|
On October 26 2012 00:30 debears wrote:@Djo Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 23:18 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 23:12 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 23:06 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 22:59 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 22:52 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 21:43 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Just woke up fella's, have a few moments to read this over and give my thoughts. In the name of brevity, I'll keep it short. On Debears-Rad incident: Debears came out of the gate swinging; reminiscent of DP from the last newbie game. Personally, I don't like this style of hot-headed pursuit, but it can work. However, I feel the reasons he's giving for Rad being suspicious are ill-founded. There is all this talk of confidence and policy lynching, and everything seems to be a matter of personal opinion rather than a role shining through to the exterior. There may be something there in what Debears has concluded, but I cannot be sure of my opinion of Rad at this time. I'd much rather vote for a lurker atm because the evidence is just not there. Djodref: I find him to be exceedingly odd. I first thought his initial comment of my "serious policy lynching" to be weird, but with his recent two posts I find him suspicous. On October 25 2012 18:25 Djodref wrote:I'm not planning on defending you this game so I expect you to do your job as town  How do you know he's town??? On October 25 2012 18:31 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 17:57 Roco69 wrote:
@djodref
To keep it simple, "lurker policy on D1" seems to be a well known and basic strategy so I will do the exact opposite,=>so I will never be suspected.
@RocoI have more questions for you. Why do you want to never be suspected ? Are you mafia ? Why would you specifically ask someone about them being mafia. What do you hope to accomplish??? I find these two statements to be suspicious as hell. ##FOS DjodrefI'll be back in about 6 hours, after my classes. @CheeseCalling daoud town was a slip, I've already explained it. Regarding you and your "serious policy lynching", I have asked you a question and your answer satisfied me. I don't think you are 100% for a policy lynch anymore. I misinterpreted your post. Regarding my question "are you mafia?", this is a very uncomfortable question to ask to a mafia player, believe me or not. They have to lie to answer such a question and this is the best way to pressure them imo. So I want to see Roco reaction to this question. I'm not expecting him to admit that he is mafia. I'm going to gauge his reaction to this question in comparison to my own experience as a mafia player. Uuuuh Not really. You just say "no" as an answer. That's the 'correct' answer for both alignments. I'd imagine you won't be able to interpret much out of those 2 letters. I know in a post yesterday I semi-seriously pressured Roco to answer that same question, but as I just said, semi-seriously. You seem to really think that's a good strategy, lol. @dandelI've just played a game as a mafia player and the most difficult thing I had to answer to was "why do you think you are not going to be targeted tonight ?" I had a very strong case written against me at one time. But rather than this dead-on case (from mementoss if you want to read our Looney Lynching game), this only simple question has made my whole mentality crumbled. I know everybody is going to say "lol, no, I'm not mafia". But my question is psychological warfare ^^ That's a different situation and a different question.. Most importantly, it's not a question you can just wave off with a "no". It's one that requires an answer with reasoning and logic. It's a decent question to ask. "are u scum" can be answered in a word, non-commitically. I don't think it's a good question. But I'm starting to argue semantics.... @dandelYeah, it's not exactly the same kind of question but I don't think you can freely wave it off as scum. If you have to lie, it makes you uncomfortable. If you are uncomfortable, you are going to post some shit. Why did you ask the question? The answer is pretty obvious as town or scum You'd say "I'm town" no matter what. The question was useless and you know it. There is no real reaction that can be read from a question like that. It's not a big lie if the person is mafia by any means. I don't like that. It makes you look like you are contributing without actually doing so
@debears
I believe it would make mafia uncomfortable, no matter if it is easy to answer or not. I don't think it's too easy because I've also asked him another relevant question with this one.
I was also interested to see who was going to pick it up. I'm expecting town players to read the thread more carefully than mafia players (I didn't even read twice the thread in the Looney Lynching game even if I was pretending to do so) and to jump on this kind of thing.
|
On October 25 2012 15:27 Inigmaticalism wrote:I have a thought regarding the Rad-Debears argument, over the whole 'confidence' thing. Its possible Im wrong, but it seems that Rad views the world in a more 'logical' way, meaning that in this case (playing mafia) having sound logic and scum reads will naturally result in confidence from said logic. Debears may happen to be more 'emotional', in this case where having a strong will/confidence allows for people like him (and me) to be very logical when there is a strong emotional base beneath them. You've both brought up the pros and cons about each type of viewpoint, so it should be beneficial if you guys watch out for each other. It seems you've both explained what you meant fairly well, and Im especially glad to see this post from you Rad cause I was getting slightly worried. Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 14:11 Rad wrote:
EBWOP - I also agree that there's no point in lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. That's not what I said originally but is what he's trying to make it seem like I said. Ha just saw you summed up my analysis for me: Show nested quote +You're pushing for "have confidence, the scum will show" while I'm pushing for "find the scum, if you're confident push it, otherwise we should lynch lurker". That stance seems completely reasonable to me. Does it not to you? @ sylver
You seem fairly energetic. Also, don't really think "What's your favorite role to play in mafia?" keeps us all that focused on scum hunting, but as it may be some clever scheme of yours Ill bite.
