|
Marv, you liking the company you're keeping there?
You already mentioned mkfuba. You already got this response to your question: On September 20 2012 03:56 mkfuba07 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 02:58 marvellosity wrote:On September 20 2012 02:56 mkfuba07 wrote:
EBWOP: "He mentions them elsewhere, but doesn't explain them until after he's posted the list." I feel like at that point it's not even a summary, it's just a list of people who don't have to worry about being pressured by prplhz.
Sorry for posting so much right now. I believe I have class during the deadline, and while I will have access to a computer for the later half of it, I can't guarantee that I'll have time to keep posting then. As your vote is currently on austinmcc, care to comment on his case and what you make of his recent activity? Absolutely! I think the most convincing thing about it is the overall feeling that MMToss isn't really pressuring his scumreads. He hasn't said much about prplhz since the vote until his post about marv and I being suspicious together. I actually forgot that he even had his vote on him. Austinmcc didn't feel particularly pressured. And despite feeling like MMToss should be voting for me instead of prplhz based on his posting so far, I don't feel particularly pressured by him. He seems to be kind of passively throwing around suspicion, but keeping his vote firmly set on prplhz without any force behind it. I'm not sure if this is necessarily scummy (I know, wishy-washy), but I don't feel like it's consistent with MMToss's town play (the limited amount that I have experienced). Gotta switch classrooms... I'll take another look at austin's recent posts and comment when I'm settled in the other room. Sorry about that :< Regardless of your feelings on MY alignment, his vote is looking a little odd.
Then you've got:On September 20 2012 03:45 iamperfection wrote:
I will follow the two guys I think are town.
## unvote
## vote austinmcc
Which ange and I have already pointed out is not the strongest vote in the world. Let alone that one of the town reads he's sheeping is someone you seem to be struggling with.
Except for the bit on my response, I've got no problems with HiroPro's vote though.
|
well guess i can stop worrying since austinmcc is getting lynched over me
don't know if he's scum but i guess we'll see
##Vote austinmcc
|
Sorry for spam, but that mkfuba post actually looks all sorts of off.
Care to comment on austinmcc's case and recent activity?
Absolutely! Here's my thoughts on mementoss. Gotta go, thoughts on austinmcc later
I know mementoss WAS the subject of the case, but that response looks really disjointed.
|
Raise your hand if you are here
|
Okay, so I am trying to understand this case against austin.
On September 19 2012 22:39 marvellosity wrote:austin: yeah, I think I most of all want to lynch austin. Some of it's gonna be a rehash, but it's important for the whole thing. The reason people jumped on austin in the first place: Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 06:55 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 06:50 Blazinghand wrote:
Hey pudding-munchers stop arguing about that and read my case I don't know how anyone can munch on pudding. I DO kind of like that observation. It feels almost TOO obvious but...man it's kind of damning. Pretty much generally agreed that this was scummy, so won't delve too much. Where shit starts to diverge is on the response, which people read as townie. There's important time issues to look at. BlazingHand first pushes him to elaborate on it, and we get this as a response: Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 07:16 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 07:09 Blazinghand wrote:On September 18 2012 06:55 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 06:50 Hapahauli wrote:
If mafia would like to keep hypothetical townie-marv alive to the endgame because of my "policy lynch," then awesome! Mission accomplished! Though in all seriousness, I've read through quite a few of his recent games. He never lives as town past N3 (barring Mad Men Mafia where he was a replacement) in his recent games. If he's alive a long time, there's a very high chance (IMO basically guaranteed chance) of him flipping red.
<3 everyone at all, but you need to look further. He's generally not being killed off for supersexy scumhunting, but because he comes off as very townie and is generating a lot of discussion/activity from others. His early reads, although I haven't read recent games, are not generally a big threat to mafia.
On September 18 2012 06:50 Blazinghand wrote:
Hey pudding-munchers stop arguing about that and read my case I don't know how anyone can munch on pudding. I DO kind of like that observation. It feels almost TOO obvious but...man it's kind of damning. Elaborate. Now. Elaboration on the second half - Pudding is soft. Munching feels like it requires chewing, crunching. Can't do that with pudding. As to the obvious bit, obvious is the wrong word. I like...neat observations like that. It says something, unsure what, about you that you could pull out the starts to prplhz's game just like POOF. Like, I key in on the initial question more than the actual scummy stuff, because there's a chance that prplhz doesn't realize he's started scum games like that. But ... he has to, right? I gotta leave work, but the thought process is convoluted here. Pudding blabla not satisfactory at all. His 'townie' explanation that follows only comes after me, Hapa, and BH apply further considerable pressure.Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 08:03 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 07:21 Blazinghand wrote:
The "it's way too scummy, he must be town" argument is dumb on its head. What are you even saying
On September 18 2012 07:23 marvellosity wrote:
austin, you're not playing with grush.
