|
On October 26 2012 23:22 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Early on, Djo, I felt a contradiction from you based on a combination of you criticizing the lurker policy + calling out a lurker. More recently, you've switched gears a lot and been unsatisfied in defenses mounted against your case.
Finally just now claiming "not needing to consolidate" is fishy to me too. If we don't consolidate, we're going to have someone get lynched with like 3 votes, reducing scum's need to assist in the lynchwagon as well as improving scum ability to make sure one of their own cannot be lynched - so we're less likely to find scum today, but equally importantly, we would have less information later in the game (and could cause town to go rabid on itself) We want to consolidate.
I dunno if mods have more replacements lined up, I sure hope so. Having 3 playerdrops happen on day 1 is really depressing to me. Who are the three players who are going to drop, according to you ? Are you even reading this thread ?
What kind of condescension is this?
1 - Clarity, who has already been modkilled
2 - Roco69, who has not posted since posting some pretty questionable stuff. He was immediately asked questions about it, and never responded.
3 - imcasey, who hasn't posted at all. (Likely player to get replaced, though.)
|
@sylver
If you were reading the thread, you could see that I have finally addressed Alsn's points against me in this post.
On October 26 2012 14:02 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 02:40 Alsn wrote:
My reasons for thinking Djodref is slightly scummy so far is that he is asking a lot of questions. That in itself isn't particularly scummy(in fact, done right it's pro-town as it pressures people into sharing their opinions and such).
The problem I have with it so far is that you keep asking people to answer you, yet your own statements so far amount to picking on the people who are being lurky(Ini, Roco) while at the same time criticising Rad for supporting lurker policy lynch?! This makes no sense to me. This in combination with the slip leads me to believe that you are trying to make yourself look good by being active. I can definitely see the possibility of there being town motivations for your actions so far, but I'd just like to point out that I have my eye on you.
So, with that in mind, FoS Djodref.
I'll see if I can't take a look at some of the other things said so far before I go to bed but if not, I'll do it first thing tomorrow as I will have a lot more time then. @AlsnThe slip I have made was because I was mentioning another game I have been playing with daoud where he was town. I understand it can be seen as a scumslip. It's a valid point but not a strong one in my opinion. I have asked questions to many people, not only Inig and Roco. This is a misrepresentation of the reality. It's true that I'm focusing a lot on Inig but it's because I think he is scum. That's why I want people to give their thoughts about him. Criticizing Rad for his support of lurker policy lynch doesn't mean I don't want to lynch a lurker. I don't want to protect the lurkers or anything like that. I just don't want us to use blindly the policy lynch or to rely on it too much. If a lurker is scummy enough (like Inig in my eyes), I would lynch him for being scummy, nor for the policy. I think your FoS is forced by the way...
and I mention it again in this post
On October 26 2012 20:34 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 19:36 Alsn wrote:
Just woke up and read through the thread.
First impressions are that Djodref seemed way more defensive than he needed to be towards my accusation. It was merely meant as a prod(which he probably realized) yet he felt the need to resort to insulting me as a way to discredit my points. If nothing else, it has sparked a ton of discussion, so I'm happy about that. To clarify, Djod does still feel slightly scummy to me, yet I'm still not convinced about him being town or scum as his actions can definitely be explained from both perspectives if one tries to. His main redeeming action to me is his willingness to stick to his guns and pressure Inig even though he was under pressure himself. I see that as a more townie move than a scum move, yet with all the other things brought up against him I don't feel that it's enough to clear his name.
That being said, my reads so far amount to mostly very slight reads in one way or the other. I think my strongest reads so far are Rad/debears who are looking both pretty towny, simply due to how willing they are to put themselves out there. If nothing else they have given us a lot of things to put into context once people start to flip, which is very good for town.
Right now I'd be in favour of lynching a lurker, simply due to the fact that I don't consider Djodref to be a strong enough of a read to me at this point. To sum up, I feel the benefits of getting rid of a non-contributor such as Roco currently outweighs the chance of Djodref flipping scum. Although Roco if you are still following the thread and haven't given up, posting your own feelings about the topics in the thread so far would go a long way towards eliminating suspicion against you.
