EPTGSL Open Mini Mafia II - Page 13
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:21 Blazinghand wrote: Vote Count! Thrawn2112 (4) - iamperfection, Ottoxlol, Sinesis, strongandbig Phagga (2) - ShiaoPi, Bluelightz Sinensis (1) - Thrawn2112 Not Voting (2) - austinmcc, Phagga With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch. Day ends in 4.5 hours on Friday, Sep 28 9:00pm GMT (GMT+00:00) aka 21:00 GMT (+00:00) | ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
| ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
Austin voted Thrawn just a minute before the votecount. I think he is dead.... | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:26 ShiaoPi wrote: Austin voted Thrawn just a minute before the votecount. I think he is dead.... Nope | ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
| ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
| ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On September 26 2012 23:04 thrawn2112 wrote: Why is everyone talking about useless shit such as timezones? The only one talking about it were austinmcc and me, and I tried to stop that discussion. On September 28 2012 07:35 thrawn2112 wrote: It was from when you didn't want to answer a question about him until he responded to your question It wasn't a question, Ottox did not want to vote yet. On September 28 2012 10:43 thrawn2112 wrote: ottoxlol: You say I lied, with the lie being that I said you wouldn't give your full read on snb. Yes you have given your read, but the question originally proposed to you was about where your vote was going to go, and you specifically declined answering that question. Whether or not you want to vote for snb is a very big part of what I look at when trying to determine how genuine your read on snb is. Ottox did not decline answering the question, he said he might vote snb but wants to hear is answer first. This one is probably the worst, completely missinterpreting Sinensis accusation, therefor I post it in the open. On September 28 2012 13:55 thrawn2112 wrote: So if I were to not go after other people that would somehow be better than what I've been doing? Well of course not. So how are you making the distinction that I'm trying to direct attention from myself? Are the accusations or questions I've posted scummy looking? Basically it seems like you are accusing me of "too much scumhunting" without going into detail about how the scumhunting looks suspicious. I'm trying to disrupt communication? So I'm just supposed to sit back and let everyone talk to each other and then come in afterwards with my read without being able to ask people questions beforehand? And I think "rarely follow through" is an exaggeration. Which "nitpicks" do you have a problem with? Is your concern about the number of them or the usefulness of them? What I want you to be more specific about is exact cases you're accusing me over. Tell me which ones you're actually talking about. You've just made some general statements about my play without actually saying which specific examples you think are scummy and why, and honestly I'm a little wary about how genuine your intentions are. He never said to not go after other people, he never said not to ask questions. He was talking about the way you were doing those two things and that he sees your methods as disrupting instead of helpful. I was unsure if it was just your reading comprehension that failed over and over again or if you did this on purpose. When I compare your play to Newbie Mini Mafia XXVI, then I don't see any misreading of this type there. Interestingly enough, earlier in the thread, Sinensis posted this: On September 28 2012 04:42 Sinensis wrote: I wasn't implying SnB's meta is unclear and dickish. I've played many games with him and he's never been a dick to me. I was implying that being clear and undickish (that's a word I promise) is a good way to be in general. It makes communicating easier. That's all I was saying with that. Communicate clearly and undickishly and I'll be happy to give anyone my time. Thrawn is doing the exact opposite in his beforementioned post. This could be an attempt to avoid having to properly defend against Sinensis' accusations. Also, Thrawns response seems over the top. Check how other reacted on such statements from Sinensis, they were much cooler (e.g. Austin) I also don't like how he is suddenly attacking Sinensis when his points are valid. He does not really try to defend, instead he just attacks him here and demands Sinensis defends. Thrawn, get in here, this is your last chance to say something about this. I expect a statement until deadline -1 hour (that's in roughly 2 hours), else I'll hammer you. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Thrawn On September 26 2012 23:04 thrawn2112 wrote: If someone hammers another player without warning then what is a legitimate response? What reasonable punishment could you put in place to stop people from doing it? I say it's not too big of a deal. If someone hammers a player then we can speculate as to the legitimacy of their motivations. minor town points. agree with it being not too big a deal. others may find this scummy though, since my comments were found scummy by some. On September 27 2012 21:40 thrawn2112 wrote: "just making a note of it" Wanna say anything further than that? null but I found it...interesting? that he keeps harping on this comment. Is it scum trying to figure out why Sinensis is making note of his play? Is it scum worried that Sinensis is onto thrawn/phagga distancing themselves? Or does he just feel that Sinensis is basically saying