......Well actually I won't because I realized I was typing how I play the game. How clever. Loaded question indeed.
@Inig
How can you seriously find sylver energetic ?
Why don't you want to share with us how you play the game (I mean this game) ?
|
On October 26 2012 00:37 Dandel Ion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 00:35 sylverfyre wrote:On October 26 2012 00:24 Djodref wrote:
@sylver
I don't care about who hasn't posted right now. I want to know what info you were expecting to get by asking your question. I was making that list because I wasn't even sure myself who/how many people hadn't spoken up. I was trying to stir something up and you can also consider it a kind of "roleclaim-lite" (I hardly expect anyone to claim they enjoy playing scum when I ask ingame, but i think it could have been interesting to see if some people said they like a particular pro-town power-role.) So, you admit you were rolefishing?
Yes, I am trying to get people to talk about roles without doing something as ridiculous as asking for a D1 mass claim. Also I am trying to get to know the other players in general.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On October 26 2012 00:11 Rad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 16:21 debears wrote:On October 25 2012 13:27 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote:
I've realized that in my last newbie game. Not being confident led me to write wish-washy posts and it is not good for general town mentality.
Also I like DarthPunk style with his early heavy pressure. Pretty newbie scums can slip very easy, kush or not kush.
Plus I had some difficulties in my last mafia games to post properly when people where directly pressure me. Why even think about artificial confidence though? Why is the concept of confidence even something to be considered beyond "if you're confident, push your case!" That's all confidence is good for. Artificial confidence does nothing. I get the point of "try to be more confident in your reads" or something to that extent, but I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker. We should do whatever we think is best at that point, not necessarily 1 thing or the other. Read the line in red again "I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker......How in the fuck is that not a scum tell. Why in the hell would a townie say that???????? And Rad, the sentence after has no affect on the scumminess of that statement at all. You just said that you did no see reason in pushing a d1 scum lynch over a lurker. Now, if the following sentence had said "If there is no good candidate for a scum lynch, then we should lynch a lurker", it would make sense...You didn't bring up that scenario. You just said whatever is best for town in that scenario. Well, the best thing for town in that scenario is a scum lynch....duh. Obvious contradiction? Let's think of the benefits of pushing a d1 scum lynch 1) We lynch a scum 2) refer to 1) 3) We scramble the scum team and make them make a decision on who to vote Case coming up on rad My point, which is completely consistent with what I've said time and time again in this thread, and which is clarified in the sentence after the one you bolded red, is that I see no good logical reason to "have confidence" that we'll necessarily find a scum on d1. The logical reason isn't necessary to catch scum. It's to make people post while possibly lynching mafia. You aren't fully reading my reasoningIf we find a scum on d1, wonderful! I think we should definitely try our hardest to, and if you have a good read on someone, naturally you should be confident and follow through. If we don't, and we have no better option, then lynch a lurker.I also totally get pushing newbies to "be more confident" but both you and djo were pushing this confidence theme as if suddenly just being confident will make town get a lynch on d1. This seemed extremely suspicious to me and is why I started asking questions. To summarize: "GO TEAM! BE CONFIDENT!" - I get, though this isn't what you two were talking about at first "Finding a scum d1 will be easy! All you have to do is be confident!" - makes absolutely no sense to me Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 10:26 debears wrote:
What are you saying here exactly? Policy lynches are by no means a necessity. If we are confident and push reads, like dp did last game, then the scum will show. Why do you lack the confidence of catching scum d1?
FOS dandel
Oh, that easy is it? AND a FOS just because "he's not confident"? Yeah. I want answers when people say they aren't confident in finding scum d1. I hate that attitude. It's an attitude that sets people up to fail. Do you know anything about psychology and how a positive mindset can affect performance? Let me tell you, it works wonders. Also, by saying "we probably won't lynch scum d1", you set a tone for the rest of the players of not caring for pushing reads too much and being satisfied with lynching lurkers. This gives mafia a veil to hide under for d1, making it drastically harder to catch them.Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 12:58 Djodref wrote:
I don't think it's going to be difficult to find a scum D1. It's better for us to be confident about this because I think it's quite easy to reveal scum newbies when you put pressure on them.
Plus, if you are town and you are not confident, people are going to feel it through your posts and are going to become suspicious about you.
We have to be assertive and for this, we have to be confident in our ability to find scum. I know it looks difficult at first but don't forget that scum players are likely to be as inexperienced as you in this game. Oh, that easy is it? Now, the one thing I can't really wrap my head around is if both debears and djo are mafia, why would they be pushing this confidence thing to help save a lurker? Reasons that make sense to me: 1. Maybe that's the plan. 1 of the mafia sit back and lurk (maybe they're new and scared, or some other reason) while debears and djo stay really active. If they can look town enough AND prevent a lurker lynch, perfect! 2. Maybe getting people hyped for a d1 lynch that isn't a lurker is a good strategy? If they can get town to lynch another town, that's even better than a pure lurker, because then on the next day we'll be going "HMM that guy's still lurking, we've got to do something about that." (assuming multiple lurkers, at which point mafia lurker comes out of hiding a bit, or likely at the end of d1 before we start to think about this) Ok, off to respond to debear's "case" against me. I'm going to have to stay fairly inactive throughout the day until tonight though, as per the reasons I stated previously (work work...)
