|
On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Wait what! What on earth happened? We lynch drazak? What happened to the killing scum read?
After posting this near lynch deadline
On September 20 2012 06:29 JacobStrangelove wrote:killing I don't think is as scum as anyother lurker.(infact slightly less)
On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote: We voted for someone who our other two scum reads (assuming sharrent spoke for cubu) told us to vote for....
Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing
|
On September 20 2012 14:04 JacobStrangelove wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote:On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote:
Wait what! What on earth happened? We lynch drazak? What happened to the killing scum read? After posting this near lynch deadline On September 20 2012 06:29 JacobStrangelove wrote:killing I don't think is as scum as anyother lurker.(infact slightly less) Yeah but drazak seemed more town than killing, when I was refering to the killing being less that the lukers I was talking about stutters/cubu the two main lurkers under fire at the time. Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 13:54 thrawn2112 wrote:On September 20 2012 13:24 JacobStrangelove wrote: We voted for someone who our other two scum reads (assuming sharrent spoke for cubu) told us to vote for.... Sharrent was also willing to vote for killing Yeah? I thought that was my point. I might have missed something though.
Your post indicated you wanted us to have lynched killing instead of drazak and that it was bad we lynched drazak because sharrent was on board with it,,, I was just pointing out that sharrent was also on board with voting killing.
Speaking of sharrent you mention him as a scum read, is that your read on him?
|
someone asked if people are allowed to post links to their mason qt, if not are they allowed to post the text contents of the qt?
|
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).
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.
|
when did you first think I was scum?
the 50/50 thing makes sense
|
oh and can you repost and include time stamps for that qt post?
|
Ok another reason for doubting your mason claim is because of the timing of the original role claim suggestion. When you said debears should role claim I thought that was a scummy thing to ask. Later during the mason claiming you say that the role claim idea was an attempt to bait us into claiming mason... but it didn't look like you thought I was scum at the time of you posting your debears vote, your strong scumread on me came in your next post. So if you didn't think I was scum at the time of your debears vote then your role claim suggestion couldn't have been an attempt to bait mason-claims.
I'm still reading all of your posts about reads on me, and all the times when you tried to rationalize your role claim idea after people jumped on you for it.
|
On September 20 2012 23:03 Sharrant wrote:
Certainly!
M-8:14PM 17th
S-10:56AM 18th
S-11:17 PM
S-11:22 AM 19th
S-11:50 AM
M-12:14 PM
S-1:01 PM
S-5:09 PM
S-5:20 PM
S-5:28 PM
S-5:46 PM
S-6:42 PM
M-7:37 PM
S-7:50 PM
S-8:05 PM
M-8:07 AM
Yeah, I probably should've posted my plan into my mason box earlier, but I was waiting for him to say literally anything first.
what time zone are those in
|
I'm gonna go through the time stamps in relation to events going on in the thread. Also I want you to clarifiy exactly at what precise time in the thread you thought I was scum and show evidence. And a mason claim from the new guy is needed. If all those things pan out then I think we're all good.
|
sharky are you and sharrant masons?
|
I'm not gonna go over every single post from the qt because a lot of those would not be helpful but I'll go over what I think are some important events:
In the qt marv says "new player incoming" at the same time he announces sharky's arrival in the thread.
When sharrant says in the qt that his plan is bad is 4 minutes before he says it in the thread.
I'm gonna go ahead and stop here because those timestamps don't look like they could have been faked. It's already taken me a long time to convert timezones and find correlations between the qt post and the events in thread for just those 2 posts. Sharrant posted the timestamps 5 minutes after I asked him for them so I doubt he would have been able to fake all those timestamps in 5 minutes.... because I personally was unable to verify their accuracy within 5 minutes.
I believe your mason claim now. Also sharky just confirmed it. So even if you're lying and we find out later then we will have 2 confirmed scum.
|
On September 21 2012 00:15 Sharrant wrote:
@Thrawn
I guess I didn't need to post the wall of text after that, but I felt it would help to explain my motives on you and debears to the fullest.
I think that will be the last I have to say about being a mason, still, if there are questions I'll happily answer. For now I'd like to move back onto scum hunting rather than having to prove my role.
Up on my radar right now is (in no particular order) debears, Atreides, and kush. I need to read through JAcob's most recent posts again before I have a more solid idea on him. Kush right now is up there mainly for his points immediately after Drazak's death. He says he was just bandwaggoning, got caught up writing a post so he missed the deadline, but he also never thought Drazak was lurking and the biggest slip up in my eyes. He thought Drazak was doing great things scumhunting. I can't find a post by Drazak where he's scumhunting. Also his latest posts were one lined little bits saying almost nothing.
Atreides pops up because he sort of appears every now and again, says a few things and pops off. Doesn't really seem to hunt for people, but had something to say after Drazak died nonetheless.
debears is up there for everything that happened earlier, but I'm still trying to process how the last half of day 1 changed my opinion of him. He's had good and bad posts since then which I'll need to take a closer look at.
jacob, kush, and atreides all came into the thread after the deadline and said some strange things. I think atreides' posts are the scummiest looking and most contradictory, refer to my case against him. unfortunately like he said he's gonna be afk for a long time but he's someone I'm currently pretty suspicious of:
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.
|
Add this to the contradictory things atreides has said:
On September 20 2012 06:41 Atreides- wrote: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.
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.
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.
