|
On October 26 2012 10:36 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 01:01 Djodref wrote:
@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. @CheeseI would appreciate you to quote my entire posts instead of cherry-picking some stuff like you did. I was responding to sylver saying that I was not looking so clean. My priority is to find scum first and defend myself in a second time.I'm planning to write a case on Inig by the way.
If you ARE town, by not answering any of the questions surrounding you, you're wasting all of town's time. Answer our questions, don't just say "I don't care" or shrug it off. Town cares about your answers. If you can prove yourself to be town by clearing up confusion surrounding you, we can focus other people instead!
|
On October 26 2012 12:18 debears wrote:@DjoDo you believe that Inig fits the category of lurker? His filter is less than a page. Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 10:15 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 10:08 Clarity_nl wrote:So.... you're trying to get a strong response by asking what Alsn thinks Inig, which he has done to two other people before him. So what's the reason you brushed off his FoS? On October 26 2012 01:21 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 01:10 Clarity_nl wrote:
@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 @ClarityI don't think that debears is advocating chaos. In my point of view, he is certainly promoting discussion. We could as well being still discussing policy lynches if he wasn't here. And please remind that it's quite easy for mafia to avoid a policy lynch. By the way, do you believe that we can lynch a scum on D1 ? What do you think of Inig ? On October 26 2012 02:04 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 01:45 Dandel Ion wrote:On October 26 2012 01:42 Djodref wrote:@RadMy comments in red in your quoted post. On October 26 2012 01:28 Rad wrote: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 This is some of what I've got from you and/or djo 1. Pushed the confidence theme hard, as if to make it seem like we NEED to have a scum lynch d1 rather than a policy lurker lynch. FUUUUUuuu. You are doing it again. Policy lynching is just an option and it is a bad option in my opinion because mafia can avoid it easily, especially when town decides to apply this strategy from the beginning. Lynching a suspicious player get us more chances to lynch mafia. We should start to scumhunt in order to do so, not throwing FoS at each other for disagreeing over policy.2. Acted overconfident as if it was easy to make a scum read on d1 (is it? doesn't seem like it, and that's not due to lack of confidence, it's due to lack of information). I'm not saying it is easy, I'm saying it is totally possible and you should have this mentality rather than the policy lynch solution mentality. Would you like to comment about Inig by the way ?3. Twisted people's statements, either responding with something that had nothing to do with the original statement, or focusing heavily on a particular statement as if to give it more importance than it really should have. Please be more specificAll of these things feel scummy to me. You don't get it. You establish a lurker-lynch policy early. Potential lurkers see it and go all "oh shit if I lurk I'm gonna die" So they don't lurk. If you say "nah I'm completely against lynching lurkers" or "We should lynch the most active people" What do lurkers do when they see that? They'll tell themselves "cool, I'm set" And then they lurk. I'm not against a policy lynch but I think it would be better to bring it up when the right time comes (like 6 hours before the lynch ? anyway at a time we can finally identify some serious lurker). Taking an early decision against or for policy lynches is just going to help mafia to use this decision on their favor. Anyway, a lot of people seem to favor a policy lynch for today. I'm not going to go against it but I would appreciate these people to get into super scumhunting mode right now. I'm not going to forgive laziness at all, especially if you are supporting a policy lynch. By the way, what do you think about Inig ? On October 26 2012 08:25 Djodref wrote: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. @AlsnI would expect more from you than an half-assed FoS on me  What do you think about Inig ? Honestly, I don't really care if Alsn has a FoS on me if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post. I know he is totally able to come at me with something more consistent if he really thinks I'm scum. Right now, I think his reasons are poor and I'm more interested in his opinion about Ini. Djo, why would Alsn be able to come up with something consistent if he thought you were scum? This sounds like scum with a guilty conscience. Scum know they are guilty. Their posts are made with the intention to mislead town, meaning that they know that traces of their deception are in their own posts. If you were townie, you would feel that your filter is not filled with scummy things, since you would be honest and sincere. This post definitely does not give that read of honesty.
@debears
I got a scummy read from that line as well as the previous one: "Honestly, I don't really care if Alsn has a FoS on me if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post." I think you're spot on on your analysis with that. It's very close to what I was thinking but wasn't sure how exactly to say it.
I think my more recent discussions with Djo might help convince you further.
Djo, if you're town, you don't have much chance left to clear your name. Time to stop avoiding the controversies around you and clear things up.
|
On October 26 2012 12:42 debears wrote:
ebwop
The line before that you mention "I don't care if Alsn has a FOS on me". I don't read scummy in that line. A town is just as likely to say that as scum
It's the bolded part that I'm talking about. "if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post" I mentioned this in another post that it seems scummy to me but I can't quite put my finger on it. In particular the "if" aspect is bothering me.