Ok. So Rad now thinks Djo and I are a scumteam
Ok boys. This is bullshit. Let me explain why
1) This is an association case. They are dogshit d1 without any information
2) This is a case built on WIFOM. How in the fuck do you know what scum would or wouldn't do? You can't think like that. Djo did that shit last game to me and it pissed me the fuck off.
I never said we are lynching a non lurker no matter what. I want to push cases, and if we have something good, then we lynch that person. Lurkers are a last resort. There are most likely 3 mafia. A lynch wasted on a lurker is suboptimal as town if there are people posting some really scummy things.
Right now, you are scummy as shit. And this post by you doesn't help. I'm pissed when someone tries to build a pure WIFOM case, which you have done, let alone a WIFOM ASSOCIATION CASE EARLY D1.
This guy be scum yo
|
On October 26 2012 00:46 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 00:37 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 26 2012 00:35 sylverfyre wrote:On October 26 2012 00:24 Djodref wrote:
@sylver
I don't care about who hasn't posted right now. I want to know what info you were expecting to get by asking your question. I was making that list because I wasn't even sure myself who/how many people hadn't spoken up. I was trying to stir something up and you can also consider it a kind of "roleclaim-lite" (I hardly expect anyone to claim they enjoy playing scum when I ask ingame, but i think it could have been interesting to see if some people said they like a particular pro-town power-role.) So, you admit you were rolefishing? Yes, I am trying to get people to talk about roles without doing something as ridiculous as asking for a D1 mass claim. Also I am trying to get to know the other players in general.
No,
No.
No.
No.
No.
Talking about roles is stupid. It gives the mafia stuff to go on when looking for nk candidates. DON'T DO IT.
|
I admit that my question may not have been as useful as it sounded in my head at the time. If you don't want to answer it, don't. I think that it's not completely useless, I found the information you gave me interesting, because I don't know you as a player but this isn't your first game.
You're tunneling me pretty hard when you don't look particularly clean, yourself, Djo. How bout responding to some of the criticisms against yourself?
You even asked a more useless question than mine "Are you mafia?" is the classical question to which the entire game responds in chorus, "No."
|
On October 26 2012 00:48 debears wrote:
I never said we are lynching a non lurker no matter what. I want to push cases, and if we have something good, then we lynch that person. Lurkers are a last resort. There are most likely 3 mafia. A lynch wasted on a lurker is suboptimal as town if there are people posting some really scummy things.
I basically said the same thing, and you FoS'd me for it.
reference:
On October 25 2012 10:26 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 10:08 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 10:02 Inigmaticalism wrote:For lurking I think it seems even more of an issue in Newbie games than regular games because too many lurkers results in mafia wins most of the time in the Newbie games I looked at. That said, if we get any confirmed mafia I'll always vote confirmed mafias over suspicious lurkers. Btw Im a noob ...  That goes without saying. Having a confirmed scum can be hard though.. And is next to impossible day 1 (since no possible DT checks) unless there is a serious slip. That is why policy lynches day 1 can end up being a necessity. That said, I'm going to sleep. See you in a few hours. What are you saying here exactly? Policy lynches are by no means a necessity. If we are confident and push reads, like dp did last game, then the scum will show. Why do you lack the confidence of catching scum d1? FOS dandelBtw guys officially postjng from phone for rest of night. Tell me if something gets messes up and u can't read
Now the question is, did you read my post wrong, or are you being hypocritical?
|
I FOS'd you for not being confident. If you look at my recent post on rad. Saying it's "next to impossible" sets a tone for the game that allows the mafia to hide. They can say "oh, finding scum d1 is too hard. Let's just lynch the lurker"
Do you see what I mean?
|
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 09:33 Rad wrote:
Lurkers policy, well, I guess lynch lurkers if there's no better option?
Can you explain what what the noob card is? Here Rad comes into the thread, unsure on something like lurker policy, which is pretty obvious if you've seen a TL mafia game, which he stated he has.
I read some of the last newbie mafia game. Other than that, and reading a couple guides, I have absolutely no mafia experience. You say it's "pretty obvious" but I hadn't put 1 moment of thought into it until Dan asked. I just thought about it briefly and threw out what seemed reasonable to me. I actually had no idea that this might turn into some huge debate or that my answer was anything more than just something to get us talking about something.
