EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXIX - Page 20
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
| ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On October 26 2012 03:42 Inigmaticalism wrote: As for everyone else I need to read their posts again. It seems my scum-hunting has so far resulted in town-finding, but thats how its gone. What scumhunting exactly? I didn't ever see you do something that would qualify as such. Also, I deliberately dodged sylvers question about what your favorite role is to play to show I was town(which, ironically because he was role hunting, still answered his question). I would never have posted such an awkward response I was mafia, I would have simply ignored the question all together, but it seems no one took it that way. Pure WIFOM. You said you wouldn't do it as scum, but if you are scum, you could do it, point at it, and say "I'd never do this as scum". It's impossible to get a read on your original answer, but the INSTANT you try to argue with "I'd never do this as scum"-WIFOM shit, it gets me riled up. Don't do that. It doesn't make you look good. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On October 26 2012 04:11 Dandel Ion wrote: What scumhunting exactly? I didn't ever see you do something that would qualify as such. To be devils advocate for a second, I imagine he means he's scouring the comments intently. Whereas your definition of scumhunting is probably closer to "actively engage with people to make them mess up" It does seem rather convenient to be the silent observer and just come in every now and then and say "well, found no scum. Sorry guys, did my best, maybe next day!" | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
That's just sitting back and hoping others do the work for you. And THAT'S the best-case scenario where I, for the sake of this argument assume a town perspective. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On October 26 2012 03:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Okay guys I'm back from class, will be on for the rest of the night. Following up my FoS on Djodref--He's seeming more scummy as time goes on. I'm concerned about his attitude in the thread. Check his filter, and look at how many ^^  :p, etc there are. He even uses a smiley when addressing his supposed scumslip, a time when you should be definite about your defense. He even gives Debears a <3 at some point. What is this all about? I think he's trying to show himself in a happy, innocent, and loving light; perhaps to cover up something sinister. This could just be his personality, but I don't buy it for a second.Also, why would you say this, Djodref? Everybody's "principal concern" is to find mafia. Sort of like that "why are you afraid of seeming suspicious" question -- the answer is self explanatory. I fail to see a point here. That's what I have to say concerning Djodref atm, and my FoS still applies. In terms of the most active poster, Debears, I've a slight town read on him. Promoting discussion, getting people to talk. Could be scum trying to seem active, but I see no fault with him as of yet. I'll be looking through the rest of the thread to get reads on other posters. Are you seriously making a case on smilies? The only thing that even remotely has a point is his "<3 debears", but just because it seems a bit like he's buddying him up. Not because it makes him look 'happy'. I must admit, I'm a little bit worried about a djo+debears scumteam, but not nearly enough to even FoS either of them. I'm also (even less) worried about a djo+daoud scumteam, since the slip and following call-out on it might have been intentional. At this point, I realize I'm getting paranoid. And I'm getting carried away with my hard-on for association cases, and I am currently trying to get away from that too. Taking a break from thinking about this game... | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On October 26 2012 04:22 Dandel Ion wrote: Are you seriously making a case on smilies? The only thing that even remotely has a point is his "<3 debears", but just because it seems a bit like he's buddying him up. Not because it makes him look 'happy'. I must admit, I'm a little bit worried about a djo+debears scumteam, but not nearly enough to even FoS either of them. I'm also (even less) worried about a djo+daoud scumteam, since the slip and following call-out on it might have been intentional. At this point, I realize I'm getting paranoid. And I'm getting carried away with my hard-on for association cases, and I am currently trying to get away from that too. Taking a break from thinking about this game... Yes, I'm making a case on smiles. That kind of stuff is rhetoric and it effects how people read your posts (I.E swaying opinions). You can't say that his tone hasn't been "happy go-lucky" as someone put it. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
Unless you can say right now, that because of the smileys it makes him lean towards scum or town. Regardless of smileys or no smileys in his posts from this moment, you changed his posts. He will now either: Stop posting smileys because he got told it made him look guilty (both scum and town would do this) OR he will continue posting smileys because it would look weird to change the way you post (both scum and town would do this) I also dug this up: On October 22 2012 08:12 Djodref wrote: gg guys, I was happy to play with you, it was a fun game ^^ Also thank you thrawn for the meta warning, I've started to put smileys everywhere after that I was not sure how to play it during D1 but after that I found my "story" and I stuck to it | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
| ||
|
sylverfyre
United States8298 Posts
