EPTLiquid City Mafia - Page 2
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 11:12 kushm4sta wrote: + Show Spoiler +I dont regret voting for nodes but I also didn't see any good arguments really. @Austin you say that his defense of shady has nothing to do with when shady disappeared. However, part of the reason node defended shady was because he was scumhunting, which he was doing somewhat before he disappeared. So the fact that the defense of him was before shady's disappearance does matter. On September 30 2012 13:54 Shady Sands wrote: Yes! Thank goodness the gambit worked. The whole plan was either to troll hard and have some fun, or enjoy a serious, non-troll game of Mafia by inciting the mod to explicitly threaten a modkill for trolling and scare all the trolls into the straight and narrow. Shiao, you can thank me after the game is over. With that being said, I find the easy rando-vote at the beginning highly suspicious. ## Unvote ## Vote Z-Boson Explain your rando-vote without trolling as a factor. On September 30 2012 14:14 Shady Sands wrote: Hmmmm here Z-Boson soft defends kush Then kush follows by sheeping his vote ##FoS Kush On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote: I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly, and I certainly don't think he would be willing to reappear and start pushing targets. Node just notes that he doesn't think Shady would reappear and start pushing targets. Shady doesn't really PUSH anyone. He votes Z-BosoN for a random vote, then asks Z-Boson to explain the vote. He thinks kush is connected to Z-Boson because of a "soft defense" and vote (And iirc, someone pointed out after this that Z-BosoN had already moved the vote that kush "sheeped"). Shady didn't push anyone. Shady voted a guy while asking him to explain himself, then made some weird connection concerning sheeping that didn't exist. II disagree that Shady was actually scumhunting here (even if he's somehow town, this wasn't scumhunting) and I think Node is completely misrepresenting what Shady was doing when he says it was "pushing targets" | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 11:31 annul wrote: that is not to say everyone on the wagon is red, but in this situation with how ez it is rolling this quickly.... lotsa reds probably in the initial push. I agree that, if he flips scum, there's AT LEAST one red in the rush of votes. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:07 annul wrote: ..... no he didn't? if i am just 100% blind or something please quote where he said this, but i am re-reading his two posts a lot and i see nothing of this sort On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote: I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly, and I certainly don't think he would be willing to reappear and start pushing targets. Now, kush on the other hand has been talking a lot about absolutely nothing. Seeing as he considers his vote on Shady absolutely inconsequential so far ("My vote for Shady had nothing to do with a scumread of any sort"), he's sure spent an awful lot of time discussing it. Weirdly enough, he justifies his current vote by saying he doesn't have any scum reads, yet has also thrown a few FoS's around. So, we see his vote that doesn't matter (yet) on someone he doesn't care about, instead of actually pushing the rather perfunctory cases he's made so far, possibly just so he can look like he's actually contributing. So, I'll actually put my vote where my mouth is. ##vote kushm4sta Bolded for emphasis. This is pretty much exactly how Coagulation plays every game. If he's town, in a day or two he'll come up with a handful of proper scum reads to tunnel for the rest of the game, about half of which will be correct. He "defends" shady, yes. But half his defense is that shady pushed reads, and half is that shady stopped trolling. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:10 annul wrote: okay, i see now where you get that from. i interpreted this part to be future-predictive, not past-indicative. like he is saying "i dont expect this to happen." note the difference in verb tense between the two clauses: "i don't think he would've dropped" (past tense) vs "i don't think he would be willing to reappear" (future tense) It makes no sense for node to have defended shady based on what he might do in the future. if you interpret it that way, it's not a defense, it's speculation about future actions that shady might take | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:14 annul wrote: THAT specific sentence fragment is speculative. the rest of it is obviously a defense What rest of it? If you take that part out, you're left with On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote: I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly His trolling wasn't scummy. If he were scum, he wouldn't have stopped trolling so quickly. I still don't find the second bit there any good, and it's very suspicious to me. Shady was spewing obscenities and typing in half caps. He did it enough that mods warned him. Node defends Shady because Shady stopped doing something that the mods told him to stop doing. Great defense. So unless you like that point, Node's defense was "His trolling antics were silly, but they weren't