Coincidentally, now that I know it's important, I agree with my original thought on the matter.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 12:00 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
I might be. But, consider this. How did that slip from kush come about? Darthpunks heavy pressure.....duh. policy lynches, on the other hand, are usually caused by passivity or something like a claim. Besides, its fairly easy to discuss policy lynches. Its not easy to be confident. I learned my mistake last game. I didn't stick to a read til the SDM case. I basically said screw it and went with it. Where did that confidence get me? You're being especially confusing right now, at least for me. Dan basically said sure, if we have a confirmed mafia d1 (which he claims would be difficult without a major slip), lynch, otherwise it might be necessary to policy lynch. This seems reasonable. Your statement, however, is extremely confusing. Without knowing your previous game in depth, none of what I quoted above means anything. Can you please explain more briefly/clearly "where your confidence got you"? Also, what does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch? He goes and defends another player over a simple question that I asked that player when that player hasn't responded first. Mafia tend to due this since they KNOW someone is town. What's a better way to get townie points? Then the part on what confidence has to do with any d1 lynch scenario. WHAT D1 LYNCH IS BASED ON SUCH HARD EVIDENCE THAT YOU CAN BE COMPLETELY CONFIDENT ON IT AS TOWN? None. It takes fucking balls to stand up with your accusations, even in the chance that they might be wrong.
You said to Dan "Policy lynches are by no means a necessity.", but that was in response to Dan saying "That is why policy lynches day 1 can end up being a necessity." To me, not as a mafia player, but as a reasonable person, this screams bs. You twisted his words into something most people would agree with, even though most people would probably agree with his original statement.
1. Policy lynches on day 1 can end up being a necessity.
2. Policy lynches are by no means a necessity.
Both are true statements, but because yours was in response to his, you make yourself come off as the "winner" here, even though your statement actually had nothing to do with his. This was really sketchy to me. Then, you suddenly got really confusing:
On October 25 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
I might be. But, consider this. How did that slip from kush come about? Darthpunks heavy pressure.....duh. policy lynches, on the other hand, are usually caused by passivity or something like a claim. Besides, its fairly easy to discuss policy lynches. Its not easy to be confident. I learned my mistake last game. I didn't stick to a read til the SDM case. I basically said screw it and went with it. Where did that confidence get me?
You never answered my question to this.
What does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch
I'll answer this for you. Your previous confidence has nothing to do with a d1 lynch in this game and just clogs up the thread with confusing garbage.
I really have stuff I need to be doing, so I'm going to try to make my answers to your case quicker from here on. If anyone is unsatisfied with any explanation I give, please point it out specifically and I'll try to get a chance to respond in greater detail.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 13:15 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 12:58 Djodref wrote:
I don't think it's going to be difficult to find a scum D1. It's better for us to be confident about this because I think it's quite easy to reveal scum newbies when you put pressure on them.
Plus, if you are town and you are not confident, people are going to feel it through your posts and are going to become suspicious about you.
We have to be assertive and for this, we have to be confident in our ability to find scum. I know it looks difficult at first but don't forget that scum players are likely to be as inexperienced as you in this game. I'm really not getting this whole confidence theme going on and not really sure what confidence has to do with lynching a scum on d1. Confidence should be a result of being sure of something, not just being confident for the sake of being confident. If we're confident on a scum lynch d1, great, we lynch them, but really that confidence should come naturally from knowing we're right on a lynch vote. Even as a complete newbie, I'm not looking at this as "newbie vs newbie", I'm just looking at it as myself vs a bunch of unknown people. I'm certainly not counting on someone screwing up, which is how you're suggesting we approach this. The only way that it would be easy to find a scum d1 is if they slip up, and there's no guarantee that they'll slip up, newbie or not. For all we know, they could all lurk, which means they cannot slip up, and your "confidence" would only lead to lynching someone who's not lurking because you've forced yourself to be "confident". Yet again, he talks of scum reads like they are 100% foolproof. That is wrong. The best townies on TL are wrong on cases all the time. Don't give me that, we must make sure he's 100% scum before voting, bullshit. No way. Cases don't start that way. Lynches don't start that way.