I'll take a look at Inig's points regarding Dandel, but unless I missed something extremely incriminating when I read through it the first time I'd still be in favour of lynching a lurker. @AlsnAs I've said, I was expecting better reasons from you to cast a FoS on someone, given your meta. Moreover, you kept saying things like "it could be scum, it could be town". Hence the half-assed comment. I didn't realize that you were busy nowadays and I was very wary of your low post counts. Thus I've been provoking you on purpose to see what kind of reaction you would have. I can say that you kept your cool and I appreciate it. I'm sorry if you felt insulted but I was attacking your "case", not your person.
I'm more interested in your personal reasons for possibly voting for me.
But I'm even more interested right now to know who are the 3 guys who are going to drop, according to you 
|
Day one but you want someone, who is ostensibly town, to have a better reason than "well his post seems kinda fishy" for an FOS?
|
On October 26 2012 23:29 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:22 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 23:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Early on, Djo, I felt a contradiction from you based on a combination of you criticizing the lurker policy + calling out a lurker. More recently, you've switched gears a lot and been unsatisfied in defenses mounted against your case.
Finally just now claiming "not needing to consolidate" is fishy to me too. If we don't consolidate, we're going to have someone get lynched with like 3 votes, reducing scum's need to assist in the lynchwagon as well as improving scum ability to make sure one of their own cannot be lynched - so we're less likely to find scum today, but equally importantly, we would have less information later in the game (and could cause town to go rabid on itself) We want to consolidate.
I dunno if mods have more replacements lined up, I sure hope so. Having 3 playerdrops happen on day 1 is really depressing to me. Who are the three players who are going to drop, according to you ? Are you even reading this thread ? What kind of condescension is this? 1 - Clarity, who has already been modkilled 2 - Roco69, who has not posted since posting some pretty questionable stuff. He was immediately asked questions about it, and never responded. 3 - imcasey, who hasn't posted at all. (Likely player to get replaced, though.)
I'm sorry but I wouldn't call Clarity modkill a player drop. Clarity has made a mistake and has been punished for it. I thought you were referring to Oatsmaster instead of Clarity. I'm very curious how you could have missed that Clarity has been modkilled.
It has been very clear on the filters list for a long time.
|
On October 26 2012 23:33 sylverfyre wrote:
Day one but you want someone, who is ostensibly town, to have a better reason than "well his post seems kinda fishy" for an FOS?
I know how Alsn plays as town and I'm expecting more from him to cast a FoS on someone. According to him, his post on me was meant as a prode.
|
@sylver
So do you have even your own reasons for possibly voting me today ?
Or were you just sheeping like a boss ?
|
When is lynch? Tonight in like 9 hours right?
|
On October 26 2012 23:35 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:29 sylverfyre wrote:On October 26 2012 23:22 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 23:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Early on, Djo, I felt a contradiction from you based on a combination of you criticizing the lurker policy + calling out a lurker. More recently, you've switched gears a lot and been unsatisfied in defenses mounted against your case.
Finally just now claiming "not needing to consolidate" is fishy to me too. If we don't consolidate, we're going to have someone get lynched with like 3 votes, reducing scum's need to assist in the lynchwagon as well as improving scum ability to make sure one of their own cannot be lynched - so we're less likely to find scum today, but equally importantly, we would have less information later in the game (and could cause town to go rabid on itself) We want to consolidate.
I dunno if mods have more replacements lined up, I sure hope so. Having 3 playerdrops happen on day 1 is really depressing to me. Who are the three players who are going to drop, according to you ? Are you even reading this thread ? What kind of condescension is this? 1 - Clarity, who has already been modkilled 2 - Roco69, who has not posted since posting some pretty questionable stuff. He was immediately asked questions about it, and never responded. 3 - imcasey, who hasn't posted at all. (Likely player to get replaced, though.) I'm sorry but I wouldn't call Clarity modkill a player drop. Clarity has made a mistake and has been punished for it. I thought you were referring to Oatsmaster instead of Clarity. I'm very curious how you could have missed that Clarity has been modkilled. It has been very clear on the filters list for a long time.
