|
On October 14 2012 03:41 thrawn2112 wrote:
austin are your votes for ON more because you think he's the scummier candidate, or because you are more afraid of sandroba being town and you wouldnt want to lose a town sandroba?
IMO sandroba is scummier than ON, but I am also a coward and I have no problems with a policy lynch... and when you think about it, ON is the perfect policy lynch candidate if there ever was one.
I don't want to lose a town sandroba. I'm not convinced either way on his alignment, and he's a big asset if he's town.
But I don't want to deal with either having him around late game after this D1, OR having to deal with a replacement catching up on 96 hours and then us having to read the replacement while not having much to go off of from ON's time in thread.
To the extent that voting ON for concerns other than "ON scummiest" is a policy lynch, then yeah, I'm in favor of policy lynching him. Right now it's more just weighing what I think of each vs what they each bring. If I'm not convinced on either's alignment, then I'd rather take the chance that we have townsandroba who's useful than townON who isn't right now. If all this meta talk is true, scumsandroba is not particular active and nasty, whereas VE is the first replacement, and I feel like scumVE replacing in for ON might be nastier.
So...I'd rather have townsand over townON. I'd rather have scumON dead than scumsand D1. Based on that, I'd rather flip ON if I'm not sure about the two of them.
|
that second blob of text should read "don't want to deal with either having ON** around late game"
|
On October 14 2012 03:57 kushm4sta wrote:
@austin you are wrong no one fought for ON. I fought for him last round purely because he is a null read. ET pushed him through with 6 last minute votes. I just wish ET hadn't done that so would could lynch 1der today.
Also you make a pretty good point about the replacement. If I had to guess based on the OP, I would guess that ON is going to get modkilled.
So what is better?
Lynching ON so he doesn't get modkilled
or
lynching sandroba and letting ON get modkilled?
Right now I'm leaning towards the option that gets them both killed. I dont want to have to lynch Sandroba d2 if he continues on his path of lurking/not giving a shit.
Last round was late enough that people were finally going to fight for him anyway. It was the first two rounds that I'm really looking at for ON, where Hiro and I got free passes and nobody blinked. A scumbuddy could have just said, "ON feels like an easy mislynch" and dropped a couple votes in R1 or R2, but once we were in R3 both sides were getting more votes and more discussion, so there was less of an opportunity for someone to save him without doing much at all. Plus, at some point, he was going to get more discussion and more arguments in support at him, so I'd rather focus on the early days as far as the whole nobody fighting for him bit.
I'm not leaning scummy on them, so I don't lean towards the lynch Sandroba + replacement/modkill option. If we're going to lose one, I'd rather lose ON, because he's going to be more difficult to read and feels like he's going to be less useful. I haven't played with ON though so I dunno him much, but I've seen some good games from sandroba.
|
On October 14 2012 09:21 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2012 03:46 austinmcc wrote:On October 14 2012 03:41 thrawn2112 wrote:
austin are your votes for ON more because you think he's the scummier candidate, or because you are more afraid of sandroba being town and you wouldnt want to lose a town sandroba?
IMO sandroba is scummier than ON, but I am also a coward and I have no problems with a policy lynch... and when you think about it, ON is the perfect policy lynch candidate if there ever was one. I don't want to lose a town sandroba. I'm not convinced either way on his alignment, and he's a big asset if he's town. But I don't want to deal with either having him around late game after this D1, OR having to deal with a replacement catching up on 96 hours and then us having to read the replacement while not having much to go off of from ON's time in thread. To the extent that voting ON for concerns other than "ON scummiest" is a policy lynch, then yeah, I'm in favor of policy lynching him. Right now it's more just weighing what I think of each vs what they each bring. If I'm not convinced on either's alignment, then I'd rather take the chance that we have townsandroba who's useful than townON who isn't right now. If all this meta talk is true, scumsandroba is not particular active and nasty, whereas VE is the first replacement, and I feel like scumVE replacing in for ON might be nastier. So...I'd rather have townsand over townON. I'd rather have scumON dead than scumsand D1. Based on that, I'd rather flip ON if I'm not sure about the two of them. I've found some holes in your reasoning. Did you consider the case where ON is scum and Sandro town and the case where ON is town and Sandro is scum ? Oh i'm not saying they're both town or both scum.