I never once said I'll only vote on a scum if I'm 100% sure. I'm not sure if 100% is even possible. Of course I'll vote on someone I'm not 100% sure of if the case for them convinces me enough and/or I feel that is the right move to make.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 13:21 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 13:15 debears wrote:On October 25 2012 12:00 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
I might be. But, consider this. How did that slip from kush come about? Darthpunks heavy pressure.....duh. policy lynches, on the other hand, are usually caused by passivity or something like a claim. Besides, its fairly easy to discuss policy lynches. Its not easy to be confident. I learned my mistake last game. I didn't stick to a read til the SDM case. I basically said screw it and went with it. Where did that confidence get me? You're being especially confusing right now, at least for me. Dan basically said sure, if we have a confirmed mafia d1 (which he claims would be difficult without a major slip), lynch, otherwise it might be necessary to policy lynch. This seems reasonable. Your statement, however, is extremely confusing. Without knowing your previous game in depth, none of what I quoted above means anything. Can you please explain more briefly/clearly "where your confidence got you"? Also, what does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch? Ok this phone posting iw hard. Forgive th disorganization. Confidence has everything to do with d1. If everyone is confident and pushes cases, then scum will be forced to do the same. That is the key. We need to force scumcto contribute early My confidence led to me making a game winning case on arguably the most townie looking player (who was the last scum) It wasn't your confidence, it was your reasoning. Confidence had nothing to do with it. I completely agree that we should push cases, but we shouldn't become unnecessarily confident and make lynch decisions based on it. Confidence based on nothing makes no sense. Confidence based on something is what will come naturally. No one has said that we should necessarily lynch lurkers on d1. Analyze, make a case IF you're confident, and then we can push for a scum lynch or push for a lurker lunch depending on how confident we all are. Now he makes up some bullshit statement that my lynch of SDM had nothing to do with confidence. Really? I was at threat of being lynched. And instead of fighting for not being lynched, I sacked myself and went all out on the most townie looking player at that point (at least in my eyes). Do you really think that doesn't take any confidence? And how are you suddenly an expert on last game when you didn't even know what I was refering to with my SDM case before???????
Your previous game doesn't matter here except for having additional "meta" information on how you play the game. Your confidence there has nothing to do with finding a scum here, IMO. I feel like you talking about your previous game and how much your confidence helped you is just clouding up discussion here. I don't feel like I'm an expert of your last game because I only watched a bit of it (3-4 days worth I guess? meaning real days, not mafia days, so like 2 mafia days and 2 mafia nights at most)
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 13:38 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 13:33 debears wrote:On October 25 2012 13:27 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote:
I've realized that in my last newbie game. Not being confident led me to write wish-washy posts and it is not good for general town mentality.
Also I like DarthPunk style with his early heavy pressure. Pretty newbie scums can slip very easy, kush or not kush.
Plus I had some difficulties in my last mafia games to post properly when people where directly pressure me. Why even think about artificial confidence though? Why is the concept of confidence even something to be considered beyond "if you're confident, push your case!" That's all confidence is good for. Artificial confidence does nothing. I get the point of "try to be more confident in your reads" or something to that extent, but I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker. We should do whatever we think is best at that point, not necessarily 1 thing or the other. Why are you so focused on lynching a lurker over a scumread right now imo lurker lynches are last resorts to scumreads. If a lurker has a scumread, that's a bonus. Why do you keep pressing this "artificial confidence" thing when newbie games are notorious for lurking (usually caused by fear/lack of confidence) and lack of confidence? Please point out where I've said that we should lynch a lurker over a scum read. I'm all for helping newbies be more confident in pursuing their cases, but it has nothing to do with "we can get a scum read d1!". That's "artificial confidence" and doesn't make sense. I'm completely open to a reasonable argument where it does make sense though. So here he wants newbies to suddenly hide in their holes, citing what has been previously said on confidence as "artificial". This is a forced argument. He ignores the fact that confidence = increased posting and scumhunting.
Not sure why you're saying I want newbies to hide in their holes. I didn't say or suggest that. When you say confidence, I read it literally. I do not equate it to increased posting and scumhunting. If confidence is some term in this game that really means increased posting and scumhunting, then we've been arguing about different things. I feel like it's "artificial confidence" to just straight up say "we can get a scum on d1!" Instead, I think we should try to find a scum on d1, and IF at that point we're confident in a case, we can vote for it then. That's the point where I think confidence matters, not before.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 14:00 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 13:48 debears wrote:
Actually, that's a scumslip
##Vote Rad So you FOS dan for no reason, and when I try to make sense of your reasoning giving you plenty of chances to clear it up, you fos me, and then claim I scumslipped and vote me? FOS debears Wow. Isn't this OMGUS? I've tried explaining how confidence = increased posting and scumreads. And then how increased posting = less room for mafia to hide. He doesn't get simple logic like that????? Then he tries to play it off like I'm doing something wrong. "I give you plenty of chances to clear it up". Last time I checked, I'm the one wanting you to clear your view up. And a weak FOS to back it.
To be honest, I considered FOSing you minutes before you FOS'd me, but I wasn't sure if that would be appropriate. I felt pushed to do it after reading more from you and the fact that you suddenly were voting for me. So I guess in a sense I OMGUS'd you, but it was more like straw that broke the camel's back than "OMG why is this guy voting for me".
I said I gave you plenty of chances to clear it up because I asked you questions that you never answered, or at best side stepped. You weren't the one wanting me to clear up my view point until I put pressure on you. That to me seems scummy.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 14:10 Rad wrote:On October 25 2012 14:05 da0ud wrote:On October 25 2012 13:45 debears wrote:
You don't understand having confidence to push d1 scum reads over lurkers?
