|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
I would lynch fuba right now if we could get all the votes for it.
|
the reason i didn't like it (no one else voting marv) is because palmar is pretty good and i think that at least one of marv's scum buddies would try to jump on him for town credit. i'm a peace with it because i realized that palmar was probably not as convincing to other people as he was to me because i am pretty certain he's town (for now) and because he was arguing in a way that people generally don't like but i like (concise and straight to the point instead of huge fucking text walls). it was a minor concern but i'm not worried about it anymore.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
you best answer me prplhz, because I want you to be accountable for this read on me.
|
On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz? no and it doesn't matter right now so i don't care about it
|
On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz?
prplhz, answer this.
marv, you should vote prplhz. We can't let a freaking no-lynch happen.
|
On September 20 2012 05:36 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz? no and it doesn't matter right now so i don't care about it
JESUS CHRIST
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
seriously, can't we lynch fuba? :/
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On September 20 2012 05:36 Zephirdd wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:36 prplhz wrote:On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz? no and it doesn't matter right now so i don't care about it JESUS CHRIST
yeah, i know right.
IT DOES MATTER BECAUSE YOU ARE ONE OF THE MAIN CANDIDATES
|
Marv. We have fucking 24 minutes. Nobody is giving a sign of life in this thread, and I won't be able to read mkfuba and be calm with his lynch in twenty fucking four minutes. If it was for me, I'd lynch imp right now but we don't have fucking time.
|
On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz? I read what you're reading, but his vote is still on me for the time being.
On September 20 2012 05:31 Zephirdd wrote: 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. I agree that there are some townie folks on the prplhz lynch. Not bluelightz, not mementoss, but the rest of you look town or better than enough others that you should be town.
I don't want to swap over.
At this point I'm happy with mementoss, why NOBODY SEEMS TO REALLY WANT TO CALL TOWN AND GIVE REASONING FOR. I believe Palmar has blanket said he's town, but nobody seems to actually want to come into the thread, call mementoss town, and throw down some reasoning for that read besides mementoss himself.
I'm happy with voting bluelightz if we have juice for that
Possibly happy with fuba, need to reread another time
|
On September 20 2012 05:37 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:36 Zephirdd wrote:On September 20 2012 05:36 prplhz wrote:On September 20 2012 05:31 marvellosity wrote: Do you have nothing to say about my play since you committed to your vote on me, prplhz? no and it doesn't matter right now so i don't care about it JESUS CHRIST yeah, i know right. IT DOES MATTER BECAUSE YOU ARE ONE OF THE MAIN CANDIDATES but i'm not getting lynched lol austinmcc is if anybody (and i'm sort of content with that, he's not a scum read but he's not a solid town read so whatever) so it doesn't matter right now
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
##Unvote ##Vote prplhz
best get talking, prplhz.
|
are we seriously going to let a no lynch happen
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On September 20 2012 05:39 Mementoss wrote: are we seriously going to let a no lynch happen
thanks for this, very helpful
|
@iamperfectino:
On September 20 2012 05:23 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:16 austinmcc wrote: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: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
What's this?
@marv:
On September 20 2012 05:30 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:15 Ange777 wrote: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: 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.
My point is that giving a weak explanation fits a town player who should not be scared of being accused as scum. Being town there is no need to write your posts carefully which could lead to a weak first explanation before a satisfying second one. I see your point of view but I don't agree with it.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On September 20 2012 05:40 Ange777 wrote:@iamperfectino: Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:23 iamperfection wrote:On September 20 2012 05:16 austinmcc wrote: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: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 What's this? @marv: Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 05:30 marvellosity wrote:On September 20 2012 05:15 Ange777 wrote: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: 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. My point is that giving a weak explanation fits a town player who should not be scared of being accused as scum. Being town there is no need to write your posts carefully which could lead to a weak first explanation before a satisfying second one. I see your point of view but I don't agree with it.
I can understand how it can be viewed both ways. But given the context of his whole play at the time, the only thing he'd done is post about 10 times on defending himself, and not at all at hunting scum.
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Thanks. Ok, so we're up to 6 votes. We only need one more, and we won't no-lynch. I'm against the idea of an mkfuba07 lynch for two reasons: 1) it's 20 minutes before the deadline and he has no votes 2) he's not as scummy as prplhz.
The prplhz lynch has faced resistance at every turn and finally all we need is one more vote. austin. someone.
|
@hapa you best get in here and change your vote
brb 17 mins
|
austin, what the fuck. We have fucking 19 minutes. Are you seriously going to sit on the no-vote zone and let a no-lynch happen?
Seriously?
Someone shoot this guy at night
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On September 20 2012 05:41 prplhz wrote: @hapa you best get in here and change your vote
brb 17 mins
lol yeah, this guy can die.
|
|
|
|