It's more just ... if we're going to kill one, and I don't really think either is super scummy, I'd rather take the safer lynch. I want a townsand around more, and I want a scumON around less, so ... I'm more willing to lynch ON.
|
On October 14 2012 09:31 thrawn2112 wrote:
austin what do you make of sand's "omg you guys suck so bad i'm not going to try" defense?
On October 13 2012 16:00 sandroba wrote:
I'm not going to fight against this lynch. This is simply too stupid to fight over and I don't feel like it. If you people stopped one second to look at this thread you would come to realise that is simply no way I'm scum purely based on how this situation came to be. Also there is no case against me. I refuse to defend myself against the ignorant uninformed opinion of a bunch of riotters. This is no way to play mafia. You have to look at the intricacies and not follow the mob rule that is usually driven by scum. I leave you sheep to your fate.
My reads so far is that ET austin hiro and kush are town. I honestly don't know anymore about ON cuz I would expect him to try to at least keep apearances as scum.
This djodref is either very dumb or scum. You would never as town (and inteligent) feel that a person that is standing up to you against the majority trying to lynch would be scum. Prpl and mementos are prob scum.
It's odd. So angry over not being lynched, just moving on one round. Hangover anger?
He's correct that there wasn't much case on him. kush is either townie or just doing a nice job avoiding his usual style in order to seem that way, so, at least from my point of view, I didn't want kush to advance and I wanted to pressure sandroba with moving through another round.
To some extent, sandroba responded to that pressure by giving out some reads. He drops a bunch of names, but provided a little reasoning later on Hiro and I. I THINK I like that part of his angry defense? I think that makes me lean town on him. The wishy washy part of my feeling is that he drops a list of 4 names, then explains 2 later. Maybe that's enough for us to town he actually has reasons, maybe it's covering up that he just vomited a list of names there and decided to explain one or two that he could easily explain. Leaning towards the former right now based on absolutely nothing.
It's...concerning that mementoss and prplhz keep popping up as these minor scumreads. I think you mentioned them earlier. They're on my radar as well. But we're all just dropping their names and nothing more, because we're overly focused on today's lynch. I guess i find dropping those names townie from sand, because even though they're unsubstantiated he did choose two people that I'm not townie on.
That's my too-long, entirely wishy-washy, could be x or y thoughts on his post.
|
On October 14 2012 09:57 thrawn2112 wrote:
Austin why haven't you used all your votes yet? I was actually in agreement with sandroba on that part. I don't see how anyone would either A not want to use all their votes or B trust anyone else in the game D1 enough to 'give' them votes
I'm serious about you having 3 and kush having 3. They're not...fully given away. They come at the cost of a scum and town read on players who fell out of R1 and R2. At the very least, instead of using them to control the lynch I'm trying to use them to get information and a better read on the two of you. I like that idea, seems like a fun and useful way to use them.
I'm not letting either of you have ALL my votes. And worst case, I give scum a net total of 3 votes (I'm using 3). Even if one of you is scum, that's still 6 town votes and 3 scum votes from my pool. That math sounds stupid, but it doesn't feel like even if you guys are scum that I'm handing control of the lynch over. They're really just supposed to be bait/bribery and get you guys to look at some of the folks who dropped out R1 and R2.
|
On October 14 2012 10:18 kushm4sta wrote:
Sandroba has a better chance of flipping scum...lynch sandroba.
This day has been SUPER long and he has had ample time to show us he is town. He hasn't though. His defense, non-defense, whatever you want to call it, did not convince me.
I'll go through his recent posts soon and quote some stuff. But for now I'm leaving my one measly vote on Sandroba.
@Austin if you want to give me your votes, whatever it's kind of weird but I'll take them. Put those bitches on Sandroba.
I'm not purely GIVING them to you.
On October 14 2012 02:16 austinmcc wrote:
You, thrawn, are welcome to three of my votes. As is kush, who is either town or is doing a great job of adopting a completely different style of play for this game. Plus, GZA > RZA. 3 of my votes are for each of you two to use, so long as, in the post in which you tell me how to use them, you give thread a scumread and a townread (and a tiny bit of reasoning) on someone who was safe after the first or second round.
|
On October 14 2012 10:23 thrawn2112 wrote:
So I have to give a scum and a town read out of the people who got 0 votes? That might not even be possible but i'd say out of the people who got 0 votes, i'd be least surprised if hiro flipped red. hiro is one of the players who I don't have a clear mental picture of (in other words he has basically been blending in somewhat) and those are the kinds of players you need to be most wary of. however the chances of him flipping red I wouldn't put much higher than memtoss' chances, who has been popping up on several people's radar. Out of the people with 0 votes.. I'd say you are most likely to be town. Your meta does seem to be a little different than normal... for instance you are posing the crazy hypothetical "if you are scum what would you do" questions, and there is this weird thing with vote sharing. But I haven't found any of it scummy and you've always been willing to answer any of my questions with a lengthy response.