I do agree with you on this one. That makes no point lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. Even though I am not sure we will have very clear reads on day1. Please re-read the post he's quoting me on there. When you put it all in context, it should make sense to you what I meant (along with my other posts before it). Let me know if my point isn't clear there and I'll try to make it more understandable. To me it seems like he's trying to push out an obvious statement that people will agree with in order to cover up what I really meant. So now you're trying to discredit my statements instead of accurately explaining your own. "he's trying to put up an obvious statement to cover up what I really meant". I'm not covering up anything. I'm showing everyone an obvious scumslip that you said. It's a contradicting statment in a mafia-oriented way. See my post to da0ud about it. Your defense of my scumread on you is that "the context backs it up". Bullshit. bullshit. bullshit.
I feel context DOES matter. My statement makes sense when you put it next to the rest of the context, meaning my previous posts and even the sentences around it. My stance is clear. If you take the statement out of context, it sounds like a scumslip. If you take it in context, it has clear meaning. I have explained it before and will explain it again if someone requests.
On October 25 2012 16:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 14:11 Rad wrote:
EBWOP - I also agree that there's no point in lynching a lurker over a clear scum read. That's not what I said originally but is what he's trying to make it seem like I said. Ah. Now you're restating what you said. Your best defense is that I'm trying to make it seem like you said " I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker" Finally, my final part of my case is the lack of scumhunting that Rad has actually done. His sole focus is on me and "artificail confidence". His only scumhunting is a weak FOS on me. And he is more concerned on defending himself than finding scum. Rad you are pretty damn scummy in my eyes. My vote will stand with you unless I see a person who is more scummy.
I've been scumhunting both you and djo. The fact that you point out that I've just been scumhunting you seems very suspicious of you. That's a clear lie. All you have to do is read my previous posts and see that I was putting the exact same pressure on djo. In fact, in my mind, you both seemed like you were working together, which suggested you were both mafia to me. The fact that this is your final point should scream to everyone that you are BS because I absolutely, 100%, clearly was going after djo as well (and for the same "confidence" thing).
Ok, I'll try to respond lightly for the next 6 or so hours but probably cannot do a huge post like this any more until later tonight.
|
On October 26 2012 00:38 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 00:30 debears wrote:@Djo On October 25 2012 23:18 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 23:12 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 23:06 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 22:59 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 22:52 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 21:43 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Just woke up fella's, have a few moments to read this over and give my thoughts. In the name of brevity, I'll keep it short. On Debears-Rad incident: Debears came out of the gate swinging; reminiscent of DP from the last newbie game. Personally, I don't like this style of hot-headed pursuit, but it can work. However, I feel the reasons he's giving for Rad being suspicious are ill-founded. There is all this talk of confidence and policy lynching, and everything seems to be a matter of personal opinion rather than a role shining through to the exterior. There may be something there in what Debears has concluded, but I cannot be sure of my opinion of Rad at this time. I'd much rather vote for a lurker atm because the evidence is just not there. Djodref: I find him to be exceedingly odd. I first thought his initial comment of my "serious policy lynching" to be weird, but with his recent two posts I find him suspicous. On October 25 2012 18:25 Djodref wrote:I'm not planning on defending you this game so I expect you to do your job as town How do you know he's town??? On October 25 2012 18:31 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 17:57 Roco69 wrote:
@djodref
To keep it simple, "lurker policy on D1" seems to be a well known and basic strategy so I will do the exact opposite,=>so I will never be suspected.
@RocoI have more questions for you. Why do you want to never be suspected ? Are you mafia ? Why would you specifically ask someone about them being mafia. What do you hope to accomplish??? I find these two statements to be suspicious as hell. ##FOS DjodrefI'll be back in about 6 hours, after my classes. @CheeseCalling daoud town was a slip, I've already explained it. Regarding you and your "serious policy lynching", I have asked you a question and your answer satisfied me. I don't think you are 100% for a policy lynch anymore. I misinterpreted your post. Regarding my question "are you mafia?", this is a very uncomfortable question to ask to a mafia player, believe me or not. They have to lie to answer such a question and this is the best way to pressure them imo. So I want to see Roco reaction to this question. I'm not expecting him to admit that he is mafia. I'm going to gauge his reaction to this question in comparison to my own experience as a mafia player. Uuuuh Not really. You just say "no" as an answer. That's the 'correct' answer for both alignments. I'd imagine you won't be able to interpret much out of those 2 letters. I know in a post yesterday I semi-seriously pressured Roco to answer that same question, but as I just said, semi-seriously. You seem to really think that's a good strategy, lol. @dandelI've just played a game as a mafia player and the most difficult thing I had to answer to was "why do you think you are not going to be targeted tonight ?" I had a very strong case written against me at one time. But rather than this dead-on case (from mementoss if you want to read our Looney Lynching game), this only simple question has made my whole mentality crumbled. I know everybody is going to say "lol, no, I'm not mafia". But my question is psychological warfare ^^ That's a different situation and a different question.. Most importantly, it's not a question you can just wave off with a "no". It's one that requires an answer with reasoning and logic. It's a decent question to ask. "are u scum" can be answered in a word, non-commitically. I don't think it's a good question. But I'm starting to argue semantics.... @dandelYeah, it's not exactly the same kind of question but I don't think you can freely wave it off as scum. If you have to lie, it makes you uncomfortable. If you are uncomfortable, you are going to post some shit. Why did you ask the question? The answer is pretty obvious as town or scum You'd say "I'm town" no matter what. The question was useless and you know it. There is no real reaction that can be read from a question like that. It's not a big lie if the person is mafia by any means. I don't like that. It makes you look like you are contributing without actually doing so @debearsI believe it would make mafia uncomfortable, no matter if it is easy to answer or not. I don't think it's too easy because I've also asked him another relevant question with this one. I was also interested to see who was going to pick it up. I'm expecting town players to read the thread more carefully than mafia players (I didn't even read twice the thread in the Looney Lynching game even if I was pretending to do so) and to jump on this kind of thing.