nothing, because making a note of something that happened is what everyone should be doing with everything that happens here. No read built off this post, but ... I made a note of it (sunglasses). On September 27 2012 23:43 thrawn2112 wrote: You say there's not enough in my posts that are scum motivated for you to vote for me, so obviously you must think some things look scum motivated. What looks scummy? again we have concerns over someone finding him scummy maybe. Again, it's not like you can build a read out of it. On September 28 2012 06:46 thrawn2112 wrote: ##Vote Ottoxlol Alright otto that is 3 votes against you. You've been accused of giving a bad defense and it was, it was more of a deflection than a defense. You've also been accused of not giving your full read on snb earlier and that was also true. So if snb is your top scumread can you give all the reasons why, and if he's not your top read / you're just waiting on his response or whatever, then who else looks scummy and why? This is where things start to turn on me with Thrawn. Drops a nice vote in the middle of the pack. Drops it a ways into Ottox's "defense." To me, Ottox feels pretty darn towny at this point because of the way he's just...not been defending himself and not being worried at all. But Thrawn votes here with very little reasoning, and absolutely no discussion of why Ottox is scummy. Look at his comments:
Where is the reason for the VOTE? Where is the reason Ottox is SCUMMY? X not giving a full read on Y isn't a reason to vote for X. Ottox's odd defense was one of the most towny things out there the more it continued, so why is Thrawn harping on that as well, and is that his reason for voting? BOO AT THIS VOTE. BOO AT THIS POST. Looks to me like joining a lynch in the middle with no real reasoning, just pushing a mislynch. Thrawn CONTINUES to harp at ottox after this. The whole exchange feels stupid, because again, I've got Ottox looking very towny in how he's responding to pressure. But thrawn keeps pumping him. Look at page 9 of the game, too many little posts to link here. So at this point, here's what I'm seeing.
After that, Ottox comes back with a vote on Thrawn. I'm more mixed here: Specifically, look at Ottox's vote post where he votes Thrawn and Thrawn's response. Those I'll include here. On September 28 2012 08:34 Ottoxlol wrote: @SnB then I don't understand random lynch at all. I thought it is like we go to a random website roll 1-8 then put our votes in-> ofc scum wont do it properly so there is much less chance to lynch them My case on thrawn: His response: I gave my full read on SnB, explained why I did not vote at the moment, the first bolded part is where he lies about it, the second and third he wrote in the same post! Don't let him get away with this please ##Vote thrawn2112 I don't see thrawn lying really, I don't think Ottox did a great job of laying out a clear read on SnB, but I also don't see why thrawn is hounding him about it. Thrawn ... hmmm. I can't tell if he's really fighting the vote or not. If he's actually getting worked up about Ottox's vote, then I see that as scummy, because the vote and reasoning feel weak, and a strong response to a weak vote makes me think scum is worried about picking up random votes. I'd like outside thoughts here, concerning Thrawn's reaction to Ottox's vote: On September 28 2012 10:43 thrawn2112 wrote: ottoxlol: You say I lied, with the lie being that I said you wouldn't give your full read on snb. Yes you have given your read, but the question originally proposed to you was about where your vote was going to go, and you specifically declined answering that question. Whether or not you want to vote for snb is a very big part of what I look at when trying to determine how genuine your read on snb is. So your original problems with snb's suggestion were that you couldn't see how it could be fairly done as far as actual logistics goes? You didn't say anything like that at all when you said you first said you didn't like the idea. On September 28 2012 11:39 thrawn2112 wrote: otto you keep saying that I'm lying and you're acting like you have no clue why my accusations are being made, and I think whether you're town or mafia you actually do know why. I feel like most of your defenses thus far have been deflections or omgusing Initially it struck me as a strong response. On reread it doesn't really. On September 28 2012 12:33 thrawn2112 wrote: There's a distinction between making a bad defense and making a bad defense by deflecting... I'd say deflecting is scummy. And sorry I dont know what you mean by "close read." This post bugs me for the same reason...phagga's post about thrawn not looking scummy bugged me. He gives a conclusion, but no real reasoning, and it doesn't necessarily match up with earlier statements. I mention that I dislike thrawn's votepost. I mention that I dislike the deflection/defense big seemingly being the reason for a vote (I didn't realize how little reasoning there was the vote last night off the top of my head Thrawn's response is that There's a distinction between making a bad defense and making a bad defense by deflecting... I'd say deflecting is scummy. Sinensis, in his vote post, gave a longer explanation of why deflecting can be scummy. Thrawn gives none. He doesn't note that he never called it scummy in his vote post. He doesn't explain why it's scummy. He doesn't explain what the distinction IS between a bad defense and deflecting. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