speak plainly or die like a little bitch. It's not that it's too scummy to be town. Because the part of your post that I key in on is that prplhz, in two other scum games, and in none of the games he's played as town (out of what you reference), opens in a similar manner. I think you are stretching when you say that the questions are scummy. Yes he can go look the guy up. Yes, he might ought to at least remember that the guy played in a game he hosted. But it's not like...asking a question about who someone is is scummy on its face. There's no scumhunting heuristic for "opens games asking questions about a particular player." It MAY be scummy as applied to prplhz, but it's not like every player who opens like that is probably scum. So then . . . working off that. If it's not scummy on its face, but might be scummy to prplhz, why? There's no objective pushed there, it's not like starting off a game with that post helps a mafia objective. If prplhz is scum and happens to start all his scum games this way, it's just something he does without knowing it. There's no objective pushed. Then finally, if starting games that way as scum is just something prplhz does without knowing it, not to push an objective, then . . . it's almost null? Not getting there in the same way "small sample size" gets there. The train of thought is... (1) This is a thing that prplhz has done in scum games (2) This is a thing that does not further mafia objectives, or actively DO anything really (3) Therefore, it's likely he's just doing it subconsciously (4) If he's doing it subconsciously, then it's not really a tell. Could argue that he only does it subconsciously as scum, but then you get the sample size discussion and there's no real proof either way. So obvious was really the wrong word choice, when I fully go through this. It's not a bad explanation as it goes, and I can see why people viewed it as townie. But the fact is that it only came after his previous, poor explanation. In other words, he had to give a good explanation because he knew a large part of town was hounding him for it. In this context, I believe it loses some of its 'townieness'. I bold the final line as well for a reason. Obvious was the wrong word choice, eh? Look at how austin usually posts - longwinded, carefully thought out. Yet in this instance he'd thrown out his 'obvious' and 'too damning'. It looks like austin is justifying his scummy words after the fact. austin has a few posts subsequently, but they are all focused on his own defence rather than any other scumhunting. Why is he so worried about how others view his defence? Why is he only talking about his own defence rather than being proactive elsewhere? Because he's worried that he needs to appear as town. After these posts, austin has been markedly absent from any of the considerable goings-on in this thread. We don't have an opinion on anyone or anything, except his own defence. His play is marked by being worried by how he appears, rather than finding scum. ##Vote: austinmcc
Why does him posting a very poor first explanation before delivering a satisfying reasoning for his behaviour makes him lose "townieness"? Shouldn't the fact that he made such a bad explanation make him more townie as apparentely he was not worried about defending himself when he first made that post?
Seeing his recent vastly improved posting (especially his defense and scum-hunting whilst under pressure) I don't think austin is scum.
|
me neither but he's kind of the alternative
|
On September 20 2012 05:14 iamperfection wrote:
Raise your hand if you are here
Explain your vote if you are here
On September 20 2012 04:51 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 04:47 iamperfection wrote:On September 20 2012 04:38 marvellosity wrote:
sounds like some epic phone posting gone wrong You know me to well. I meant to say it is reasonable for me to follow my town reads because they are usually right So you are not voting austin because you think he is scummy but because you hope that your town reads found scum?
|
On September 20 2012 05:16 prplhz wrote:
me neither but he's kind of the alternative
Awww, I wasn't going to swap back to you if it came down to it. Sniffle.
While you're here, could you give thoughts on mementoss? I know he's not as legitimate a non-you lynch as I am at this point, but I'm interested in your thoughts.
|
@prplhz: Apparentely you are following the thread. Why don't you use the time to share your scum reads?
|
EBWOP: Still dead-set on marv?
|
EBWODP: Oh and I am still waiting for an answer to this, I don't think I have seen a reply to it yet:
On September 19 2012 20:28 Ange777 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:54 prplhz wrote:
I have some small reservations with the marvellosity lynch that I can tell you about later but for now he's my top candidate. So when is it "later"? How do you want to convince us into lynching your allegedly top scum read when you yourself have reservations you are not willing to share with us?
|
On September 20 2012 05:16 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:14 iamperfection wrote:
Raise your hand if you are here Explain your vote if you are here Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 04:51 Ange777 wrote:On September 20 2012 04:47 iamperfection wrote:On September 20 2012 04:38 marvellosity wrote:
sounds like some epic phone posting gone wrong You know me to well. I meant to say it is reasonable for me to follow my town reads because they are usually right So you are not voting austin because you think he is scummy but because you hope that your town reads found scum?
