EPTLiquid City Mafia - Page 145
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Coagulation
United States9633 Posts
| ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:38 Z-BosoN wrote: Coag, I really think a scum kreb wouldn't hard defend Node like that early in the game. Scum generally don't like doing that... Even if they did, once Node was lynched they would obviously be all like "wow he sure fooled me", which is not the tone he took. The only thing that really says it for me is the difference from his townie filter, which I've read and it sure seems a bit different. However, he's actually trying to defend himself, unlike Mattchew, who simply disappeared. Like nuke said, mattchew is a liability for the late game, we can't rely on him. Added to that, he actually has a decent chance of popping scum. He is also in agreement with your "awol" theory, if you check his filter, his only two posts are nowhere near dawn. Remember he also didn't vote in day 1? Honestly, he's a much better choice. i was active during the last night phase, please try harder to lie about me | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:16 Z-BosoN wrote: I pretty much agree with nuke. Can't find kreb to be scummier than him ##Vote Mattchew what do you agree with risk about? | ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
Ok, let me double check the times then. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:49 Z-BosoN wrote: Dude, read the thread, man, I'm not going to cherry pick. Ok, let me double check the times then. i am reading the thread, and you have not quoted or answered risk once. Your case on me was demolished by me and VE. I would like to know your actual reasons for voting me and what actions i have taken that you deem scummy, especially if any of them pertain to anything other than "he's not active" | ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
On October 11 2012 00:36 Mattchew wrote: Thanks BC for that I'll write a case before the end of the night On October 11 2012 02:26 Mattchew wrote: Also kush was being pushed hard and sloosh pushed for the BC 3rd party (regardless if he's right or not) lynch... Someone else should say this but I will cause I thought of it Inb4 you called out BC too.. I haven't been reading as much as sloosh Then your next post on october 12th you had one: On October 12 2012 01:22 Mattchew wrote: forgot i had work today, i am done in ~6 hours Each of them are more than 11 hours apart from the night 4 post. This is also just a side note, not the main things you've got going on against you. You also choose someone who has not even one vote. There are like 6 lynch candidates today, we need to consolidate, seriously. | ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:52 Mattchew wrote: i am reading the thread, and you have not quoted or answered risk once. Your case on me was demolished by me and VE. I would like to know your actual reasons for voting me and what actions i have taken that you deem scummy, especially if any of them pertain to anything other than "he's not active" It was not demolished. The fact that I find VE scum and you being the only person he tried to defend ever makes me think poorly of you. I've made my case, I've also made a post making a summary of my case. Here it is again: 1) Your post telling people not to vote shady for shit reasons 2) Your only two major posts stating your views on people, only never to be revisited ever again. Gives off the impression that you are just wanting to look like you are scumhunting, but you are not. VE also said that this might be true, when he ridiculed my case | ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:52 Mattchew wrote: i am reading the thread, and you have not quoted or answered risk once. Your case on me was demolished by me and VE. I would like to know your actual reasons for voting me and what actions i have taken that you deem scummy, especially if any of them pertain to anything other than "he's not active" Dude click on risk's filter and see his last two posts... seriously | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:53 Z-BosoN wrote: Liar liar pants on fire. October 11th you had two posts: Then your next post on october 12th you had one: Each of them are more than 11 hours apart from the night 4 post. This is also just a side note, not the main things you've got going on against you. You also choose someone who has not even one vote. There are like 6 lynch candidates today, we need to consolidate, seriously. well i don't like me as a candidate I believe in VE's claim, i have read him twice with "if he was town" and "if he was scum" mindsets. The scum side doesn't make sense with the timing of the claim and how he has played it BC, i think is actually town. If he isn't dead in a certain amount of nights I will begin to worry about him, but i think he talks about himself being 3rd party too confidently to actually be 3rd party. You Z-boson, feel town from the tone of your posts especially when you are called out by VE and others. I just think you do not know how to find scum characteristics, or you don't know how to voice your findings properly. I am going to read kreb now | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 03:57 Z-BosoN wrote: It was not demolished. The fact that I find VE scum and you being the only person he tried to defend ever makes me think poorly of you. I've made my case, I've also made a post making a summary of my case. Here it is again: 1) Your post telling people not to vote shady for shit reasons 2) Your only two major posts stating your views on people, only never to be revisited ever again. Gives off the impression that you are just wanting to look like you are scumhunting, but you are not. VE also said that this might be true, when he ridiculed my case 1. why is this post scummy? because telling people who were voting shady for trolling (which he said he was gonna do pre-game before his alignment was given) they were being stupid is bad? For wanting people to vote because of actual belief that someone is scum instead of herp derp he trolled im mad! 2. Because I went inactive and my reads have changed. I can't help either of those. Is that scummy? I am now pushing my strongest scum read in iamperfection | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21171 Posts
| ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
hi nice to see you again! That's because matt invoked your name as well, before me see. @Matt lol I'm glad you don't like you as a candidate Godamnit, why can't you just die quietly. This game confuses me. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 04:01 VisceraEyes wrote: That's like the third or fourth time you've interpreted that line from my post as agreement with your point - please stop. I did NOT agree with that point on Mattchew, because you said blatantly untrue things. what is this in reference to? These are risks last posts on me z-boson references On October 13 2012 22:37 risk.nuke wrote: I have a friend visiting over the weekend, I've just barely skimmed over the last pages. The only smart thing to do today is to kill Mattchew. We need to get rid of Mattchew because. He is likely scum. So we have to lynch him sooner or later. The only scenario we don't end up sooner or later lynching Mattchew is if we decide that hey, his retarded actions are probably indicators that he is town so lets not lynch him... ever. That scenario is never going to happen. Never fucking ever. Ergo we need to kill him. Why is it better to kill him now rather then later? Because as the game progresses we will be able to get better reads on everyone. Just as how you have better reads on other people day 1 then day 2. This makes it sub-ideal to lynch person x today and Mattchew tomorrow rather then lynch Mattchew today and person x tomorrow. This is NOT fucking complicated but the fucking ESSENCE of standard logic now start fucking voting. On October 13 2012 01:39 risk.nuke wrote: Vicera. We'll never figure out Mattchews alignment. He deserve to be modkilled but that's not in our hands. Every single other player we're going to get better reads on with time with one exeption. Mattchew. Which makes it neccersary to lynch him in itself. Furthermore he's playing his scum-meta of lurking/notcaring. Try tell me why someone else is a better option. We're lynching him today. The recently ended Aperture game had almost every player in the game call me inactive and apathetic and I was town. Therefore his meta read could be easily countered by just reading the game that i was playing in alongside this game. I am attempting to become more active although in about 45 minutes I will be offline for around 20-ish hours. I will not be around at deadline. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
| ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
| ||
|
Z-BosoN
Brazil2590 Posts
On October 14 2012 04:06 Mattchew wrote: what is this in reference to? These are risks last posts on me z-boson references The recently ended Aperture game had almost every player in the game call me inactive and apathetic and I was town. Therefore his meta read could be easily countered by just reading the game that i was playing in alongside this game. I am attempting to become more active although in about 45 minutes I will be offline for around 20-ish hours. I will not be around at deadline. Ok, so couple of more things. You being inactive is a null tell if you are scum./town from what I'm gathering. However, it IS anti-town, as you will become a liability later on. Also, I get your reasoning for finding iamp scummy. What I don't get is why you bring this up now. Lynch time is getting closer and we need to consolidate the votes on someone, and there are like 6-7 different lynch choices. What of DP? What of Kreb? What of Shiaopi? Why are you voting iamp over any of them? I seriously think you did not read any of their filters, and just selected somebody easily pegged as scum and went for him. | ||
|
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7876 Posts
I still find the situation around kush's flip fucked beyond belief but I am willing to give you time to prove yourself given the name you said Kush had, and thus it may make sense that he can hide his own flip. As such ##unvote | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On October 14 2012 04:07 Mattchew wrote: VE any thoughts on iamperf and my post on him? I disagree with you 99%. And yea, I was wrong about iamp in Aperture. But I was wrong based on him making 4 posts, not 7 pages of posts. Also, you're misrepresenting his "change of heart" on kush. He had been saying kush was town all game. Its pretty understandable that he hopped on the red check and then still had doubts, especially with the way kush was acting in crunch time. It was so different from every kush scum game. I want you to do a little research into iamp if you're so convinced. Read GSL 2 and Newbie XIX. Tell me if the iamperfection in this game feels like the scum iamperfection in those games. Because I just don't see it. | ||
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
On October 14 2012 04:20 Keirathi wrote: I disagree with you 99%. And yea, I was wrong about iamp in Aperture. But I was wrong based on him making 4 posts, not 7 pages of posts. Also, you're misrepresenting his "change of heart" on kush. He had been saying kush was town all game. Its pretty understandable that he hopped on the red check and then still had doubts, especially with the way kush was acting in crunch time. It was so different from every kush scum game. I want you to do a little research into iamp if you're so convinced. Read GSL 2 and Newbie XIX. Tell me if the iamperfection in this game feels like the scum iamperfection in those games. Because I just don't see it. no, this isn't a meta read. this is scumplay characteristics if VE is det and kush was scum. | ||
| ||