scummy." | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 12:26 annul wrote: Man, I was just finding you townie.i never said it was a good defense. but you are not seriously going to argue that it is not "A" defense, right? How are you going to say that node defended shady, which you liked because it matched what you were doing all day. then people bring up the text of node's defense, which was the root of my post on him, which seems to be the root of this voteswap. Node's defense is not that single line about trolling being silly but not scummy. His defense is (1) trolling is silly but not scummy, (2) shady stopped trolling quickly, (3) shady started pushing people (3) didn't happen mods TOLD him to stop doing (2) you can't then look at (1) and go "see, there's a defense. Just not a good one." That's entirely disingenuous. You were just happy he made a defense at all. It's been pointed out that the defense was bad and it was based on misrepresenting shady's play. You can't then take the one bit that isn't based on a misrepresentation and go "see, a defense!" You have to take it as a whole. And the whole thing, which is technically defense, isn't just A defense, it's A SCUMMY defense. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
In the same way that some may have concerns about the way votes are coming in, look at some of the votes going elsewhere, or admonitions to go elsewhere: On October 02 2012 12:17 Coagulation wrote: Everyone keep your votes on shady sands. Node bandwagon looked scummy as fuck and only makes shady look even scummier. Wagon looks scummy. Nothing about node himself, nothing about node's posts On October 02 2012 12:30 Z-BosoN wrote: Allright, there he is. I've decided that I will not give a shit about what people are saying regarding meta and choose whoever I think is scummiest and makes a better lynch. I'm going with coagulation because of what I've stated earlier on him. He hasn't posted anything useful so far and flows along with content-less posts. Shows no real interest in scum hunting and his association with me on shady sands is ridiculous, as if he is incapable of reading. ##Unvote ##Vote Coagulation Dude who randomly mentions Node On October 02 2012 12:33 slOosh wrote: Guh didn't realize how much time I actually take to read. Between Node and Shady Sands I'm leaning Shady. With a total lack of follow through after his troll antics, he has disrupted early day discussion and dropped off. Not lynching him today on the basis of a potential modkill is stupid - he could easily trade his life for hurting day 2 discussion as well and he might not even be lynched. The nature of the Node lynch is really strange. Reason enough to lean the former. ##Vote: Shady Sands Node lynch is "strange." Is Node himself scummy? Are Node's posts scummy? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 14:27 annul wrote: Just for fun, no way.then i move for a directed verdict. and it would be granted. This is criminal, no way you've shown no scintilla of evidence to prove guilt. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 02 2012 18:35 Kreb wrote: Lets look at the case on Node itself: The case is built by the fact that, according to austin, Node calls Shady town for weak reasons. Yet he doesnt say anywhere in his post he calls him towny, he calls Shady "not scummy", not "towny". Also the case is largely built on the fact that Shady would be scum (I agree Node would look suspicious in that case, but now we know better at least). But if the case is built on that we should be pushing Shady, get his flip and then push Node afterwards when we know Shadys alignment. is incorrect. The case is not "Shady is scum and Node called him town, trying to cover for his scumbuddy." Again, it's this: On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote: I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly, and I certainly don't think he would be willing to reappear and start pushing targets. These feel like incredibly bad reasons for a townread. I don't see how NoT coNtINUinG TYpINg LIKe tHIs and throwing a bunch of obscenities around is townie. I don't see Shady pushing other targets. The case is that Node is throwing out a townread for FOUL reasons. Yes, semantically, Node uses the term "not scummy" and "If he were scum he would do x I don't think he would do what he's doing." But if Shady is not scum, and is not acting as scumShady would act, then there's no great leap of logic involved here in saying Node has a townread on Shady. But, again, the reasoning behind the read is: (1) silly, not scummy trolling; (2) stopped trolling; and (3) pushing targets. (3) is either a lie, or if you're annul, it's speculation about the future. (2) is ridiculous because he received a message from mods telling him to stop. (1) has nothing behind it at all. Shady flipping town changes none of that. You know who has bad townreads on townies? Scum. scumNode knows Shady's alignment, and the post in which he calls Shady town (or "not scum" if you prefer) is ... either one step up or one step down from just saying "Shady town" with NO reasoning. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Everyone who is just going "node wagon looked bad" or "node wagon node wagon" is a wanker, to paraphrase...golden? Therefore, I present to you: YE OLDE LIST O' WANKERS slOosh - On October 02 2012 12:11 slOosh wrote: Still reading for context but I'm currently of annul's viewpoint that the switch seems ... unnatural for a lack of better term. The lynch candidate selection is basically a lurker list (none of the cases really stuck out as built on strong analysis), and with an inactive town as this the lynch sway has me concerned. When you have a selection of alright lynch targets and a sudden switches happens from one to another, it raises flags. Will read up on other candidates and give thoughts on them. On October 02 2012 12:33 slOosh wrote: Guh didn't realize how much time I actually take to read. Between Node and Shady Sands I'm leaning Shady. With a total lack of follow through after his troll antics, he has disrupted early day discussion and dropped off. Not lynching him today on the basis of a potential modkill is stupid - he could easily trade his life for hurting day 2 discussion as well and he might not even be lynched. The nature of the Node lynch is really strange. Reason enough to lean the former. ##Vote: Shady Sands Post 1 - The switch is "unnatural." The switch raises flags. slOosh will "read up on the other candidates." This indicates that slOosh actually has read Node, "the other candidates" implies he's read a candidate at this point. Yet he says NOTHING substantive about Node, talks ONLY about the votes. Post 2 - Substantive reasons on Shady as to why he's leaning that way. Nature of the Node lynch is "strange." Still nothing substantive about Node, to compare his substantive thoughts on Shady to. On October 02 2012 12:49 slOosh wrote: After I call him out on this, he gives substantive thoughts on Node, calls him scummy. Notes that I tossed out a bunch of names, despite having been absent from the thread and having to go read the substantive cases on people he knows what my posts looked like. Also, I tossed out two names I wanted to lynch - Node and mkfuba. While there were other people I wrote about, those were the only two I was pushing as actually scummy. I don't like that slOosh has just returned to thread, seems to kind-of know what's been posted, but not quite.Node is scummy. I think what you found about his post was valid. However we can only lynch 1 at a time and I find Shady a better target for the reasons I stated. The strangeness of Node's lynch was that there was a disconnect between the push and the votes - you tossed out a bunch of names and his was just picked up. It's enough to sway me to Shady. Coagulation - On October 02 2012 12:17 Coagulation wrote: Wagon looks scummy. No substantive thoughts on Node. Everyone keep your votes on shady sands. Node bandwagon looked scummy as fuck and only makes shady look even scummier. Kreb is NOT a wanker. Kreb is, as far as I read it, the only person who actually looked at the post on Node, read Node's posts, and formulated an actual opinion about what Node was saying, what the case was saying, and why he disliked it (annul doesn't count, next post will cover that). I don't love that Kreb only does this the next day, but he wasn't posting and said he'd gone to sleep. Believable. I don't love that Kreb is kind of misrepresenting the cases he's looking at. But still, dude actually looked at stuff. Compared to YE OLDE WANKERS that's a marked improvement. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
And finally, drumroll, please HIS LORDSHIP, KING OF THE WANKERS; GRAND POOBAH OF WANKERS LODGE No. 237; WANKER-O NUMERO UNO; THE HIGH PRIEST OF THE REFORMED CHURCH OF THE BLESSED WANK; HE-WHO-SHALL-NOT-BE-WANKED annul - Act 1, in which our wanker beginneth his wank On October 02 2012 11:10 annul wrote: this node push seems VERY forced, wtf On October 02 2012 11:17 annul wrote: its happening extremely fast extremely easily and with no resistance. On October 02 2012 11:31 annul wrote: that is not to say everyone on the wagon is red, but in this situation with how ez it is rolling this quickly.... lotsa reds probably in the initial push. On October 02 2012 11:40 annul wrote: and i am NOT arguing for node's color one way or the other on any type of substantive case. that is, i am not basing my claims on what he himself has said or done. i am basing it based on circumstances revolving how everyone else is voting for him. it just does not make sense. a bus in this situation is a terrible play for the red team i think... and so based on the rush of votes, he is probably not red. as for a substantive case against node, ill read that filter closely after marv's Here's a big ol' list of quotes in which annul worries about the wagon, worries about the wagon, there's scum on the wagon. At the end, he specifically notes that he isn't arguing node's color, isn't arguing substance, and is going to read node's filter. (1) Rush of votes for scum doesn't mean that player isn't scummy, ESPECIALLY right before deadline. All of a sudden the whole day got turned upside-down, scum is in a panic, any push for a scum lynch is going to pick up some scum votes before they sort things out. (2) annul has been posting about the node push now for 30 minutes. 