I did you didn't like the explanation. And I'm starting to not like my explanation
|
Seriously guys, where are you? It's half an hour till lynch and we still don't have a majority! I want to see the people who have their votes on austin answering my question:
On September 20 2012 05:15 Ange777 wrote:
Why does him posting a very poor first explanation before delivering a satisfying reasoning for his behaviour makes him lose "townieness"? Shouldn't the fact that he made such a bad explanation make him more townie as apparentely he was not worried about defending himself when he first made that post?
|
yea marv is best lynch today
also can you tell me why you made a bullshit biased case on me instead of actually saying why the fuck you think i'm scum. the whole thing reeks of "he's scum so i'm just going to read his filter and find random shit and spin it scum", why didn't you just do that with someone else but me? it's just too irrational and i fucking hate it because i can't read this kind of tunneling. like, blazing is legit, but i have no idea about you.
if you say i'm scum because i'm ignoring your "share your scum reads hurr" then i'm going to ignore you for the rest of the game.
|
I am here now off of work
|
On September 20 2012 05:26 Ange777 wrote:Seriously guys, where are you? It's half an hour till lynch and we still don't have a majority! I want to see the people who have their votes on austin answering my question: Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:15 Ange777 wrote:
Why does him posting a very poor first explanation before delivering a satisfying reasoning for his behaviour makes him lose "townieness"? Shouldn't the fact that he made such a bad explanation make him more townie as apparentely he was not worried about defending himself when he first made that post?
It's pure wifom
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On September 20 2012 05:15 Ange777 wrote:Okay, so I am trying to understand this case against austin. Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 22:39 marvellosity wrote:austin: yeah, I think I most of all want to lynch austin. Some of it's gonna be a rehash, but it's important for the whole thing. The reason people jumped on austin in the first place: On September 18 2012 06:55 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 06:50 Blazinghand wrote:
Hey pudding-munchers stop arguing about that and read my case I don't know how anyone can munch on pudding. I DO kind of like that observation. It feels almost TOO obvious but...man it's kind of damning. Pretty much generally agreed that this was scummy, so won't delve too much. Where shit starts to diverge is on the response, which people read as townie. There's important time issues to look at. BlazingHand first pushes him to elaborate on it, and we get this as a response: On September 18 2012 07:16 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 07:09 Blazinghand wrote:On September 18 2012 06:55 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 06:50 Hapahauli wrote:
If mafia would like to keep hypothetical townie-marv alive to the endgame because of my "policy lynch," then awesome! Mission accomplished! Though in all seriousness, I've read through quite a few of his recent games. He never lives as town past N3 (barring Mad Men Mafia where he was a replacement) in his recent games. If he's alive a long time, there's a very high chance (IMO basically guaranteed chance) of him flipping red.
<3 everyone at all, but you need to look further. He's generally not being killed off for supersexy scumhunting, but because he comes off as very townie and is generating a lot of discussion/activity from others. His early reads, although I haven't read recent games, are not generally a big threat to mafia.
On September 18 2012 06:50 Blazinghand wrote:
Hey pudding-munchers stop arguing about that and read my case I don't know how anyone can munch on pudding. I DO kind of like that observation. It feels almost TOO obvious but...man it's kind of damning. Elaborate. Now. Elaboration on the second half - Pudding is soft. Munching feels like it requires chewing, crunching. Can't do that with pudding. As to the obvious bit, obvious is the wrong word. I like...neat observations like that. It says something, unsure what, about you that you could pull out the starts to prplhz's game just like POOF. Like, I key in on the initial question more than the actual scummy stuff, because there's a chance that prplhz doesn't realize he's started scum games like that. But ... he has to, right? I gotta leave work, but the thought process is convoluted here. Pudding blabla not satisfactory at all. His 'townie' explanation that follows only comes after me, Hapa, and BH apply further considerable pressure.On September 18 2012 08:03 austinmcc wrote:On September 18 2012 07:21 Blazinghand wrote:
The "it's way too scummy, he must be town" argument is dumb on its head. What are you even saying
On September 18 2012 07:23 marvellosity wrote:
austin, you're not playing with grush.