Might be a stretch but I read those 2 lines and was like... "wait what??" I feel like if anyone came at me with a argument about why I'm suspicious, I would at the very least attempt to shut it down regardless of how dumb I thought the reasons were. He's saying the opposite, that he would defend himself if the reasons were better (according to him) but since they're not he just doesn't care.
As a town, one should clear their name at all costs yes? For all he knows, Alsn's argument could help convince others to vote him, and if he's town, not defending himself would be stupid.
|
On October 26 2012 13:15 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 12:51 Rad wrote:On October 26 2012 12:42 debears wrote:
ebwop
The line before that you mention "I don't care if Alsn has a FOS on me". I don't read scummy in that line. A town is just as likely to say that as scum It's the bolded part that I'm talking about. " if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post" I mentioned this in another post that it seems scummy to me but I can't quite put my finger on it. In particular the "if" aspect is bothering me. Might be a stretch but I read those 2 lines and was like... "wait what??" I feel like if anyone came at me with a argument about why I'm suspicious, I would at the very least attempt to shut it down regardless of how dumb I thought the reasons were. He's saying the opposite, that he would defend himself if the reasons were better (according to him) but since they're not he just doesn't care. As a town, one should clear their name at all costs yes? For all he knows, Alsn's argument could help convince others to vote him, and if he's town, not defending himself would be stupid. @RadFor meta reasons, I'm pretty suspicious of Alsn at the moment. I wonder if his FoS on me was faked or not. By the way, could you tell me which part of his FoS post has convinced that I was scummy, if there is one ?
Can you clarify the bolded part please?
Are you asking "which part of his FoS convinced you that I was scummy"
or "which part of the FoS was trying to convince that I was scummy"
or something else? I don't understand how you worded that sentence. I'm sure it was just a typo, but I need clarification before I can respond.
|
On October 26 2012 13:29 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 13:26 Rad wrote:On October 26 2012 13:15 Djodref wrote:On October 26 2012 12:51 Rad wrote:On October 26 2012 12:42 debears wrote:
ebwop
The line before that you mention "I don't care if Alsn has a FOS on me". I don't read scummy in that line. A town is just as likely to say that as scum It's the bolded part that I'm talking about. " if it is for the reasons he has stated in his post" I mentioned this in another post that it seems scummy to me but I can't quite put my finger on it. In particular the "if" aspect is bothering me. Might be a stretch but I read those 2 lines and was like... "wait what??" I feel like if anyone came at me with a argument about why I'm suspicious, I would at the very least attempt to shut it down regardless of how dumb I thought the reasons were. He's saying the opposite, that he would defend himself if the reasons were better (according to him) but since they're not he just doesn't care. As a town, one should clear their name at all costs yes? For all he knows, Alsn's argument could help convince others to vote him, and if he's town, not defending himself would be stupid. @RadFor meta reasons, I'm pretty suspicious of Alsn at the moment. I wonder if his FoS on me was faked or not. By the way, could you tell me which part of his FoS post has convinced that I was scummy, if there is one ? Can you clarify the bolded part please? Are you asking "which part of his FoS convinced you that I was scummy" or "which part of the FoS was trying to convince that I was scummy" or something else? I don't understand how you worded that sentence. I'm sure it was just a typo, but I need clarification before I can respond. which part of his FoS convinced you that I was scummy ? Thank you 
The content of his FoS isn't really all that important here, to me at least. The fact that you claimed it was a half-assed FoS, though, is a major reason you're suspicious to me.
He made claims, you didn't shut them down. If it's so half-assed and the argument is bad, shut it down already. If it's sooo bad you can't even respond to it because it doesn't make sense in the first place, you could point that out. If it's just "bad" and you don't feel it's worth responding to, you're leaving yourself open to whatever decision we want to make in Alsn's case vs Djo's non-case.
Just to answer your question though, I feel like he made an interesting connection (I would prefer if you want to dispute these, you take it up with him, as it's his case):
You criticize me for supporting lurker policy lynch, yet you're so focused on Inig due to his lurking (your recent case on Inig isn't helping your case against this either)
I don't know what slip he was talking about. I'll have to look into that at some point.
Honestly I think both debears's and my own points against you are far more solid, but you've avoided answering my questions for a while now. You have some catching up to do if you want to convince me.
|
On October 26 2012 13:50 Djodref wrote:
@Rad
I'm focused on Inig for his total lack of scumhunting and his weird attempt to gain town cred.
Could you sum up for me the main questions I have to answer to ? I'll try my best to answer them.
Djo, I already did that for you earlier today. Why aren't you going the extra mile to prove your innocence?