You've got 3 votes if you want them.
|
On October 14 2012 10:36 prplhz wrote:
why don't you say stuff like this earlier and not 25 mins before deadline
...
This statement looks more to me like not caring about the lynch than my not using votes. All Sandroba said was that, if he were scum, he and his scumbuddies wouldn't have let him move to the final round.
That's true of pretty much everyone. That's how being scum in this D1 setup would work for ALL of us. Sandroba didn't descend from the heavens and drop mystical knowledge here, yet prplhz makes it sound like this is new stuff and is partially changing his mind.
|
On October 14 2012 10:40 JingleHell wrote:Sand is currently set to be lynched. 24-21, last vote counted, Austin 6x on Sand.
20 Minutes to deadline.
I put 6 votes on ON...
|
On October 14 2012 10:46 kushm4sta wrote:
yeah as scum he would just let this lynch happen.. that is what he has done in the past
There are 3 votes with your name on them...
|
On October 14 2012 10:50 kushm4sta wrote:
austin vote ON for me please. im changing my mind about sandroba lynch
Scum and townread from people safe in first 2 rounds?
|
On October 14 2012 10:52 thrawn2112 wrote:
austin why did you offer your votes to specifically kush and I out of everyone else?
I think at the time you were two of my townreads who were also putting a decent amount of reasoning in thread.
|
On October 14 2012 10:54 kushm4sta wrote:
fuck austin I really don't want to play your stupid games...
town read=daoud-too dumb to be scum. no fear in posting, total newbie and therefore should be transparent
scum read=austin for throwing away his votes and feigning towniess with stupid games he makes people play
We'll allow it. Still want them on ON?
|
On October 14 2012 11:02 prplhz wrote:
well at least i don't have to bother with defending myself now
The super paranoid players might point out that, at the time you voted, kush had changed his vote and had yet to use my 3 votes. ON would have been the leading vote-getter had you swapped or not.
|
On October 14 2012 11:22 EchelonTee wrote:I had no need to vote dump ON last round. It attracted a lot of attention and was simply not necessary from a scum perspective. I suggest you get off my case.
You dropped 6 votes right at deadline. 4 would have put him through.
The extra 2 votes, if you've got a 3 man scumteam, represent you and your other scumbuddy's anger at ON for not being around.
gg, ET scum.
|
On October 14 2012 11:28 HiroPro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2012 11:24 austinmcc wrote:On October 14 2012 11:22 EchelonTee wrote:On October 14 2012 11:16 kushm4sta wrote:
@ET you have a very fishy schedule I had no need to vote dump ON last round. It attracted a lot of attention and was simply not necessary from a scum perspective. I suggest you get off my case. You dropped 6 votes right at deadline. 4 would have put him through. The extra 2 votes, if you've got a 3 man scumteam, represent you and your other scumbuddy's anger at ON for not being around. gg, ET scum. this is a joke post, right?
Yes.
|
Hey! Here's way more text than you want to read about MEMENTOSS! I don't know when night ends, so I want to get thoughts out asap though. We should all be doing some of this.
Read on mementoss is wonky, because his early play felt very towny.
He was the first person to do a big "Here's what I think about each matchup" post. I liked that, that someone would do that and kind of force more people to do so.
Town justification: More info into thread, explain self, be transparent
Scum justification: Hide votes in 1-2 matchups by speaking about ALL matchups? Overcompensating and trying to look townie by being open?
Overall I was leaning townie on him for that stuff.
His play in the later rounds feels different from that openness. Whereas in those matchup posts he's giving his thoughts on everyone, he then stopped doing so. To the extent we have his thoughts recently, it's basically just that holding votes is scummy, having lots of votes is scummy.
On October 13 2012 22:52 Mementoss wrote:
Actually, everyone should only be using 1 vote, and we can get some sort of real full out majority going where everyone is involved.