I missed it initially (I was asleep at the time of his modkill) and didn't notice it immediately upon waking up, especially cause nobody had mentioned it. I had just noticed it when I made the "3 drops" comment, and agreed when daoud posted "wow, nobody is talking about this? and my reply to daoud amounted to an "i know right?"
Furthermore, it's not so much me being frustrated at 3 players lurking out of the game, but 3 players vanishing from the game before the end of day 1 is pretty depressing and could easily cause this game to suffer infant mortality.
And your condescending tone towards me and other accusers ("half-assed FOS") is bothering me.
|
On October 26 2012 23:43 kushm4sta wrote:
When is lynch? Tonight in like 9 hours right?
Yup. 9 hours 15 mins from now (9:00 27 Oct server time. 8PM 26 Oct EDT.)
|
On October 26 2012 23:45 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:43 kushm4sta wrote:
When is lynch? Tonight in like 9 hours right? Yup. 9 hours 15 mins from now (9:00 27 Oct server time. 8PM 26 Oct EDT.)
This is correct.
Also, a reminder, please refrain from discussing what mods should/shouldn't do. Thanks.
|
On October 26 2012 23:33 sylverfyre wrote:
Day one but you want someone, who is ostensibly town, to have a better reason than "well his post seems kinda fishy" for an FOS?
@sylver
Are you saying that Alsn is ostensibly town ?
Are you serious ? Today, Alsn is the definition itself of a semi-lurker trying to blend in...
Did you really pay attention to how he presented my lynch ?
On October 26 2012 22:22 Alsn wrote:
/snip
For that reason, I'm going to go with my strongest scum read so far, Djodref. Like I said though, I don't really feel like we have particularly good odds on him(only slightly better than random), but at the very least people have actually committed to taking stances on him and been forced to explain why. We would gain nothing by lynching a possible modkill who has said basically nothing, as no one could really be blamed for wanting them gone.
/snip
##Vote: Djodref
Will be looking over the other cases made so far to see if maybe there are better reasons than my own to be found, but for now I'm not yet convinced by anyone.
I'm passing this to Alsn right now because he could have some serious IRL excuses. But just look at how he is confident that I would flip scum: "only slightly better than random"
Sure Alsn is ostensibly town...
|
On October 26 2012 23:42 Djodref wrote:
@sylver
So do you have even your own reasons for possibly voting me today ?
Or were you just sheeping like a boss ?
Uh, I've said my reasons. I don't find your defenses/ignorance of accusations adequate, I don't like how you're like BLIND LURKER POLICY IS BAD when NOBODY was advocating blind lurker policy (last resort lurker policy) which pretty much was turning the discussion into a very useless one, then you turn around and start aggressively attacking Ini for lurking. Finally I don't like how you accuse Ini of "not scumhunting" when he makes some well-thought-out town-aligned reads (and some null-reads)
|
Also, I was suspicious of you before Alsn voted you. I was just MORE suspicious of Roco at the time, to try and get him to talk. I've given up on that for now, it's not getting anywhere.
|
On October 26 2012 23:44 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:35 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 23:29 sylverfyre wrote:On October 26 2012 23:22 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 23:05 sylverfyre wrote:
Early on, Djo, I felt a contradiction from you based on a combination of you criticizing the lurker policy + calling out a lurker. More recently, you've switched gears a lot and been unsatisfied in defenses mounted against your case.
Finally just now claiming "not needing to consolidate" is fishy to me too. If we don't consolidate, we're going to have someone get lynched with like 3 votes, reducing scum's need to assist in the lynchwagon as well as improving scum ability to make sure one of their own cannot be lynched - so we're less likely to find scum today, but equally importantly, we would have less information later in the game (and could cause town to go rabid on itself) We want to consolidate.
