|
On October 14 2012 12:18 austinmcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2012 12:15 sandroba wrote:
Djoref is unlikely scum because he didn't unvote hopeless last round to keep his votes and have me lynched instead of ON this round. Well, he could technically still be scum, but that would be pretty terrible play. Don't bother with him till way later. Hopeless was set to be lynched last round until RIGHT at the deadline. There would have been no reason for scum to unvote Hopeless, as he was set to go through and ON would have been safe.
Oh yeah you are right, then don't consider what I said earlier. I'm going to take a second look at him.
|
@djodref sorry I just pulled you out of my ass pretty much from looking at the votes. You gave up all your votes to try to push 1der through.
memetoss and prpl are top scumpicks ATM. Austin's case against memetoss makes good points. Sure he bussed ON but the bus looks pretty scummy.
It is perfectly reasonable to believe that at least one scum would bus their afk teammate.
|
The key key KEY matchup from D1 seems to be hopeless1der vs. ON. Can't point that out enough. ON was safe until right at deadline. Possible that scum expended a decent amount of votes in order to make that happen, but were happy to do so because they weren't worried about what happened in finals.
Then BOOM. Deadline votes, ON moves on, and scum have already burnt a lot of their influence in R3.
|
On October 14 2012 12:22 sandroba wrote:
I'm not quite sure on him being town, but there is no things that jump about him being scum either. He is quite active and apparently concerned about the game, so I wouldn't worry about him yet.
Agreed. Just weirded out how he continuously asks people for their top scumreads lol
|
@austin the thing about that MU is ON was winning until I votebombed 1der maybe an hour before the deadline.
|
On October 14 2012 12:29 EchelonTee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2012 12:22 sandroba wrote:
I'm not quite sure on him being town, but there is no things that jump about him being scum either. He is quite active and apparently concerned about the game, so I wouldn't worry about him yet. Agreed. Just weirded out how he continuously asks people for their top scumreads lol
because people haven't been giving them lol. all D1 everyone was just focused on whoever looked scummier out of each matchup which was probably not the way we should have been doing it
|
Specifically:
18:07 - Djodref puts 6 on hopeless (H6, ON0)
4:27 - Hiro puts 2 on ON (H6, ON2)
4:36 - ET puts 2 on ON (H6, ON4)
4:49 - thrawn puts 1 on ON (H6, ON5)
7:09 - sandroba puts 2 on ON (H6, ON7)
7:10 - sandroba changes vote to 7 on ON (H6, ON12)
9:45 - kush puts 1 on hopeless (H7, ON12)
10:24 - OFFICIAL VOTE COUNT POSTED - SAYS (H7, ON 11)
10:33 - kush changes vote to 6 on hopeless (H12, ON12)
11:00 - ET changes vote to 6 on ON (H12, ON16)
11:00 - DEADLINE (H12, ON 15)
Actually the numbers are really weird...kush puts 6 votes on Hopeless when it doesn't change anything? ET puts 6 votes on ON when it doesn't change anything...
you guys vote weird.
The official vote count is different, which means that under the official votecount, kush first voted hopeless once. He then voted enough to put hopeless through and save ON (ONLY UNDER THE OFFICIAL VOTECOUNT, WHICH SEEMS TO BE WRONG?).
iirc he was also asking me in thread if I was gonna outvote him? I need to go find that. If so, shows that he was worried about expending votes and still having ON go through to the finals...(BUT THEN HE VOTED ON LATE TODAY)
|
Maybe there's not a lot there, I dunno. Jeez, only 2 people period vote for Hopeless, and they both dropped 6 votes in doing so. I dunno if it really says anything or not, except that ET very likely town (EVEN THOUGH TECHNICALLY HIS LATER VOTES DIDN'T DO ANYTHING AND THE VOTE COUNT SEEMS TO BE WRONG QQQQQQQQQQ)
|
On October 13 2012 22:51 sandroba wrote:
What is even there to talk about? Over the time I've been playing mafia I grew more and more away from hard analysis and began to use apparent integrity and sincerity of people's post as a way to tell scum and town appart. That means that the way I do it is completely subjective to what I consider to be a post (from the particular person I'm looking at) to be honest. Of course the method is not flawless and is completely dependant on my ability to make that judgement, but it served me right in the past and I see no reason to change it. From that place you can see clearly that any explanation I provide you with for my reasoning wouldn't apply to everyone and is not verifyable. What you can do is check for the same things I do. The motives and truthfulness behind my posts and see if you think I'm trying to put on a show or I'm speaking my mind without the fear of consequence. If you can make that distinction then you will have a good idea of my alignment.
The stupid exercise of breaking posts apart and endelessly saying things are "scummy" without even defining and not even knowing what scummy means is what brings this tiresome conversation that I refuse to take part of where everyone indulges each other and strikes each other's dicks.
This deserves to be put into a guide or something
The emotional method of scumhunting, as opposed to the hard analysis method
|
@austin my 6 votes gave 1der the majority
|
On October 14 2012 12:38 kushm4sta wrote:
@austin my 6 votes gave 1der the majority
According to the official vote count, yeah.
But if you actually count the votes, unless I'm missing something, your votes actually just got him to tied, and ON would have continued because he hit that # first.
You and ET's votes both mattered based on the vote count that was given in blue.
|
Austin, you missed where thrawn took his vote off ON.
|
On October 13 2012 04:49 thrawn2112 wrote:
originalname x1
sandroba x1
then
On October 13 2012 07:15 thrawn2112 wrote:
sandroba x1
|
There we go, that's it then.
|
Austin gets a large barrel of Acme Angry Host Glare delivered to his door for interrupting my viewing of the LoL finals to frantically make sure he was wrong. Unfortunately, it works about as well as Acme products ever do, which is to say, not at all.
|
So djodref on Hopeless, Kush providing the oomph to get Hopeless into the lead, then you sending ON through.
Yet when given votes at the end of today, Kush used them on ON. And was set to do so before prplhz came in. Eeeeeenteresting.
|
On October 14 2012 12:46 JingleHell wrote:
Austin gets a large barrel of Acme Angry Host Glare delivered to his door for interrupting my viewing of the LoL finals to frantically make sure he was wrong. Unfortunately, it works about as well as Acme products ever do, which is to say, not at all.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 14 2012 12:46 JingleHell wrote:
Austin gets a large barrel of Acme Angry Host Glare delivered to his door for interrupting my viewing of the LoL finals to frantically make sure he was wrong. Unfortunately, it works about as well as Acme products ever do, which is to say, not at all.
Payback for Aperture 2 
|
These finals make me sad. I wanted to see M5 vs CLG.eu =(
|
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 >_>.
This is such a strange post. You are presenting the lack of votes used as bad, but you don't go so far to say it is scummy. So therefore you spending a significant time talking about something that isn't meant to find scum. First strange part. Second strange part is that you are saying that austin is playing very passive and not putting any reads on people, where his filter shows him sharing thoughts quite easily. It doesn't matter that austin's filter is 10 pages long with 1000 word posts; it's a mispresentation to present him like this.
However, misrepresentation isn't alone bad; people make mistakes. Exhibit A is myself and kush having a cock fight for no reason. The difference is in the confidence and tone displayed. Kush had (or has) a strong feeling that I was scum and fought me directly, making strong moves stating that he thought I was scum. On the other hand, in this post Mementoss seems extremely floating because he tries to discredit austin and make him seem scummy, while not ever saying that directly. It's very non-confrontational, which is strange compared to his early play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