On October 26 2012 09:45 Djodref wrote:
@Rad
I know Alsn town's play and I find him not fitting his meta. I intend to get some strong response to my post. I'm provoking him on purpose.
Regarding your concerns about me not changing my mind, have they been addressed or not ?
On October 26 2012 09:53 Rad wrote:@DjodrefNo they haven't been addressed. Please see my concerns: Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 08:22 Rad wrote:
I can't think of any good reason a townie would have to be completely unopen to changing their opinion on something regardless of the arguments presented. Worst case scenario for a townie is you're just not convinced by the argument so you keep your original opinion, then someone's not happy that they couldn't convince you.
Seems like a scummy stance. The scummy reasoning would go something like "I need to be consistent, and if someone changes my opinion on something, I'll look inconsistent, so I'm going to just make it clear that I'm not going to change my mind on this so it's dropped."
That's what you sound like with that statement djo. And the restating of my concerns: Show nested quote +On October 26 2012 08:43 Rad wrote:
You said "I won't change my opinion." I pointed out that I can't think of any good reason a townie would be opposed to changing their opinion if an argument is good. It sounds like a scummy sort of move, for the reasons I laid out. That's why I have an interest in it, because if you're a townie it doesn't add up, thus you come across as scum. I'm completely open to some reasonable argument for why a townie would ever have that sort of mind set.
|
On October 26 2012 14:21 Djodref wrote:
@Rad
So your main concern about me was I said that I wouldn't change my mind ?
Do you have other concerns ?
Did you understand I was only speaking about a particular point (agreeing that a strict lurker policy should be part of our strategy) ?
My original concerns came from the "confidence" ordeal from before. As I found with debears, that can turn out to be a huge ordeal and I'll address it again if I feel the need to.
My concerns about your unwillingness to change your stance on something regardless of the arguments provided are still there. To me, as I've stated, this feels like a scummy perspective. I can't see a good reason for a townie to not be open to changing their opinions on something based on further arguments. "No no no not going to budge on this!" feels scummy. "Let me hear your points, ok, I disagree and here's why" feels townie.
It was the way you handled the questions. It doesn't matter that it was about just a particular point, or even if that point mattered in the end, but that you were so specific about never changing your opinion on it regardless of the arguments provided. It didn't feel like a townie move, so I can only suspect scum, but furthermore, you've dodged my questions until now. Why? If you can so simply answer them now, why didn't you do it before? You clearly saw them, acknowledged them, but didn't answer them. Instead, you said you were done with me.
Going to have to look over all this in more depth tomorrow as I'm getting tired and need to wind down.
|
@Djodref
I literally just finished catching up, refreshed the page once, and there was your post mentioning me not being around!
Anyway, I'm not going to be able to be that active today until around 6pm (2h before lynch), at which point I will try to jump in and be useful. If anyone has questions for me in the meantime, I will try my hardest to answer them, but I cannot go into great depth during the day like I can at night (I'm EST so right now is work work...). Questions that only require short answers are ideal for me right now.
Interested to see what kush brings to the table.
|
Some quick thoughts on people:
debears - still not convinced town but everyone else seems so convinced that I have to question my own instincts. Due to him being super active and creating good discussion I feel ok letting him stick around for now. Also I have no major problems with him since the confidence ordeal. I have my eye on him but would not be surprised if he was actually town because of his consistent contributions to discussion.
Alsn - probably worth keep around due to his real life reasons for not being as active, which are supposed to change after his test.
Mr. Cheesecake - maybe my highest town read, which is why I'm going to look more closely into him as soon as I can (my town read for isn't based on anything other than a "feeling" I get from reading his posts, so I'm going to dig into him more to confirm or reject those initial thoughts)
sylverfyre - feels like he's scrambling now but i get a null read from him. I need to look more into his case vs djo and any cases against him.
Djodref - still feels super scummy. Even though he's gone back and answered a lot of questions, I don't know why he didn't earlier. Still hasn't discussed the idea of "doesn't make sense that a townie would be completely against changing their mind on something if the argument to do so was good enough", instead, he just explained why he didn't want to change his mind on the particular topic. I do like that he did finally address multiple concerns though, and like that he's creating good discussion.
imcasey - complete lurker, nothing to say
da0ud - looks like people are starting to bandwagon on him but I'll need to look into it more and consider arguments when I get a chance. He's a null read to me.
kushm4sta - null so far, not enough content / not enough time to think about what he has put out there so far
Dandel lon - like da0ud, null for me, I need to look into him more
Inigmaticalism - I'm most confused about him, moreso than any
Roco69 - I'm totally baffled by him so far and wouldn't feel bad about voting for him. Either scum or useless townie. I'm leaning towards useless townie and that given up on us.