I dunno if mods have more replacements lined up, I sure hope so. Having 3 playerdrops happen on day 1 is really depressing to me. Who are the three players who are going to drop, according to you ? Are you even reading this thread ? What kind of condescension is this? 1 - Clarity, who has already been modkilled 2 - Roco69, who has not posted since posting some pretty questionable stuff. He was immediately asked questions about it, and never responded. 3 - imcasey, who hasn't posted at all. (Likely player to get replaced, though.) I'm sorry but I wouldn't call Clarity modkill a player drop. Clarity has made a mistake and has been punished for it. I thought you were referring to Oatsmaster instead of Clarity. I'm very curious how you could have missed that Clarity has been modkilled. It has been very clear on the filters list for a long time. I missed it initially (I was asleep at the time of his modkill) and didn't notice it immediately upon waking up, especially cause nobody had mentioned it. I had just noticed it when I made the "3 drops" comment, and agreed when daoud posted "wow, nobody is talking about this? and my reply to daoud amounted to an "i know right?" Furthermore, it's not so much me being frustrated at 3 players lurking out of the game, but 3 players vanishing from the game before the end of day 1 is pretty depressing and could easily cause this game to suffer infant mortality. And your condescending tone towards me and other accusers ("half-assed FOS") is bothering me.
@sylver
I'm sorry for the tone I'm employing. I'm just getting pretty pissed off by people accusing me for weak reasons (like Alsn did).
Right now, I have the feeling that you are just sheeping. Please prove me wrong and I'll be nicer to you ^^
|
Djod, just quoting my post and then writing something after it doesn't mean you addressed it. In fact, your response is illogical. You state a truth "I have most certainly asked questions of more than just Roco/Inig!" yet that truth was irrelevant to my criticism of you. My criticism was that you indeed asked a lot of questions but the only people you actually shared your own thoughts about were to cast suspicion on Roco/Inig, for reasons of them being lurky. Yet at the same time you criticised Rad for being in favour of lurker lynching.
I'm not sure if you're purposefully trying to distract the issue or if you genuinely misunderstood my criticism of you but I'm inclined to let my vote stay for now. However, I will definitely be checking the thread for the next 5-6 hours to see if there's any reason for me to change it.
I'd just like to remind everyone that I can not be here for lynch like I stated during pre-game. Exam starts tomorrow at 8:30 local time and lynch is at 02:00. At the very latest I'll be here until ~3 hours before lynch.
|
Hello gentlemen, just got home and beginning to address some questions on me.
@ Inig
I understand your concerns with this post, and I address them in bold.
On October 26 2012 16:35 Inigmaticalism wrote:Also, I now have some suspicion on Cheesecake. I like pretty much every post hes given actually, except this one: Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 08:56 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On October 26 2012 07:42 Inigmaticalism wrote:
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.
I'm not sure how to comprehend this answer. Inig is obviously very distressed, as he's discrediting everything by calling it blatantly "stupid and pointless". Either he doesn't know how to form a coherent response to an accusation or is cracking under pressure. I don't like the response at all. With him going afk after this, I'm beginning to get suspicious of him. Oh ya and look cheese also calls me out about being emotional and freaking out in thread. His arguments good too, although I wish he put in a 'outside mafia influences' reason as well, but thats fine. I actually have found cheese to be more likely town than I said djo was, so this is why I called this out. -This point is not doing anything other than saying he read it. Like my earlier posts, it doesnt really contribute at all, doesnt really push me either except in the most indirect of ways. This was simply something I noticed. I read that post and went "wow" due to your emotive state. It came off as suspicious to me, as it didn't seem like you could form a decent sentence in your defense.-The 'Im beginning to get suspicious of" me. Ive re-read my own filter. Cheese you should already be suspicious of me, not beginning to be. Ive barely been pro-town at all. I wasn't very suspicious of you at the time, for the same reasons I wasn't suspicious of Rad; too little posts, too little content. The only other thing that sent lights off in my head was you "only having town reads". This was the tipping point where you become null, to becoming slightly scum orientated in my mind.-While those points are fun and are probably included in numerous posts in this game, I call it out because it seems like Cheese is simply trying to look good by joining a case that had potential to go somewhere (and so far has). I think what Im trying to say is that I read it and then after re-reading it I realized it had 0 content, but it looked like it did. No treally a scum-tell, but I guess I saw it because it seemed different than his other posts. The only other person who had even mentioned that post was Djodref, but he had not focused in on your "rage quit" scenario. In the context of the thread, I was the first person to point it out. I believe it was worthy of mention as it stuck out so blatantly to me.
