fucking horrible it gives me the worst nightmares (good thing I just woke up)
Even if that was the truth about this last post, I now have an even better contribution with this post.
But at least I can give you the good news! Remedy is no longer my top scumread! It's you! You win! Yaaaaay!
##vote debears
Disclaimer: I'd still be up for lynching remedy/stutters/insert-lurker-here too.
Way to OMGUS worse than kush.
Oh and when did you make a case against stutters? I thought you knew how to scumhunt, since you're telling other people how to
*drops the microphone emphatically*
|
@Dandel
+ Show Spoiler +The "town(?)" was intentionally selected as an expression because you seemed to imply that you think Remedy is town, in contrast to rethos.
Pls answer my question: Do you think Remedy is scum?
I NEVER, even remotely called for a vig shot on anyone.
The ONLY thing I said was that it's a valid strategy for lurkers to be dispatched by Vigs.
I even said, in the same post, that it doesn't apply to this particular game, because everyone and their mother lurks here.
You are making up points and putting words in my mouth. You are blatantly lying.
Keep it up, you gonna look real good for doing that in a few hours.
I'd also be down for lynching Stutters, Killing or Atreides, but all of them are mostly policy about lurking/non-conributing, and less about actual scumreads.
I do think, however, that getting rid of lurkers one way or the other is absolutely necessary looking towards MYLO/LYLO. If there's only 1 or 2 lurkers, that could be easily solved with a vig shot, but we have 3 (4 counting the late rethos), and possibly no Vig at all . Which sucks.
I was looking back at your vig shot argument (which is the only argument you actually refuted in my long ass case) and saw some extra stuff. You said that if there are only 1 or 2 lurkers, they can be "easily solved with a vig shot". Although you do say there are 3 or 4, why can't one of the 3/4 be "easily solved" with a shot also? If it is "absolutely necessary" to rid of lurkers towards mylo/lylo, why wouldn't you want them out of the way sooner?
Also, you bring up the argument that we "possibly have no Vig at all". THEN WHY DID YOU BRING IT UP OUT OF NOWHERE????? You must have been actively thinking of there being a vig in the game to suddenly post about it. Who usually does that? Mafia? Town?
Finally, you say that you'd be down for lynching stutters (who you voted for despite the argument "being less about scumreads") while you have a scum read on me...an apparently strong one at that.
+ Show Spoiler +But at least I can give you the good news! Remedy is no longer my top scumread! It's you! You win! Yaaaaay!
##vote debears
On September 23 2012 00:52 Dandel Ion wrote:
Eh, if that's going to be the wagon, so be it.
##unvote
##vote stutters
Oh yeah. This "makes me think you're just trying to appear like you're "scumhunting", when you actually don't", good reasoning.
|
@Dandel
Oh shit. forgot to add about remedy.
Remedy has scum reads obviously. He did pretty much the same thing as rethos.
The main difference between him and rethos - rethos blatantly slipped up and said stupid shit.
The difference between you and remedy - You keep saying stupid shit
|
hmmm interesting. Who hasn't voted. Sharrant?
|
how much time until lynch? wanna make sure I'm around. going to eat right now
|
@Atreides
On September 23 2012 07:40 Atreides- wrote:
ugghhh
Stutters is a bad vote, right now I don't feel comfortable lynching him without him posting more. I think that his lurking is him genuinely being busy rather than intentional (due to his lurking last game. he once went 2-3 days without a post).
After my last post I would have felt strong about voting thrawn, I think I made a good case against him but it was pretty much swept under the rug. Seems like I'm alone here, and there's no chance of him getting votes. However at the very least I suggest looking into my post and his filter...being active doesn't make you town.
Dandel doesn't come off as scummy to me yet, and I posted earlier why I didn't buy the case against rethos. He's open to lynching debears, stutters, remedy, and possibly another lurker. Meaning if he's mafia it's less likely for these others to be mafia as well.
Remedy...I think he's a last resort lynch at best. I can't make any reads off him. His activity is in line with what he said his work schedule would be. His posts are too short, he votes without explanation, and his arguments don't make much sense...but I have trouble differentiating this between mafia and confused town.
Atreides....you are coming in and being indecisive again....In light of the current situation...I will address this tomorrow...
@thrawn
On September 23 2012 07:51 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2012 07:41 kushm4sta wrote:
@thrawn well if its true you are town and you have doubts about me, isn't that more of a reason to vote stutters Lynch a player to get a read on another player that would be based on the idea that there is 1 mafia who voted for drazak? Seems like poor reason to not vote my scumread. No scum could have voted drazak or you and stutters could both be scum.
What do you mean by that? I'm unsure of what exactly your saying with this. I thought you said earlier that one was scum.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