Ok seriously I'm going to go work now.........
|
##Vote: Inigmaticalism
Inigmaticalism, I'm voting you to force you into changing your vote on imcasey. I want to see who you pick. I feel like your real vote will be extremely telling.
If you change your vote, I may or may not change mine, but I'm not satisfied with you sticking your vote on imcasey at this point. He hasn't said one thing and will likely be modkilled. If he comes in last second without any real input, he's obviously scum (or useless townie of course).
|
I still plan on reviewing everything in about 2 hours when I get a chance. That should give me 2 hours before vote time to feel better about my final vote. I will likely keep my vote on Inig if he doesn't show up to change vote, but am open to change if I feel I'm convinced one way or the other once I've gotten a chance to research the issues more.
|
Inig, you not voting da0uds is super interesting to me.
I feel like your safest vote to stay alive is da0uds. If you want to stay alive, you vote him.
Alternatively though, you may know that and realize if you vote da0uds you look bad.
Here are some interesting things about Inig:
1. He claimed vanilla townie in the past.
2. He was forced to make a vote here and he did not choose da0uds. Instead he chose Dan. Dan currently has no chance of being lynched today unless something crazy comes up, so the vote on Dan was worthless.
3. If he is indeed vanilla townie, and he does not quite trust his current reads on da0ud and dan, it would be the best town play to a) keep himself alive if possible (change vote from imcasey) and b) let others who are more well informed make the more educated vote. Voting for da0uds when he's really uncertain is just taking a chance, and da0uds is currently in second place to be lynched today, so there's a lot of pressure on Inig's vote (if he's town).
I had a null read on him before but it was extremely confusing one way or the other. With this I'm leaning townie for Inig. Anyone want to jump in and help analyze his decision here? I'm open to whatever thoughts people have and please help me if I'm making a WIFOM argument here.
|
##Unvote
Going through filters now. Done kush and da0ud. Leaning da0ud so far. Will continue and report back in a few.
|
I've now read through inig's filter and debear's case on inig.
I get a super confused feel from inig, but not a scummy feel. I feel like he just doesn't know how he's supposed to act and he's very open about it. He lays out his thoughts for everyone to read. I feel like we should do the same with him as we're doing with djo, give him a chance to talk more and he should slip if he's scum.
da0ud seems much less likely to slip if he's scum. He's more concise and not emotional.
Furthermore, so far in this game da0ud is only active at times opposite now (no idea about his other games). I don't see any posts in his filter around this time (7am HK). Is it likely he won't be around to discuss lynches? I feel that might be an important consideration here as inig would be around for lynches in the future (or so he claims).
|
On October 27 2012 08:14 debears wrote:
@djo
Wth? You now find inig scummy again?
did you miss-read dan's post at djo's post? because I did at first... and I don't see where djo has talked about inig recently.
|
I'm going to have to go with da0ud for the reasons I listed previously.
##Vote da0ud
Guys, what do we do if roco or imcasey come in last second and vote? Should we try to change our vote to them ASAP or let it slide and talk about it after?
|
On October 27 2012 08:22 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2012 08:16 Rad wrote:
I've now read through inig's filter and debear's case on inig.
I get a super confused feel from inig, but not a scummy feel. I feel like he just doesn't know how he's supposed to act and he's very open about it. He lays out his thoughts for everyone to read. I feel like we should do the same with him as we're doing with djo, give him a chance to talk more and he should slip if he's scum.
da0ud seems much less likely to slip if he's scum. He's more concise and not emotional.
Furthermore, so far in this game da0ud is only active at times opposite now (no idea about his other games). I don't see any posts in his filter around this time (7am HK). Is it likely he won't be around to discuss lynches? I feel that might be an important consideration here as inig would be around for lynches in the future (or so he claims). @Radlol If we lynch daoud for these reasons, it would be the weakest reasons ever given to justify a lynch...
It was a concern, Djo, not a defining reason.
|
On October 27 2012 08:21 Rad wrote:
I'm going to have to go with da0ud for the reasons I listed previously.
##Vote da0ud
Guys, what do we do if roco or imcasey come in last second and vote? Should we try to change our vote to them ASAP or let it slide and talk about it after?
EBWOP: also want to say my vote is coming from a) kush's case, b) the fact that I feel like the case against inig isn't strong, and c) just my general feelings from reading through the 4 filters (kush, debears, inig, da0ud)
|
On October 27 2012 08:30 Djodref wrote:
Seriously if Roco or imcasey are coming, we should just lynch them
Shouldn't we let them get modkilled if they do nothing at this point?
If they show up to vote, what do you think we should do?
|
what's your vote Djo? It's that time...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