In that post he lists a bunch of scenarios and in 2 of them he advises lynching killing or cubu. He says the best option is option 2 which is if sharrant outs a mason and the mason confirms then we lynch cubu or killing. Sharrant ended up outing cubu as a mason so obviously cubu would no longer be his lynch choice which leaves killing as his preferred option. Of course cubu didn't confirm... but it still looks liek a contradiction because of how much he had talked about lynching killing in that post
But then he comes into the thread and said he would have preferred a no lynch and that "There weren't any exceptionally strong arguments against killer / drazak." His lynch reads before the cubu reveal were killing, stutters, and cubu but then later he says he wants a no-lynch because there weren't any good lynch candidates?
|
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.
|
Jacob my main points about his no lynch idea are that it looks like he had to have been reading the thread ( he even says the no lynch idea occured to him after readin marv's post) which means he would have known when the deadline was, and that a no lynch doesn't match up with how much he had mentioned lynching killing. He even mentioned lynching killing if sharrant claims a mason buddy. Or he could have gone with stutters which was another lurker he thought was scummy and had even voted for. Those points are explained much more thouroughly at the bottom of the last page.
|
On September 21 2012 02:44 JacobStrangelove wrote:Also I do agree about Debears latching on to you (was one of my first posts just everything else got in the way) Still need to go though his stuff side by side with your filter. (also if he does latch in all but one thing how on earth haven't you noticed it until now)
I have, but at the time people were accusing him of doing it they were making that accusation based off a very small sample size so it wasn't warranted. Today the sharrant mason thing finally reached a conclusion and my next posts are about atreides, and then debears comes in with the same thing making it too strong of a pattern to dismiss.
|
On September 21 2012 03:05 debears wrote: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 ThrawnAlso, did anyone notice that although I specifically asked Atreides who he thought was the most mafia, he did not acknowledge the question one bit?
I concede your point on the timestamps. Wasn't a lie on part though, just an error. My most recent posts have all been about Atreides and then you post a pretty detailed case against him. Ever since people have called you out for hiding behind me I've not thought it was a good case because there wasn't a large enough amount of posts to base that accusation off of. But I've kept it in the back of mind in case it continues and with my recent memory of me saying a bunch of stuff about atreides and then you coming in with a big case on him, it looked that the pattern people pointed out actually existed.
Kush: read my points against atreides and see if that no-lynch idea looks genuine or not. the argument isn't that a no-lynch is a stupid idea therefore atreides = scum. What I'm saying is that his no-lynch idea doesn't match up with what he was saying pre-lynch.
|
Remedy why was your vote so uselessly parked on kush? You were another one of the poeple who jumped in after the mislynch expressing how horrible it was, yet you weren't around during the final clusterfuck. At the beginning of the game you said you have the lynch day off work and you'll be around a lot during that, what happened to that?
Going through your filter right now and this looks spretty scummy:
On September 19 2012 11:51 RemedySC wrote:Kush, this post stood out to me also. Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 07:21 debears wrote: Why are you trying so hard to associate drazak, thrawn, and me. Understandly, my earlier posts would link me and thrawn. However, drazak does not come anywhere into play. Look at my filter there is one post about drazak. Debears posts do seem to link him and Thrawn, and if drazak is a part of this trio, than this post could just be another defense for his said teammate.
No offense to kush but kush's scumteam theory was completely awful. What I see is you coming in and sheeping onto an insubstantial case in order to get a mislynch on me, drazak and (maybe) debears. That scumteam idea is such a weak argument I find it hard to believe a town player would honestly use it. Which leads me to wonder why kush brough it up in the first place, but I'm still unsure of kush because I have a hard time serparating crazy scum things he could have said with crazy town things he always said in previous games.
|
On September 21 2012 04:30 kushm4sta wrote:
no shit the scumteam was bad. it wasn't meant as anything but a description of my thought process.
Kush accusing you isn't the point of that post, but it did look strange and right now you're the hardest person for me to judge because of your meta. I know that at least 2 of those players in the team are town (meaning it's promoting at least 2 mislynches) and it makes him look even worse than it made you look because he went along with going along with it. Looking at that point, and combinging it with him being completly absent during the voting confusion (after talking about how he's off work on lynch day) and then posting immediately after the mislynch saying how bad it was I've got a pretty strong scumread on him. Look at his filter and tell me what you think.
Remedy what are your scumreads atm?
|
On September 21 2012 04:54 kushm4sta wrote:I read his posts. I read your posts regarding his posts. I read them again. and again and again. I still dont get it. You are saying he said he didn't know about no lynch but did know about no lynch. Just confused the fuck out of me. What did he even do wrong...why does that make him mafia.
Atriedes just strikes as a big noob basically. He says stupid shit that makes no sense, but that doesn't make him mafia
Ok, he comes in the thread 1 minute after deadline saying that town should have no-lycnhed. He was then accused of saying that because he's trying to give himself townie points. His responce to that was that A) He didn't know when the deadline was and B) the reason he didn't push for no-lynch earlier was because he didn't know it was possible until marv said it was. Well I that doesn't look like a likely story. For him to not have known when lynch deadline was he would have had to not been reading the thread because 14 minutes after marv posted the no-lynch thing the other mod posted how much time was left until lynching. 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. Another reason why his no-lynch idea doesn't seem legit is because he had been talking about different scenarios that could happen and in half of them he said we should vote for killing.
My biggest read right now is on remedy...... I asked you for you to look at remedies filter please do it, and what do you think about my case against him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
