| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
HiroPro
United States2624 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:24 austinmcc wrote: 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? | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:20 thrawn2112 wrote: so this means there is likely scum among ET, da0ud, hopeless correct? The switch to sandroba happened pretty late so I don't it's likley that all the remaining mafia would be been bussing. imo the only possible busser candidates are kush and prp... hiro maybe too but his switch was pretty early on and a buss was not needed at that point. I still don't like the way austin gave away the majority of his votes.... i doubt he was bussing but by giving away his votes he was giving away his responsibility for the lynch so i'm a tiny bit wary of him of course that all excludes the possibility of sand being scum, but i'm getting a pretty town vibe on him purely based on my reads of his emotions before and after lynch I would also have voted for Sandroba so I feel left out  | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:22 kushm4sta wrote: daoud and hopeless were the big voters for sandroba. ET ignored the lynch all together until minutes after it happened. there's also djo i think... he didn't have an votes but said he wanted to vote for sandroba right? anyways we don't know how long the night cycle will be so might as well get our "if i die before I wake" posts out of the way if I were to hazard a guess at a scum team off the top of my head it would be ET and hopeless. I haven't gone back and looked at anything yet but that's just my gut feeling | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Yes. | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5262 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:24 austinmcc wrote: 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. I concede u caught me | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5262 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:30 thrawn2112 wrote: there's also djo i think... he didn't have an votes but said he wanted to vote for sandroba right? anyways we don't know how long the night cycle will be so might as well get our "if i die before I wake" posts out of the way if I were to hazard a guess at a scum team off the top of my head it would be ET and hopeless. I haven't gone back and looked at anything yet but that's just my gut feeling Man I guess it was a bad idea when I pressured 1der on day 1. I'm bad at scum  | ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5262 Posts
| ||
|
EchelonTee
United States5262 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:20 thrawn2112 wrote: so this means there is likely scum among ET, da0ud, hopeless correct? The switch to sandroba happened pretty late so I don't it's likley that all the remaining mafia would be been bussing. imo the only possible busser candidates are kush and prp... hiro maybe too but his switch was pretty early on and a buss was not needed at that point. da0ud is scum you heard it here first | ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
da0ud are you scum? ET is that a serious acusation? I'd kinda like all the people who voted for sand (or didn't vote at all including you and djo) to say who they think is scum just off the top of their head | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
| ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
| ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
| ||
|
kushm4sta
United States8878 Posts
| ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
| ||
|
thrawn2112
United States6918 Posts
| ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:51 kushm4sta wrote: honestly my reads are shit right. I've just been focused on people up for lynch. You are right, your read on me is shit | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
On October 14 2012 11:55 thrawn2112 wrote: you think memtoss would buss that early? same for austin? what do you think about the chances of sand being scum? dunno, dunno, about zero which was why i switched you don't still think i'm scum do you? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
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: 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.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. 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: 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 - 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. 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: 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: 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: 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. 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. 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. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
Replay Cast
Escore
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