On September 29 2012 00:47 ShiaoPi wrote: Okay fuck this, since they are both not here and I am getting tired, let's do this the old fashioned way. ##vote: phagga Reasons: He has very much blended in with the thread, never took a stance that would have stood out from the general direction the thread was heading to. There is close to zero content within his posts (most are short anyway). The first longer post is the more or less useless list of timezones, he admitted himself that talking about it is a good way to appear contributing while not doing it actually. Also look at the way he shifted his attention around, never called out somebody (besides the "lurkers" at the start) on his own, but piled up onto thrawn and ottox respectively as they started to get pressured by others. As the pressure subsides he pulls back as well. So I wanted him to give out reads of his own, maybe a target of his own, instead of sheeping others and blending in with thread-sentiment. Looks like he is either not online right now or prefers to lurk. Since I want to sleep soon, I won't stick around all the time until he posts. I cannot see any good town reasons for trying to blend into the thread and doing nothing besides piling up onto players already under fire. Looks incredibly scummy in trying to be on the "good" side of town, while seemingly "contributing" but actually just coasting along. I know it's a bit late to propose a new lynch target but phagga reads red to me now. Where did I pile up on thrawn? And I raised my suspicion of Ottoxlol here before austins case. don't have much more time, need to run for train, will be online from mobile and later. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
ShiaoPi
TAIWAN NUMBAH WAN5956 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 04:45 phagga wrote: Texting from mobile cause cable modem is broken. Yes they are out of context, but they don't improve when read in context. . I quoted them because you said I was posting useless stuff, when you had done exactly that yourself. I just wanted to show that you were contradicting yourself. But tell me, thrawn, who is a scummy person in this game, and why? Do you already see someone? + Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 00:16 phagga wrote: So much for talking about "useless shit". Also I was trying to shut the discussion about time zones down immediatly. Meanwhile all you have done (besides the quotes above) is talking about hammering someone, and you are just echoing others. How about you start contributing some? Looks like pounding on thrawn to me. Also regarding ottox, you mention him as bluelightz starts pressuring him. Sleepy as fuck now, so I am off to bed. I would really like you guys to considerate a lynch on phagga, but if you do not like to do it, at least hammer someone, no lynch would be just awful. night! | ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:10 austinmcc wrote: Shiao, here are my (short) thoughts on Phagga. I guess let's discuss him a little if you're around and I don't get pulled away. His inactivity is generally null for a game that's early and hasn't been inactive, but I don't love that he's constantly sniping about the game being slow and then not really trying to do anything about that. + Show Spoiler + On September 26 2012 15:28 phagga wrote: Wow, 9 hours into the game and we don't even have 2 pages. I am against a random lynch because in an instant majority game it might shortcut the discussion and therefore won't be helpfull. Also, there is the trust issue. Sinensis, why dont you want the Boxers to claim? Also, where is Bluelightz? 4am has long past. On September 26 2012 17:38 phagga wrote: Don't be shy. If you're townie, there is nothing to fear. Just try not to clutter up the thread. We are off to a really slow start, something that can generate usefull discussion is always welcome. On September 26 2012 23:01 phagga wrote: I wrote pregame I would be inactive the first 9 hours due to sleep, which is pretty much how long I was inactive. I frequently point out people who are not active, you can find this in any of my older games. It's a habit I have developed to make people aware that someone has been inactive for a longer time. I also like it as a reminder when scumhunting to see if the person has had several periods of long inactivity and what that could mean in the context of the game/thread. On September 27 2012 00:16 phagga wrote: So much for talking about "useless shit". Also I was trying to shut the discussion about time zones down immediatly. Meanwhile all you have done (besides the quotes above) is talking about hammering someone, and you are just echoing others. How about you start contributing some? Game is slow. Game is slow we need something to create discussion. I watch for inactives and point them out. Gets on Thrawn's case for not contributing. In all of that, phagga isn't doing an awful lot himself. I shared his feeligns that we needed something to create discussion, but had no idea how to get that started, so I can't really fault him for those posts. However, I don't actually see him hounding inactive players. I don't actually see him attempting to do too much. I hate this post: We know phagga wants discussion. Wants the game to move. He's speaking with Bluelightz, who posts this: and that was phagga's response. Effectively, phagga is just shutting down the chat with Bluelightz. I'm only speaking generally. I agree that thrawn isn't scummy, but I don't like your reason. I won't tell you WHY i don't like your reason. I won't explain MY reasons. I won't keep the analysis of Thrawn going at all. Just give some general statements and not offer my own specific thoughts. I mention in the nested posts