Knowing that ON was scum, this means he's probably got...1-3 scumbuddies, likely only 2. If everyone only uses 1 vote, 2 players provide a decent swing. If one player was low on votes (had 1 or 0 left), this helps them take control over the lynch.
On October 13 2012 22:52 Mementoss wrote:
For the people with 0 votes left.
##Mementoss vote "Player Name"
and I will use one of my votes towards giving you a voice in this lynch. I have a feeling scum has WAY too much control right now. But there is a possibility its too late anyways, this method should give more information to where people are at in their thought process.
Also willing to give away votes. But the reason he's giving them away is one I don't like. If people saving their votes is scummy because they want to control the lynch, then people who blew votes early to control lynches should also be scummy under mementoss's reasoning. Yet he wants to give those people votes. Also, if he were town, wouldn't he be worried about giving away votes to just anyone? I was.
CHECK DIS OUT RIGHT HERE
On October 13 2012 22:53 Mementoss wrote:
Also ET I know you explained it but its still fucking weird that you LAST MINUTE dropped all your votes on ON, after expecting him for a modkill, not having a read on him. And having a scum read on hopeless all of the first 2 cycles, you save him last minute.
Not sure which way I will be voting today yet.
ET DOES look good for pushing ON through. You know who was displeased that ET votebombed last minute and pushed ON through? Mementoss. Read that again. What alignment is most likely to be very perturbed that someone came in and dropped votes on ON, when ON was safe from lynch and hopeless1der was moving on? One of those things that's always nice to look at is where something sudden happens that can throw scum off their game/plans. ET voting ON RIGHT at deadline was one such moment, and mementoss reacted hard.
However, today Mementoss voted ON. Do you guys know why!?
On October 14 2012 00:31 Mementoss wrote:
I will be putting all my votes on ON unless he returns then
On October 14 2012 00:46 Mementoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2012 00:32 austinmcc wrote:On October 14 2012 00:31 Mementoss wrote:
I will be putting all my votes on ON unless he returns then Because of sandroba's comments? no because no one would co-operate anyways, and although I think sandroba's play has been scummy im not super sure. But if he flips town then we have ON who refuses to post or do anything, and its gunna be a bad time. Overall, I guess im happy with either lynch, lynching someone I have a bit of a scum read on, or lynching a complete lurker. He's voting ON because...he's a bit scummy on Sandroba, but wants to lynch ON who is lurking. His prior thoughts on ON - On October 12 2012 04:37 Mementoss wrote:
OriginalName
Lurking pretty hard as well. Only has one post with content so far. But it brings up some pretty decent points. Still he needs more activity into the game, looking forward to what his thoughts are on the other players/matchups. Null. Not voting either.
ON lurking but null. ON's only post had decent points. Weird phrasing. "Needs more activity" "looking forward to what his thoughts are on the other players/matchups." That "looking forward" to language sticks out as just funky. He's never been scummy on ON. He's scummy on Sandroba. But he's voting ON. (Yes, it's not scummy to vote scum, but i'm having trouble seeing why he did so)
Then there are just a variety of questions that I was asking him which he didn't answer.
Doesn't answer second question at all - + Show Spoiler +On October 13 2012 22:43 Mementoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 10:24 austinmcc wrote:
Mementoss. Pretend for a moment that you're Mementoss this game. (Or, if you don't have to pretend, please let us know).
You and your hypothetical scumbuddies are hanging out in QT, discussing how to play out the matchups and how you want to vote and do scummy stuff and whatnot. The following questions come up, as to how each of you wants to do things. How do you respond?
Do you guys make sure to sometimes be on opposite sides of a matchup? Or do you not care if 2 scum players vote together the entire way through D1?
Say in round 1 or round 2 there's a matchup that you want to influence, one of your scumbuddies is neck and neck with a townie. Do you just vote that matchup? Or do you vote that matchup + 1 or 2 that you don't care about, in order to hide the vote you actually want to make in with some that don't make a difference to you?
Is there any particular player you think is a likely D1 mislynch, just looking at player list and like...the first couple pages of the game. If so, who?
ET, I'd like to see your answers to those questions as well. You had some setup talk at the beginning that I liked, but I'm interested in hearing your thoughts about the setup from the perspective of you playing as ET. Okay let me pretend to be mementoss. 1. Don't care. 2. Vote the people acting scummiest in the thread. 3. ON is a likely mislynch for lurking, and kush is a likely mislynch for his meta. (if they are town that is) aka its not hard for scum to put them through without real reasoning I don't understand the purpose of this question though. lol.
