EPTLooney Lynching Mini Mafia - Page 3
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:28 Hopeless1der wrote: Basically hoping to lure scum out either latching onto my case with poor justification, just sheeping or trying to defend me for towncred, knowing I'd flip town. Quite frankly I think it failed pretty hard, so yeah...I won't be trying stunts like this again. I'm currently going through filters for proper scumreads. K. I'll put 2 onto ON. It would be a policy lynch, sad to say, but lurking in a mini is extremely bad for town. Can't stand for it. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
How would sandroba be a policy lynch? He's been around. Lynching him would be an old-fashioned regular lynch. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
gooby please | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:46 thrawn2112 wrote: were you talking about my post? the policy lynch part referred to ON, not sandroba Oh ok. I was confused because you said "I think it's going to be a policy lynch", and then you said you preferred sandroba to be lynched. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
I'm curious why you're not pushing djodref then? He IS up for voting after all. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 09:13 kushm4sta wrote: 1.He seems more casual/carefree in that scum game. 2.This game the tone of his posts are stern and the posts themselves are relatively long and focused. If you compare both filters they read quite differently. I do think it's interesting that ET said one of his town tells this game was discussing set up, but he did that also quite a bit in that scum game. 1. I disagree. In context of that game, sandroba was widely (and correctly) considered scum D1. Any carefree-ness you see is him on D2-4 just completely not giving a crap because he was completely and utterly doomed. What is similar in the two games is in Liar Game, sandroba got extremely busy and fell off the face of the planet (I was on his team), and he made very little effort to try and defend himself. AKA, his effort dropped off preciptiously from D1. You can say that it's because he is busy, but heuristically this looks very similar to me. 2. His C9++ is important to look at, if you're going to look at filters. That is an average town sandroba game; he is aggresive, speaks plainly, and most importantly discusses topics with people that he trusts. He seems completely disinterested in discussing things with anyone which is weird considering how he usually does things. He likes to take control and build power blocs, which he hasn't even tried to do since the first 12 hours of the game. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:35 EchelonTee wrote: K. I'll put 2 onto ON. It would be a policy lynch, sad to say, but lurking in a mini is extremely bad for town. Can't stand for it. On October 13 2012 07:09 EchelonTee wrote: Prplhz, would you care to weight in on the ON vs 1der matter? I don't want to vote dump but I will if I have to. Me showing that I supported 1der over ON, and was willing to vote dump if I had to. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:05 thrawn2112 wrote: echelon why would you opt for last minute sneaky maneuvers to keep hopeless safe instead of discussing it in the thread? so what do you give a fuck about? who is your top scumread? You misinterpret me; I'm not saying IDGAF as in I don't think either of them are worthy of the lynch. I'm saying I consider them both bad enough to lynch and don't care who dies today. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
I have a scumread on sandroba. But since lynching vets with a meta like his is not the best, it makes put his lynch on par with ON in worthiness. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
da0ud. We're killing sandroba. I'm 99% sure 1der is a townie. | ||
|
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 09:48 kushm4sta wrote: Why is ET voting for ON when he himself pointed out: You keep on requoting this without context. This is what happened. 1. HiroPro stated that his top scumread is djodref. He had no votes on him. 2. I write that statement; specifically calling out why would he not vote his scum read if he is not freely available? 3. I vote for ON because I don't want 1der to die because I think he is townie. My top scumread is not available for the lynch. I am unable to vote for my scumread. I am unable to push him because of my own earlier mistake and because of the lynch mechanics. However you were able to push me, your top scumread, and you did nothing. You have also written 0 posts about why you think I'm scummy, yet you continuously seek to jab at me and aggravate me. Either out and state why you think I am scummy, or lay off. All you are doing is trying to start a shit show, and I'm not interested in that. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
1. I voted ON because I didn't want 1der to die. This is the original reason why I posted that statement. 2. I stated IDGAF between ON and sandroba because I think both are likely enough to be scum. 2b. The reason why I stated IDGAF is because I have no votes now, so I have no direct influence. By vote bombing, it means that I am giving up my ability to choose between ON and sandroba, and I am ok with that. 3. As I stated before and you ignored, I have a scumread on sandroba, but he's someone who will be very obvious come N1/D2/N2, and lynching a strong vet is no the best if you aren't very sure. Therefore I rate his lynch equally between ON in terms of viability, hence "IDGAF" I would appreciate it if you didn't ignore my posts. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:24 kushm4sta wrote: I gave you 3 votes. Austin said he would outvote. I backed off (i figured you would lose to sandroba next round anyway so no reason to get into a voting war with austin) false. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=372945¤tpage=15#295 In that post you said I didn't scumhunt. I responded to you that I did scumhunt. In my post, I said you put 0 posts on me. You respond to me that you did. You see a pattern? We're arguing about nothing. Just stop. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
Barring a miracle change in ON's play, he has to die. He will yield extremely little information so wasting the lynch on him today is definitely not the best move, now that I think about it more. But he has to die. A super lurker at endgame is an almost un-winnable proposition for scum. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5256 Posts
On October 13 2012 11:33 kushm4sta wrote: What is the pattern? That you are wrong? You said I put 0 posts on you. I linked you one. 1>0 That you responded to it does not cancel out its existence. What is so scummy about ON? Just his 2 ninja votes at the end of r1? Or his afking? Hypothetically if he does not post at all d1, rules state that he will be modkilled or replaced. What is wrong with letting that happen? I said you put 0 posts on me, but you did, 1>0 You said I didn't scum hunt, but I showed 4 examples of me doing so, 4>0 We both are saying incorrect things about each other, that is going nowhere. We should be talking about the lynch. | ||
| ||
along with his team mates echelontee and palmar).
