Aperture Mafia 2: Portal Edition - Page 6

On September 30 2012 14:15 Drazerk wrote:
I disagree the set up speculation would start again when all the Europeans wake up because your little idea was poorly managed. To me it just looks like a third party realizing they had done something silly and trying to back out of it before they are caught out without realizing their excuse puts even more focus on the stunt.

If you wanted to truly derail the thread from set up you would of kicked up a storm and not backed down for at least 24 hours. A 2 hour changeover where only mattchew posted anything significant isn't that.

On September 30 2012 23:55 Mattchew wrote:
well this is slow

On September 30 2012 15:44 austinmcc wrote:
...

I appreciate things getting off to a nice start, but really? Was I the only person who assumed that Keirathi didn't actually have some giant scumread on Mattchew? Given the reasons that he decided to vote mattchew (amg mattchew has used the term town and hasn't claimed a role that doesn't exist), I don't see the unvote as scummy. Vote for weak reasons, unvote for weak reasons.

Drazerk you ACTUALLY think it's anti-town to do that?

On September 30 2012 22:22 JingleHell wrote:


People seem to be missing this. The first time he said it, he had some options in there, but now Draz seems focused on "Third Party" for Keirathi...

Not scum, but potentially third party (based on all that same speculation about setup)? You suggesting you know who IS scum, Drazerk?

##Vote Drazerk

On September 30 2012 14:00 Drazerk wrote:
##vote Keirathi

I'll be honest only a survivor / third party / idiot would back off a case that early with that little pressure against it.

Now I'm going to go to bed.

On October 01 2012 00:29 Mementoss wrote:
I don't know anything about Keirathi's meta, but I do appreciate that his plan to make some sort of a case (weak) was town motivated to generate some productive discussion and provoke reactions from players. The fact that he revealed his plan and unvoted so quickly completely shuts down any plan he had however. I think more pressure needed to be on the player to see who sheeped and gave time for everyone to respond. But I don't think its mafia motivation to put yourself out there and unvote so quickly. Its a pretty null, but seeing keirathi as a newer player I think it was poorly executed town play with good intentions.

Agree with Mattchew thoughts: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=372174&currentpage=5#99

This plan reminds me of Blazinghand making a plan on almost pure meta to start the game on prplhz to get the discussion going, which ultimately made for a great day 1 for town. (see RockBand Mini Mafia) Except BH kept the pressure on prplhz and then prplhz was lynched and was town lol.

I don't think its scummy for Drazerk to call out Keiriethi on his poorly executed plan either. It would be nice if he explained further why he thought it was scum motivated or 3rd party motivated rather than just stating anti-town. So I would like to here more of an explanation from Drazerk on this and in the future for his reads.

Now lets move onto a more meaty part of this post:

Austinmcc



The fact that austinmcc can't see what drazerk is trying to say is mind boggling since austinmcc is not a noob. It was pretty clear to anyone reading the thread that Keirathia plan was done in the incorrect way as I went into above and as mattchew explained a bit further in his post. Also, austinmcc thinks this is getting off to a good start?? It seems pretty dead to me. On top of this weird misconception, his explanation for why the unvote is not scummy is lackluster. Vote has a lot more power than actually getting someone lynched. He's also asking sarcastic rhetorical questions, in which the answers are fairly fucking obvious. The lack of logic here is scummy, and trying to make drazerk look bad without reason to/ target the easiest player to target day 1 in this game, makes me think austinmcc is scum.

##Vote: Austinmcc

On September 30 2012 14:00 Drazerk wrote:
##vote Keirathi

I'll be honest only a survivor / third party / idiot would back off a case that early with that little pressure against it.

Now I'm going to go to bed.

On September 30 2012 13:01 Keirathi wrote:
Of course my case is bad. I certainly don't think you are scum for something so...inconsequential. But this thread needed to move past setup speculation and into people giving real, meaningful opinions and thoughts that they can be held accountable for. Although, I was hoping that other people would weigh in on it before you responded

##Unovte

On September 30 2012 14:20 Keirathi wrote:
Matt took my case seriously, and gave a solid response. I don't need to wait for other people to come into the thread to tell me that. No reason to leave my vote on him anymore, it accomplished my goal.

On September 30 2012 14:22 Drazerk wrote:
You need other people to comment on something before you dismiss it especially when the only person commenting was the person the case was built around.

On September 30 2012 14:26 Keirathi wrote:
That doesn't make any sense. Why do I need someone else's opinion on my case to make up my own mind about how well Matt defended himself?

On September 30 2012 15:10 Keirathi wrote:
Here was my thought process: I started reading the thread, and I saw the last few posts all speculating about the setup in a closed setup game. And I'll admit, I even threw my own comment out there. Then I realized that setup speculation wasn't doing anything to actually benefit town. So I went back and looked for who started the discussion, and it was you. Then I looked back at your earlier posts, remembered you seem to roll scum a lot, and you were doing a thing that I've personally used to identify scum.

On September 30 2012 16:14 Keirathi wrote:
I think the misconception here is that people seem to think that I wanted my case on Matt to generate discussion about Matt. That's not really the case. I just wanted to generate discussion, period. If that discussion was about Matt? Great. About me? Great. About people who jumped in to defend or attack one or the other of us? Still great.

Anything besides trying to guess how many scum there are. *snip*

On October 01 2012 04:22 ghost_403 wrote:
I'm pretty happy lynching Keirathi right now. He's putting way too much effort into scumhunting on Day 1 to build up towncred. Looking through previous filters when there's been, what, twenty posts in this game? No, that's not something that townies do. I vote we lynch him today, and mementoss tomorrow. WHO'S WITH ME.

##vote keirathi