Hold on there, Tex. What are you referring to in that statement?
The "town" comment to daud or the "are you mafia one?
|
And Djo, you claim "no i asked him two questions" when both questions are basically the same.
debears case against Rad is developing interestingly, but Rad has a point - why are you trying so hard to save the lurkers?
|
Get the lurkers to respond to suspicions. If they fail that, THEN you lynch them. Nobody's advocating a blind lurker lynch without trying to talk to them first.
|
@sylver
I've explained why I've answered this question ("are you mafia") already. Could you please re-read my filter and tell me if you are satisfied or not with my explanations ?
I don't care if I look clean or not, my principal concern is to find the mafia. And, for your information, I'm not tunneling you, just putting you under some pressure. The only player I have a FoS on is Inig as for now.
I'm accepting your explanations and I would like you to tell us what you think about Inig. I'm insisting on him because mafia players have this tendency to semi-lurk while looking like they contribute.
Regarding Rad, I'm trusting debears to take care of him right now ^^ I'm following their exchanges with great interest.
|
On October 26 2012 00:59 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 00:38 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 00:30 debears wrote:@Djo On October 25 2012 23:18 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 23:12 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 23:06 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 22:59 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 25 2012 22:52 Djodref wrote:On October 25 2012 21:43 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Just woke up fella's, have a few moments to read this over and give my thoughts. In the name of brevity, I'll keep it short. On Debears-Rad incident: Debears came out of the gate swinging; reminiscent of DP from the last newbie game. Personally, I don't like this style of hot-headed pursuit, but it can work. However, I feel the reasons he's giving for Rad being suspicious are ill-founded. There is all this talk of confidence and policy lynching, and everything seems to be a matter of personal opinion rather than a role shining through to the exterior. There may be something there in what Debears has concluded, but I cannot be sure of my opinion of Rad at this time. I'd much rather vote for a lurker atm because the evidence is just not there. Djodref: I find him to be exceedingly odd. I first thought his initial comment of my "serious policy lynching" to be weird, but with his recent two posts I find him suspicous. On October 25 2012 18:25 Djodref wrote:I'm not planning on defending you this game so I expect you to do your job as town How do you know he's town??? On October 25 2012 18:31 Djodref wrote:
[quote]
@Roco
I have more questions for you. Why do you want to never be suspected ?
Are you mafia ? Why would you specifically ask someone about them being mafia. What do you hope to accomplish??? I find these two statements to be suspicious as hell. ##FOS DjodrefI'll be back in about 6 hours, after my classes. @CheeseCalling daoud town was a slip, I've already explained it. Regarding you and your "serious policy lynching", I have asked you a question and your answer satisfied me. I don't think you are 100% for a policy lynch anymore. I misinterpreted your post. Regarding my question "are you mafia?", this is a very uncomfortable question to ask to a mafia player, believe me or not. They have to lie to answer such a question and this is the best way to pressure them imo. So I want to see Roco reaction to this question. I'm not expecting him to admit that he is mafia. I'm going to gauge his reaction to this question in comparison to my own experience as a mafia player. Uuuuh Not really. You just say "no" as an answer. That's the 'correct' answer for both alignments. I'd imagine you won't be able to interpret much out of those 2 letters. I know in a post yesterday I semi-seriously pressured Roco to answer that same question, but as I just said, semi-seriously. You seem to really think that's a good strategy, lol. @dandelI've just played a game as a mafia player and the most difficult thing I had to answer to was "why do you think you are not going to be targeted tonight ?" I had a very strong case written against me at one time. But rather than this dead-on case (from mementoss if you want to read our Looney Lynching game), this only simple question has made my whole mentality crumbled. I know everybody is going to say "lol, no, I'm not mafia". But my question is psychological warfare ^^ That's a different situation and a different question.. Most importantly, it's not a question you can just wave off with a "no". It's one that requires an answer with reasoning and logic. It's a decent question to ask. "are u scum" can be answered in a word, non-commitically. I don't think it's a good question. But I'm starting to argue semantics.... @dandelYeah, it's not exactly the same kind of question but I don't think you can freely wave it off as scum. If you have to lie, it makes you uncomfortable. If you are uncomfortable, you are going to post some shit. Why did you ask the question? The answer is pretty obvious as town or scum You'd say "I'm town" no matter what. The question was useless and you know it. There is no real reaction that can be read from a question like that. It's not a big lie if the person is mafia by any means. I don't like that. It makes you look like you are contributing without actually doing so @debearsI believe it would make mafia uncomfortable, no matter if it is easy to answer or not. I don't think it's too easy because I've also asked him another relevant question with this one. I was also interested to see who was going to pick it up. I'm expecting town players to read the thread more carefully than mafia players (I didn't even read twice the thread in the Looney Lynching game even if I was pretending to do so) and to jump on this kind of thing. Hold on there, Tex. What are you referring to in that statement? The "town" comment to daud or the "are you mafia one?