in the quote above why I think it is a bad argument. I did not intend to shut the discussion down, but realized bluelights thought that I suspected thrawn, which I did not really do at this point. Phagga's unvote on Ottox ... doesn't do wonders for me either way. The reasoning behind his original vote was something I didn't express well but also didn't like. The unvote comes a looooooooong time after Ottox has started to look very town. And it doesn't come with anything else. No desire to seek another target, no nothing after that. Just "Okay, no Ottoxvote." I saw one response yesterday an thought, that sounds better, butnot good enough yet. So I went to bed, and when I had time today again to write a proper post I unvoted. I saw early this morning that he was in no danger to get lynched, so I wanted to waitunt I could make a proper post | ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:12 Bluelightz wrote: Was at work, wanted to write about thrawn, did not have enough time for more than unvote. On phagga, I think he's scum because after he votes Ottox, he doesn't make any effort to convince others of Ottox's scumminess besides asking Sinensis on his stance on Ottox and clarifying why he thinks Ottox is scum, then what? He unvotes Ottox and doesn't post anything else. Also I think he is scum because he keeps on dropping useless stuff here and there, comments near the bolded part. he misstyped lynch as lunch several times. I had to laugh and wanted to make a joke on it. I was not sure of iamp's intentions there. I wanted to see if he is serious with his vote or not. Soon after there was a vote count that showed his vote as counting. ] Oh, and while reading his filter, this is my weakest point, This seems like overkill, because if you look at (my) post before, this is just the exactly same thing. | ||
|
phagga
Switzerland2194 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:52 ShiaoPi wrote: @phagga: + Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 04:45 phagga wrote: Texting from mobile cause cable modem is broken. Yes they are out of context, but they don't improve when read in context. . I quoted them because you said I was posting useless stuff, when you had done exactly that yourself. I just wanted to show that you were contradicting yourself. But tell me, thrawn, who is a scummy person in this game, and why? Do you already see someone? + Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 00:16 phagga wrote: So much for talking about "useless shit". Also I was trying to shut the discussion about time zones down immediatly. Meanwhile all you have done (besides the quotes above) is talking about hammering someone, and you are just echoing others. How about you start contributing some? Looks like pounding on thrawn to me. Also regarding ottox, you mention him as bluelightz starts pressuring him. Sleepy as fuck now, so I am off to bed. I would really like you guys to considerate a lynch on phagga, but if you do not like to do it, at least hammer someone, no lynch would be just awful. night! Thrawn: wanted to point out that he has been doing the very thing he accused me off. Was a bit weary of him, hence me asking him about his reads, response put me back on null on him for that moment. Ottox: so what? Noone had voted on him and I brought up a genuine point. Where is the Problem? I am home in 10 mins, family time, will be online in roughly 2 hours. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:52 ShiaoPi wrote: @phagga: + Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 04:45 phagga wrote: Texting from mobile cause cable modem is broken. Yes they are out of context, but they don't improve when read in context. . I quoted them because you said I was posting useless stuff, when you had done exactly that yourself. I just wanted to show that you were contradicting yourself. But tell me, thrawn, who is a scummy person in this game, and why? Do you already see someone? + Show Spoiler + On September 27 2012 00:16 phagga wrote: So much for talking about "useless shit". Also I was trying to shut the discussion about time zones down immediatly. Meanwhile all you have done (besides the quotes above) is talking about hammering someone, and you are just echoing others. How about you start contributing some? Looks like pounding on thrawn to me. Also regarding ottox, you mention him as bluelightz starts pressuring him. Sleepy as fuck now, so I am off to bed. I would really like you guys to considerate a lynch on phagga, but if you do not like to do it, at least hammer someone, no lynch would be just awful. night! You guys may not like association talk, but I'll note that if thrawn flips scum then Phagga is my #1 read. Sinensis picked up on their banter before, phagga's townread on thrawn with no reasoning felt off to me, and then he drops in with a case once thrawn starts to be a pretty clear favorite (although so did 1/3 of the game). My gut just lumps those two together as scum, although I guess we'll see what thrawn flips. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
Thrawn2112 (4) - iamperfection, Ottoxlol, Sinesis, strongandbig Phagga (2) - ShiaoPi, Bluelightz Sinensis (1) - Thrawn2112 Not Voting (2) - austinmcc, Phagga With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch. Day ends in 3 hours on Friday, Sep 28 9:00pm GMT (GMT+00:00) aka 21:00 GMT (+00:00) | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On September 29 2012 01:42 austinmcc wrote: snb, could you give some thoughts on phagga? thrawn, when you return, could you please give your thoughts on phagga amongst whatever else you cover? | ||
| ||