@ Debears
On October 26 2012 13:28 debears wrote:
@cheese
On the point of djos "townie vibes". Why would he defend me if he thought i wasnt town, which he stated after he stated he had townie vibes on me?
The "townie" vibes mean he's simply leaning town on you, and didn't want to see you lynched today (in favor of prospects such as Inig.) That's the only motivation I could see behind it.
@Djo
I'll be addressing your post shortly.
Still rereading the thread and updating myself on current events.
|
On October 26 2012 23:49 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 23:42 Djodref wrote:
@sylver
So do you have even your own reasons for possibly voting me today ?
Or were you just sheeping like a boss ?
Uh, I've said my reasons. I don't find your defenses/ignorance of accusations adequate, I don't like how you're like BLIND LURKER POLICY IS BAD when NOBODY was advocating blind lurker policy (last resort lurker policy) which pretty much was turning the discussion into a very useless one, then you turn around and start aggressively attacking Ini for lurking. Finally I don't like how you accuse Ini of "not scumhunting" when he makes some well-thought-out town-aligned reads (and some null-reads)
Ini was not scumhunting at all. Only two questions asked to other people, no pressure at all.
Once again, please tell me what do you have against me. Stop saying accusations, be specific.
Please show me where in my filter I have said that "blind lurker policy is bad".
|
So now you're discounting my reasons too, saying I'm just sheeping? Can you address a single accusation made against you instead of just counter-accusing?
|
The tone you're employing indicates frustration - could be mafia 'i'm caught' frustration or townie 'why lynch me?' frustration but you're getting accused while throwing out lots of accusations and 0 defenses.
On October 25 2012 09:52 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2012 09:47 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
@ "Uncle" Dan
I am of the opinion that inactive players are a good candidate for lynching. There is too much mystery involved with someone whose only contribution to the thread is nonexistent.
In regards to the noobie-card policy: I have to say that claiming inexperience is a terrible defense against any accusation. Djo in the last newbie game made several references to him being a noob (and being town), and it only served to make him seem suspicious to other players.
You are sure taking lurker policy lynch seriously. Would you explain us at which point suspicious players become better lynch candidates than inactive players ?
Then you suddenly go silent on that issue.
And inactive players ARE suspicious (and you can't automatically say whether they're more suspicious or less suspicious than another suspicious player, without providing concrete examples) so it's a moot question anyway. Not your only moot question (you've been called out for asking the "are you mafia?" pointless question, too.)
|
On October 26 2012 23:54 Alsn wrote:
Djod, just quoting my post and then writing something after it doesn't mean you addressed it. In fact, your response is illogical. You state a truth "I have most certainly asked questions of more than just Roco/Inig!" yet that truth was irrelevant to my criticism of you. My criticism was that you indeed asked a lot of questions but the only people you actually shared your own thoughts about were to cast suspicion on Roco/Inig, for reasons of them being lurky. Yet at the same time you criticised Rad for being in favour of lurker lynching.
I'm not sure if you're purposefully trying to distract the issue or if you genuinely misunderstood my criticism of you but I'm inclined to let my vote stay for now. However, I will definitely be checking the thread for the next 5-6 hours to see if there's any reason for me to change it.
I'd just like to remind everyone that I can not be here for lynch like I stated during pre-game. Exam starts tomorrow at 8:30 local time and lynch is at 02:00. At the very latest I'll be here until ~3 hours before lynch.
@Alsn
I didn't attack them for lurking, I have attacked them because
- Roco was posting nonsense
- Inig was not showing any scumhunting in his posts, only fluff
I didn't find something as suspicious as that in other players posts. Maybe the role-fishing question from sylver but that's all.
Nevertheless, I understand your criticism better now. I would have appreciated if you have made this post before.
And there is a difference between applying a policy and trying to find what is scummy. Even in lurker's posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