11:10-11:40. At 11:40, he notes that he'll read node's filter after marv's. Node's filter is like...2 or 3 posts, and annul hasn't read it in the 30 minutes he's been casting doubt on this lynch. On October 02 2012 11:56 annul wrote: and read node's filter this was very easy. two posts. first post defends shady and calls out kush; second post retreats from this defense slightly and continues to argue against kush. considering node's only two posts match what i have been arguing all along............. i like this guy. the big question now is what it is about these two posts that caused 8 people to drop their pants and go all in on this guy. like, i read the posts... what is there exactly that people are seeing? this doesnt make sense. 8 votes on him so i have to assume with a normal mafia count that there are at least some towns on him.... why? end scene Act 2, in which the wank-fiend beginneth to rear his head On October 02 2012 11:56 annul wrote: and read node's filter this was very easy. two posts. first post defends shady and calls out kush; second post retreats from this defense slightly and continues to argue against kush. considering node's only two posts match what i have been arguing all along............. i like this guy. the big question now is what it is about these two posts that caused 8 people to drop their pants and go all in on this guy. like, i read the posts... what is there exactly that people are seeing? this doesnt make sense. 8 votes on him so i have to assume with a normal mafia count that there are at least some towns on him.... why? When we last saw our heroic townies doing battle to lynch Node, annul came in with this. The first post defends shady. Node's two posts match what annul has been arguing. annul doesn't understand what's scummy about node's posts. iamperfection immediately picks up on annul's post - On October 02 2012 12:01 iamperfection wrote: when did shady push anything? How could a town player reading the thread think shady is town because he pushed something after his trolling. what did shady push? annul's response - On October 02 2012 12:03 annul wrote: ....nowhere did i mention shady pushing anything? node has two posts. annul has apparently read them. annul can't understand why townies are on node, which assumes that he's read my post on node and doesn't agree with it. But he 100% seems to have no idea HOW node defended shady. annul finds node townie for defending shady without reading HOW node did so? Urrbody knows what iamperfection is talking about: On October 02 2012 12:04 Sharrant wrote: @Annul I think the point Perfection was making is that Node mentioned both of those things. He's answering your question by asking you if you think it's possible for a townie to have done those things. On October 02 2012 12:05 kingjames01 wrote: I think he means Node. except for annul On October 02 2012 12:07 annul wrote: ..... no he didn't? if i am just 100% blind or something please quote where he said this, but i am re-reading his two posts a lot and i see nothing of this sort end scene Act 3, in which the wank-fiend hath been spotted by the loyal villagers. out! out! foul wank-fiend On October 02 2012 12:10 annul wrote: Sorry guys, I didn't see where node said Shady was pushing targets. Even though everyone else did. I didn't see it because I interpreted it as another verb tense.okay, i see now where you get that from. i interpreted this part to be future-predictive, not past-indicative. like he is saying "i dont expect this to happen." note the difference in verb tense between the two clauses: "i don't think he would've dropped" (past tense) vs "i don't think he would be willing to reappear" (future tense) (1) It's still plainly there, no matter what tense you think the verb is (2) Like I point out, On October 02 2012 12:11 austinmcc wrote: arguing about the verb tense is ridiculous, because if node was being "future-predictive," then...what!? Seriously, then what. Who actually argues "well x might do this in the future, therefore he's town." That's a tremendously awfulbad thing to call someone not scummy for, that they might do townie stuff in the future. That makes node look EVEN WORSE to me, because his townread on shady is based on predictions about the future.It makes no sense for node to have defended shady based on what he might do in the future. if you interpret it that way, it's not a defense, it's speculation about future actions that shady might take annul responds - On October 02 2012 12:14 annul wrote: THAT specific sentence fragment is speculative. the rest of it is obviously a defense So one of three pieces of Node's "defense," which annul liked and found a defense, is "speculative." The rest is "obviously" a "defense." What happens when you remove this bit that's speculative and take the obvious defense? On October 01 2012 17:40 Node wrote: Ah much better. Now Node is defending shady because...his trolling was silly and not scummy, and if he were scum, he wouldn't have stopped trolling so quickly...you know, it's not like the mods messaged him and told him to knock it off. Surely that wasn't why he stopped, surely he would have kept going if he were scum.I don't think Shady Sands is scum -- at least, not given what we've seen so far. His "trolling" antics were silly, but they weren't scummy. If he were scum, I don't think he would've dropped the trolling pretext so