Doesn't explain a variety of things - + Show Spoiler +On October 13 2012 23:57 Mementoss wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2012 23:21 austinmcc wrote:On October 13 2012 22:52 Mementoss wrote:
prp: 8 Remain
ON: 8 Remain
da0: 9 Remain
Austin: 9 Remain
This^^ this right here is horseshit.
Apathetic voting up towards the last round is unacceptable.
I think everyone should only be using 5 of there votes
3 of these players alone trump the rest of the players in the game. Sandroba doesn't even have anyvotes to defend himself while ON has 9.
Actually, everyone should only be using 1 vote, and we can get some sort of real full out majority going where everyone is involved. For the people with 0 votes left.
##Mementoss vote "Player Name"
and I will use one of my votes towards giving you a voice in this lynch. I have a feeling scum has WAY too much control right now. But there is a possibility its too late anyways, this method should give more information to where people are at in their thought process.
Why is apathetic voting horseshit? Is horseshit just horseshit, or do you find it to come from a town or scum horse? Why should everyone only be using one vote? Why are you giving out votes to anyone with 0 votes left? I had planned to give away either blocks of 3 or blocks of 4 votes to people I strongly feel are town, but not to ANYONE, and not based on the number of votes they have left. How is having no votes a good criteria for who you want to give more control over the lynch to, instead of using a criteria like your townreads? what how much info are we gunna get when half the people cant vote on the lynch, and the other half have no say in the final decision. The lynch is left up to those 4 players, and since one of them is in the hot seat. He can use 9 votes to save himself. I guess playing as passive as you and not putting any reads on anyone to too late so you don't have to vote and can sheep and holding all your votes is your strategy. I guess thats cool >_>. Doesn't answer why apathetic voting is horseshit, doesn't explain why scummy. (If he's going to pay so much attention to people with lots of votes, be so concerned about them, then what is his reasoning? Is there a townie reason to worry, or is he just being active in thread and THINKS this might be a good point to push?). Doesn't explain why we should be using 1 vote. (What's his reasoning? Is it a townie one or does he want more control of lynch and is worried about townies who have votes)? Doesn't explain why he's giving away votes to anyone with 0.
Some minor thoughts, typed quickly because we don't know when night ends.
Really vague association!
On October 11 2012 11:30 OriginalName wrote:
Djo:
I'm going to wait abit to call out lurking due to timezones. However he did vote me for megalurk then disappear.
One thing that bothers me this time around is believe it or not, that vote on Mementoss. He uses the excuse that he was drunk to cover it up rather than assert his position harder and back it up. It was by his words an accident, at the very least he could push it and get more reactions, there is nothing wrong in an incorrect push as it always reveals something.
ON had like...one post of substance. In writing about Djo, ON got a little worked up over a vote on mementoss. Possibly looking out for a scumbuddy? It's not much, but there's really not much in ON's filter. But he's directly addressing the ET/Djo matchup on D2, and he ONLY talks about ET/Djo except where he brings in mementoss. Weak at best.
Anyway, if I'm looking PURELY at associations to be drawn from ON's flip, Mementoss comes off looking the worst. ON mildly references him, is concerned with a vote on him. Mementoss is relatively concerned with ET dropping votes on ON RIGHT at deadline to push him through (Hey, which faction wants to plan and didn't want ON to move into further rounds?).
Also, I ALWAYS find mementoss scummy. Every game I really look at him, I end up finding him scummy. But it's not usually for stuff like this - the minor associative bits are especially different from past accusations I've made.
|
On October 14 2012 11:53 prplhz wrote:
could be austin or mementoss instead of da0ud since i don't really noticed them this game  for you not noticing
Confused face for me being scum. If you were scum, and one of your scumbuddies was up for lynch, would you give away 6 of your votes?
|
On October 14 2012 12:04 thrawn2112 wrote:
I agree with most of that post but still I'm hesitant to believe that memtoss would have bussed ON so early on in the last round. However that's assuming that sand is town which isn't confirmed.
Yeah, that throws everything off. I get really zoned in on the associative bits though (see how I'm referencing them again?).
Need to see exactly where votes were on each candidate when he dropped his votes. I'm also, for some reason, less willing to give him townie points for voting ON when he has a scumread on Sandroba and voted ON anyway for lurking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