The "are you mafia ?" one
The daoud thing was a slip, I wasn't planning anything with that. But I'm glad that daoud picked it up
|
On October 26 2012 00:48 debears wrote:
Ok. So Rad now thinks Djo and I are a scumteam
Ok boys. This is bullshit. Let me explain why
1) This is an association case. They are dogshit d1 without any information
2) This is a case built on WIFOM. How in the fuck do you know what scum would or wouldn't do? You can't think like that. Djo did that shit last game to me and it pissed me the fuck off.
I never said we are lynching a non lurker no matter what. I want to push cases, and if we have something good, then we lynch that person. Lurkers are a last resort. There are most likely 3 mafia. A lynch wasted on a lurker is suboptimal as town if there are people posting some really scummy things.
Right now, you are scummy as shit. And this post by you doesn't help. I'm pissed when someone tries to build a pure WIFOM case, which you have done, let alone a WIFOM ASSOCIATION CASE EARLY D1.
This guy be scum yo
If I'm making scum reads based on bad logic, that would make me a bad player. No worries though, I don't think I'm a good or bad player yet, because this is my first game.
You both just seemed to be trying to make the same bad "confidence" point, together in unison. I realize that there are other cases, such as "djo sees debears making a terrible point but it would be best for him to go along with it", in which case djo is mafia and you are town. Of course there are other cases.
I haven't done anything except point out that both you and djo are looking scummy to me. I don't know if I'd actually vote for either of you at this point. I don't believe you're necessarily a scumteam, I'm just saying that was my initial take and it made sense to me.
|
@debears
You've used the word confidence an excessive amount of times. When someone mentioned day 1 policy lynches you immediately dismissed the idea. In fact, whenever anyone suggested something you turned it down, pushing your idea of "if you have a read, push it hard"
Policy lynching on day 1 exists for a reason. Lurkers hurt the town, whether they are mafia or town. If no one takes action mafia will win. Town needs to be organized and decisive, yet you are suggesting to basically follow your gut and push hard.
You follow that up by voting for Rad WAAAAAAY too early in the day.
You are advocating chaos.
If something is fishy, or a comment seems off, make a read or ask a question about it, but big bold statements like "be confident guys!!!" don't actually mean anything.
##FoS debears
|
On October 26 2012 01:00 sylverfyre wrote:
And Djo, you claim "no i asked him two questions" when both questions are basically the same.
debears case against Rad is developing interestingly, but Rad has a point - why are you trying so hard to save the lurkers?
@sylver
I'm sorry but not wanting to look suspicious is totally natural from a townie, especially from a total newbie. Adding the second question was only to make him uncomfortable if he was mafia.
Plus the lurkers have no votes against them yet so debears is not trying to save them. Not yet...
I still want you to comment Inig posts.
|
Please note I'm not trying to make a case against debears and/or djo right now. I was simply responding to the accusations from debears. I do not feel confident that either are scum at this point, but their "confidence" bits at the beginning threw me for a loop not as a mafia player (of which I'm a newbie), but as someone who couldn't follow the logic being presented by them (of which I feel I'm very good at). If I WIFOM'd or whatever in my case, fine, but I'm not looking at this from a "this is how scum usually act" perspective, I'm looking at it purely from a logical standpoint.
|
@Rad
Right now, since we are going in circles, I am going to drop the confidence issue after I address your bold points.
"What does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch"
I've said this previously I'm pretty sure. A successful d1 scum lynch is caused by pushing reads based on nothing, which requires confidence. If you don't understand, I don't know how to explain it to you.
"I've been scumhunting both you and djo. The fact that you point out that I've just been scumhunting you seems very suspicious of you. That's a clear lie. All you have to do is read my previous posts and see that I was putting the exact same pressure on djo. In fact, in my mind, you both seemed like you were working together, which suggested you were both mafia to me. The fact that this is your final point should scream to everyone that you are BS because I absolutely, 100%, clearly was going after djo as well (and for the same "confidence" thing)."
Are you scumhunting us because we are scummy individually, or because you think we are a scumteam?
|
Confidence is a stupid word, and I have no idea why debears is so stuck on it.
Being suspicious of somebody because he's not "confident" enough, is equally stupid.
Rad, don't play the newbie card. We've been over this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