On October 26 2012 05:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: So you're saying thats simply his meta? I'll take a look at his other games. Seemed suspicious though, as it stood out a ton from the other players. Well, it certainly is NOW, that post was before this game even started. | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
| ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On October 26 2012 05:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Yeah, I think I got it. I'll pardon dj for that. I see in the last mafia game he is doing much the same in his posts, so i can't fault him for it. I think this might be the most townie-phrase I've ever heard. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On October 26 2012 01:22 Dandel Ion wrote: Well, I'm sure you have more thoughts than just a FoS on debears for "advocating chaos" So, how about you present those for now. I think "advocating chaos" is actually a good argument on its own, however.... + Show Spoiler [Gathered quotes] + 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 Btw guys officially postjng from phone for rest of night. Tell me if something gets messes up and u can't read 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? On October 25 2012 13:15 debears wrote: 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) On October 25 2012 13:18 debears wrote: Very well djo. I found the wording of seriously strong for your post. Can you clarify why you have a sudden 180 on confidence on day 1 from your last game as town? On October 25 2012 13:24 debears wrote: Rad, I understand what you're saying. However, you are misinterpretjng my words. I'm not saying go on a tunneling spree. I'm saying have the confidence to make a case on anyone and pursue that case until you find that person town or someone else more scummy On October 25 2012 13:33 debears wrote: 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? On October 25 2012 13:45 debears wrote: That is the statement I'm talking about. Am i missing something here? Can someone help me out? You don't understand having confidence to pusb d1 scum reads over lurkers? What do scum want? Easy lynchs. Who are easy lynches? Lurkers. FOS Rad On October 25 2012 13:48 debears wrote: Actually, that's a scumslip ##Vote Rad "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?" First mention of the term confident "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?" Second, trying to enforce that being confident is a good thing "My confidence led to me making a game winning case on arguably the most townie looking player (who was the last scum)" Same story "Can you clarify why you have a sudden 180 on confidence on day 1 from your last game as town?" Someone "lacks confidence", better ask insinuating questions "have the confidence to make a case on anyone and pursue that case until you find that person town or someone else more scummy" Yeah, confidence! "newbie games are notorious for lurking (usually caused by fear/lack of confidence) and lack of confidence?" Guys, you just don't get it, be confident! "You don't understand having confidence to pusb d1 scum reads over lurkers? What do scum want? Easy lynchs. Who are easy lynches? Lurkers. Actually, that's a scumslip ##Vote Rad" Using backwards logic, followed by casting his vote, which he later withdrew without explaining It's easy to retort: What do townies want? Active town. What doesn't contribute to an active town? Lurkers. We never see him use the word confident again after he casts his vote On October 26 2012 01:21 debears wrote: Ok. But what individually makes us stand out as scum? I'm going to reread the thread a couple of times tonight and figure this all out. ##Unvote No explanation, nothing, just withdraws his vote that he so casually cast. The whole confidence thing is weird to me. He has a thematic history of posting in this thread, as if it's planned out. If he planned it out as scum, his actions make sense. Trying to appeal to your emotions, trying to turn the word confidence into his own little buzzword. If he planned it out as town, actually trying to help the town think critically and relentless towards possible scum, why would he vote for Rad, who has made decent points and questioned people? Let me ask everyone this: Who is more likely to plan out how they will behave day 1, town or scum? | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On October 26 2012 06:43 Clarity_nl wrote: Let me ask everyone this: Who is more likely to plan out how they will behave day 1, town or scum? Are both town/scum not equally as inclined to plan out actions? Each player individually, regardless of role, must elect to play aggressively, passively, or somewhere in between. I don't think either side is "more likely" to plan out d1 actions. Being a good player at anything requires foresight. That being said, you bring up some interesting points concerning Debears and his "buzzword" of confidence. I see what you mean, however I don't read the repetition of a single word as trying to appeal to emotion. I responded to one of his early confidence posts without much thought to it. He does use the word a plethora of times, but I can't see an intentional, malevolent reason for doing so. On October 26 2012 06:43 Clarity_nl wrote: "You don't understand having confidence to pusb d1 scum reads over lurkers? What do scum want? Easy lynchs. Who are easy lynches? Lurkers. Actually, that's a scumslip ##Vote Rad" [b]Using backwards logic, followed by casting his vote, which he later withdrew without explaining It's easy to retort: What do townies want? Active town. What doesn't contribute to an active town? Lurkers. I may be having trouble reading this, the wordy is a bit odd/choppy: How is this backwards logic? Should town not be more focused on good scum reads on d1 than lurkers? I agree that the Vote for Rad was very hasty by Debears, and I don't agree with his stance on that note. However, while I commend your post, I cannot see the ill-intentions of confidence as a buzzword. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On October 26 2012 07:19 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: I may be having trouble reading this, the wordy is a bit odd/choppy: How is this backwards logic? Should town not be more focused on good scum reads on d1 than lurkers? Ofcourse town should focus on getting reads and forcing people to explain themselves. Rad said "if we have no good lynch option we should probably lynch a semi-lurker as a policy" debear's argument was against a strawman. Rad didn't say "fuck it, I have no clue whos scum, just lynch the lurkers". "Anyone who wants to lynch a semi-lurker over a crappy guess/hunch must be scum" is just backwards. | ||
|
Inigmaticalism
United States103 Posts
On October 26 2012 04:11 Dandel Ion wrote: What scumhunting exactly? I didn't ever see you do something that would qualify as such. On October 26 2012 04:19 Clarity_nl wrote: To be devils advocate for a second, I imagine he means he's scouring the comments intently. Whereas your definition of scumhunting is probably closer to "actively engage with people to make them mess up"" Thanks clarity. Also, I deliberately dodged sylvers question about what your favorite role is to play to show I was town(which, ironically because he was role hunting, still answered his question). I would never have posted such an awkward response I was mafia, I would have simply ignored the question all together, but it seems no one took it that way. Pure WIFOM. You said you wouldn't do it as scum, but if you are scum, you could do it, point at it, and say "I'd never do this as scum". It's impossible to get a read on your original answer, but the INSTANT you try to argue with "I'd never do this as scum"-WIFOM shit, it gets me riled up. Don't do that. It doesn't make you look good. Oh ok. Guess Ill not try to make myself look like a townie in the thread. Might get mistaken as WIFOM. So then what would be a wifom defense vs a non wifom defense? You can argue anything that way a long as you dont like it. I find just about every argument/case presented so far to be stupid and pointless. To be straight up, this first day/night cycle Im not going to contribute that much. I thought I had much more time when I signed up and then RL got stupid busy out of nowhere. My time will free up much more starting around Sunday-Monday, and then Ill be able to give the amount of time Ive wanted to give. If you dont like it, tough, but I dont like it either and Im quite frustrated about it. Whine about it if you want, but it is what it is. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
@Clarity I was talking with Dandel about policy lynch, especially the fact that you have to agree early about it or not. I don't think it's good to establish a policy early and I'm not going to change my mind, even if dandel has good arguments for it. Why did you pick on this sentence ? | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On October 26 2012 07:38 Clarity_nl wrote: Ofcourse town should focus on getting reads and forcing people to explain themselves. Rad said "if we have no good lynch option we should probably lynch a semi-lurker as a policy" debear's argument was against a strawman. Rad didn't say "fuck it, I have no clue whos scum, just lynch the lurkers". "Anyone who wants to lynch a semi-lurker over a crappy guess/hunch must be scum" is just backwards. Thanks for clarifying. Pun intended. | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 26 2012 05:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: So you're saying thats simply his meta? I'll take a look at his other games. Seemed suspicious though, as it stood out a ton from the other players. It is simply my meta, regardless of my alignment  You can find my previous game and my filters in these games in my previous post in the spoiler. + Show Spoiler + On October 25 2012 10:05 Djodref wrote: I'm going to give the links to my two previous games for everyone to be able to see how playing the newbie card can get people suspicious of you as town and helps you winning as scum. 1)2 games as well -Newbie Mini Mafia XXVIII as cop - Looney Lynching Mini Mafia as mafia pardoner 2)I've more solo read than obsed, 5 games I would say 3)Yes You might want to read them if you have time ! | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On October 26 2012 07:54 Djodref wrote: @Clarity I was talking with Dandel about policy lynch, especially the fact that you have to agree early about it or not. I don't think it's good to establish a policy early and I'm not going to change my mind, even if dandel has good arguments for it. Why did you pick on this sentence ? As you can see I basically insta-posted this response when you made your post. Reason being it's a bit wishy-washy. "I agree with you but I'm not gonna change my mind" It doesn't add up | ||
|
Djodref
France3332 Posts
On October 26 2012 05:01 Clarity_nl wrote: Here's the thing. By pointing out the smiley thing, it is now irrelevant. Unless you can say right now, that because of the smileys it makes him lean towards scum or town. Regardless of smileys or no smileys in his posts from this moment, you changed his posts. He will now either: Stop posting smileys because he got told it made him look guilty (both scum and town would do this) OR he will continue posting smileys because it would look weird to change the way you post (both scum and town would do this) I also dug this up: I'm not going to stop posting smileys | ||
| ||