quickly annul's response - On October 02 2012 12:26 annul wrote: i never said it was a good defense. but you are not seriously going to argue that it is not "A" defense, right? David Attenborough voice, "Here, we see town applying logic to the wank-fiend. This kills the wank-fiend." annul's initial substantive argument for Node's townieness was that he (1) defended Shady and attacked kush; (2) which was what annul had been doing; and (3) annul didn't see the scumminess. Since then, annul has had some problems reading Node's post and seeing the "pushing targets" language. Then he found the pushing targets language to be speculative about the future, i.e., not a defense of Shady's actions. Then he considers the leftover bit a defense. Then it's pointed out that half of the leftovers is that Shady did what mods ordered him to do. annul is left with "i never said it was a good defense." ...this is not the sort of bad defense that makes someone appear townie. This is the sort of bad defense that makes it look like Node knew Shady's alignment and wanted to defend him, because 2/3 of his reasoning was not legitimate grounds for a town read, which annul seems to acknowledge. If I had been defending Shady, like annul was, I would not be happy that Node also posted this defense, a bad defense, of Shady. That doesn't give me a town feeling about someone when they have a defense like Node did, that makes me worry about my own read. annul also still hasn't said he's changed his mind about the scumminess of the defense...despite letting it be picked apart and finally clinging to "I never said it was a good defense." How is a bad defense, based on bad reasoning, out of nowhere, a townie thing? end scene Act 4, hideth thine children, hideth thine wife, forsooth, the wank-fiend is afoot and wanking about town The scene is Liquid City. ~30 minutes until lynch time. On October 02 2012 12:47 annul wrote: Translation, "it is ~30 minutes until lynch and I don't like Z-BosoN's filter and he has strange logic." Nothing specific (although Z-BosoN does look odd)i don't like what i see in boson's filter. he jumps around like a pinball and has very strange logic for doing so (if he has any at all). On October 02 2012 12:47 annul wrote: Translation, "it is 25 minutes until lynch and I'm 'going to see if this works.'" If what works? Who knows!?i don't like what i see in boson's filter. he jumps around like a pinball and has very strange logic for doing so (if he has any at all). On October 02 2012 12:51 annul wrote: i agree shady is not the kill. he will be modkilled/replaced and we can get a better read off his replacement anyway. however, node is not the kill either. look at boson's filter compared to node's. that's the kill i think. Translation, "I would like to start a wagon on a new candidate with 25 minutes until lynch, after just disparaging another wagon for picking up 8 votes in 12 minutes. However, I want to hit majority in 25, with a completely new candidate and no case, go read his filter yourself." On October 02 2012 12:55 annul wrote: we have 22 minutes. node got 8 votes in 12. anything can happen. Shady returns to thread. annul never pushed Z-BosoN for realsies, and then On October 02 2012 13:10 annul wrote: riiiiiight. ##unvote ##vote shady sands On October 02 2012 13:11 annul wrote: take picture of airport departure board please (that shows the current time etc) and post it. you do this and youll be believed and unvoted. So Shady wasn't scum a moment ago. Nor was node scum. We should vote Z-BosoN for no reason. But when Shady comes to thread, Shady is now scum. Shady is scum because...he said he was stepping off a plane. annul did not think Shady was scum, until he returned to thread, at which point he's scum unless he can take a picture and post it to thread in under 4 minutes. annul never mentions why, despite defending Shady eariler (i.e. finding him town), and finding him town minutes before Shady's return, the mere fact that Shady is back with an excuse for his absence now makes him mafia. annul defended Shady's PLAY. How does the return overpower the town read on Shady's play for annul? We don't know, because he never says. On October 02 2012 14:06 annul wrote: then when shady pulled his last minute return thing, it became a no-brainer to jump onto him. whereas slOosh and Coag just said "wagon bad" and gave no reads on Node, annul is the only person to actively defend the guy on substance. annul's defense is repeatedly attacked because it feels like he's got no idea what he's talking about, and he ends his defense by noting that Node didn't mount a good defense for Shady, nothing more. Not why a bad and suspicious defense is a townie thing. He never readdresses his post in which he fuond Node town to update with things like "Oh yeah, that defense was no good," "Oh yeah, I can see why defending someone based on what they might do in the future and for obeying mods might be scummy," or anything like that. slOosh and coag are mere wankers. That's not alignment-indicative at this point. But, fair townies, annul is the foul wank-fiend. He must be vanquished. I still would prefer to see Node dead first. We can work from there. But everyone needs to see the exact progression of annul's defense of node D1, from attacking the wagon, to substantively defending node, to having that defense poked full of holes, to trying to build a Z-BosoN wagon after attacking the node one. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 02:01 VisceraEyes wrote: Someone shoot him. We can lynch Node easier than Annul, and I want them both dead. Medics, on me and marv. DTs, on BC and Mattchew. We totally got this. Granted, there are no clues in the daypost, but I'm a little hesitant to call targets that specifically, given that the OP has all roled in black. We can't entirely rule out the existence of a mafia medic role. I'm happy with shots into either node OR annul, because, while annul does feel more difficult to lynch at this point, if node flips red then annul looks awful, and if node flips green then annul looks really, really odd. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 02:17 Risen wrote: What does a Paranoid Arsonist do? I looked up arsonist, but have no idea what having paranoid attached to it means. I know paranoid gun owner kills anyone who targets him at night. So I was thinking it was the same thing? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
He expresses displeasure with a Shady lynch: On October 02 2012 09:52 annul wrote: is it really between KJ and shady sands? this seems suboptimal to me but does not defend Shady or say why, just that the lynch is suboptimal But for someone so focused on the minutiae of language used, this: On October 02 2012 11:56 annul wrote: and read node's filter this was very easy. two posts. first post defends shady and calls out kush; second post retreats from this defense slightly and continues to argue against kush. considering node's only two posts match what i have been arguing all along............. i like this guy. the big question now is what it is about these two posts that caused 8 people to drop their pants and go all in on this guy. like, i read the posts... what is there exactly that people are seeing? this doesnt make sense. 8 votes on him so i have to assume with a normal mafia count that there are at least some towns on him.... why? Still leaves me with an impression that he doesn't take issue with node's defense of shady. He's only saying positive things about node's post, and if he disagreed with node on one of the two things that node has done in his posts, I would think that he'd mention so. But yes, annul did not defend shady earlier in the day. That did not happen. The play has received some bad reviews. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 02:27 Risen wrote: I just remember PGO from looking it up after seeing that acronym. I dunno the interactions. I think I'm in the same boat just googling names and seeing what pops up.So a doctor wouldn't protect someone who targets a paranoid arsonist. Alright. Oh...hey. Super relevant. DrH's post on the other queue site: A fairly normal game with excessive flavor. Semi-closed set-up. Role names will be disclosed, but role powers will not be. No in-thread activity requirements but voting is mandatory. I don't think we're meant to know what all the roles mean/do.This game will consist of a town, mafia and a single third party player. The third party player winning will not end the game unless he meets a more difficult and specific condition. Certain roles have access to vague clues. There will never be clues in the day or night posts. If a player is mod-killed, they will not flip. Also confirms 1 third party with abnormal win condition. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
http://tlmafiaqueue.herokuapp.com/games/6 | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 02:39 annul wrote: hey VE and austin 0-100% how sure are each of you that i am a red? Currently, I'm finding you scummy for your interactions last night. I found you townie before that. So...right now you're maybe somewhere around 70-80% for me. If node flips red, you jump way up and I don't think you can be town. speaking of node, how do you feel about him? You found him townie, but never updated that read. If you think he was speaking in future tense, do you think that defending a player by talking about what he might do in the future and what he did because mods ordered him to do is townie? Do you think that's green defending green? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 03:15 Risen wrote: Adding on to what marv said, defending a towny flip isn't town-leaning or scum-leaning in my mind. I defend towny flips all the time when I'm scum. VE knows this from my fervent defense of his doctor claim d1 in some mafia a while back. I agree with this, but how do you read Node's defense? Sure, either alignment could defend someone, but at the margins you can kind of tell when a town player is defending a townread versus a scum player defending someone they know is town. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On October 03 2012 04:10 Risen wrote: It's true it's a risk to take as a scum player, but it requires people to actively go back and look much later in the game. Kill the people willing to put in that kind of effort and boom, easy town cred. I was posting it as a warning for people not to use it as alignment telling. Do you read Node's post as a townie defense or a scummy defense of Shady? | ||
| ||