speak plainly or die like a little bitch. It's not that it's too scummy to be town. Because the part of your post that I key in on is that prplhz, in two other scum games, and in none of the games he's played as town (out of what you reference), opens in a similar manner. I think you are stretching when you say that the questions are scummy. Yes he can go look the guy up. Yes, he might ought to at least remember that the guy played in a game he hosted. But it's not like...asking a question about who someone is is scummy on its face. There's no scumhunting heuristic for "opens games asking questions about a particular player." It MAY be scummy as applied to prplhz, but it's not like every player who opens like that is probably scum. So then . . . working off that. If it's not scummy on its face, but might be scummy to prplhz, why? There's no objective pushed there, it's not like starting off a game with that post helps a mafia objective. If prplhz is scum and happens to start all his scum games this way, it's just something he does without knowing it. There's no objective pushed. Then finally, if starting games that way as scum is just something prplhz does without knowing it, not to push an objective, then . . . it's almost null? Not getting there in the same way "small sample size" gets there. The train of thought is... (1) This is a thing that prplhz has done in scum games (2) This is a thing that does not further mafia objectives, or actively DO anything really (3) Therefore, it's likely he's just doing it subconsciously (4) If he's doing it subconsciously, then it's not really a tell. Could argue that he only does it subconsciously as scum, but then you get the sample size discussion and there's no real proof either way. So obvious was really the wrong word choice, when I fully go through this. It's not a bad explanation as it goes, and I can see why people viewed it as townie. But the fact is that it only came after his previous, poor explanation. In other words, he had to give a good explanation because he knew a large part of town was hounding him for it. In this context, I believe it loses some of its 'townieness'. I bold the final line as well for a reason. Obvious was the wrong word choice, eh? Look at how austin usually posts - longwinded, carefully thought out. Yet in this instance he'd thrown out his 'obvious' and 'too damning'. It looks like austin is justifying his scummy words after the fact. austin has a few posts subsequently, but they are all focused on his own defence rather than any other scumhunting. Why is he so worried about how others view his defence? Why is he only talking about his own defence rather than being proactive elsewhere? Because he's worried that he needs to appear as town. After these posts, austin has been markedly absent from any of the considerable goings-on in this thread. We don't have an opinion on anyone or anything, except his own defence. His play is marked by being worried by how he appears, rather than finding scum. ##Vote: austinmcc Why does him posting a very poor first explanation before delivering a satisfying reasoning for his behaviour makes him lose "townieness"? Shouldn't the fact that he made such a bad explanation make him more townie as apparentely he was not worried about defending himself when he first made that post? Seeing his recent vastly improved posting (especially his defense and scum-hunting whilst under pressure) I don't think austin is scum.
You'll have to explain to me why giving a weak explanation on a weak comment makes him townie, Ange. My train of thought was that he was waffling in his defence to the post, hoping to brush it under the carpet, instead of straight out explaining why he made the vote in the first place. The fact that he needed to be further pressured to clarify his comment makes him lose townieness, because by this point he is forced to make a good explanation or face being lynched.
That said, austin's concerns on my company on him are legitimate. iamperfection is giving absolutely no reasoning, and he completely correct that I asked fuba for thoughts on austin, WHO HE IS FUCKNIG VOTING, and he gave me thoughts on Mementoss instead. Arg.
|
On September 20 2012 05:22 Ange777 wrote:EBWODP: Oh and I am still waiting for an answer to this, I don't think I have seen a reply to it yet: Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 20:28 Ange777 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:54 prplhz wrote:
I have some small reservations with the marvellosity lynch that I can tell you about later but for now he's my top candidate. So when is it "later"? How do you want to convince us into lynching your allegedly top scum read when you yourself have reservations you are not willing to share with us?
replied to it earlier when marv asked me, i don't like how nobody else is voting marv but it's a minor thing and i'm pretty much at peace with that. he's still best lynch etc.
maybe i should mindlessly call you scum for not reading the thread. i mean at least i have proof of you not reading while you only have my word for it that i didn't read the thread and you can't scum now can you? maybe i should not just read scum into every single one of your posts because it's silly to think that scum are scummy in every post they make. yea i like the latter option better.
|
iamperfection, prplhz Palmar.
jesus christ look at the people voting austin, and look at the people voting prplhz. You have HiroPro, mkfuba, Marvellosity and iamperfection on MMT, and blazinghand, ange777 and me on prplhz. Palmar is activelly pushing that prplhz and IMP are town and gives no coherent motive for that, and now decided a no-lynch is better than lynching prplhz?
Fuck no.
Austin, hapa, do town a favor. Do it just so a no-lynch won't happen.
|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
