| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
Why did you drop this hyper aggressive lurker lynching policy you were talking about? Where is this "elsewhere" that you want us to spend our time? You are also accusing all over the place without ever taking a stance, first someone is scummy then someone else, but never a vote or anything. If we can't lynch Alan Schaefer then lets go for this Douglas Quaid guy. | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:03 Alex Hesse wrote: Hey Douglas Quaid Why did you drop this hyper aggressive lurker lynching policy you were talking about? Where is this "elsewhere" that you want us to spend our time? You are also accusing all over the place without ever taking a stance, first someone is scummy then someone else, but never a vote or anything. If we can't lynch Alan Schaefer then lets go for this Douglas Quaid guy. On October 18 2012 20:47 Alex Hesse wrote: Okay, I'm not saying that John Matrix is town. I'm saying that John Matrix is an asshole (sorry if you have a legit excuse for not being here) and that we have a better case in Alan Schaefer. He keeps paying "lip service" to his "case" against me. However, He completely ignores my response post + Show Spoiler [his "case", my "resp…] + On October 18 2012 06:52 Alan Schaefer wrote: bro you serious? Some players are very good at manufacturing enthusiasm when they're scum. Others are worse at it. But faking enthusiasm as scum is definitely a skill some players have. lol okay then. On October 18 2012 06:54 Alex Hesse wrote: I don't know why you can't just read his filter yourself but since you're apparently feeling too lazy to do that I'll summarize. His posting looks bad. His original contributions to this game looks wishy washy (here and here). On the contrary, contributions that he took with him from other games such as this and the first part of this post look a lot more confident. It's like he only dares to stick his neck out when it's something he knows is townie (or at least, he knows he'd think this as a townie because he thought it in other games). He also seems worried about his contributions in last part of this post with the "I'm going to post every time I open the thread", why does he think that he is not posting enough? He has a decent filter and all that. It's also just my opinion from other things that I can't really explain because I can't really quantify them. He's just acting a little more careful than I think his language shows that he usually is. On October 18 2012 07:00 Alan Schaefer wrote: So your points on me are ... that I'm more confident in my theory on how to play normal games than on how to play this weird-ass new gametype, and that I want to explicitly commit to posting more? Yeah actually maybe I'll explain a bit more where I'm coming from with the "posting every time" thing - I think that in this game, unlike other games, posting more than normal is worthwhile even if I'm only going to point out something stupid or scummy by saying "bro you serious?" Normally I would think to myself, "now is that post really worth making or is it just gonna clutter up the thread?" but in this game, making it has a couple of additional advantages - the game is so small that thread clutter isn't something we really have to worry about (or at least, that's my position until we see otherwise) and extra posting is good because it helps establish a baseline to compare later days' posting to when people try and figure out who got killed in the night and replaced by scum. - brief though my post is, I believe it answers his entire case except for his "undescribable feeling" that I'm "acting too carefully." (and interestingly enough, if you look at the post I made after he voted me and before he explained why - the first post in that spoiler - does that really feel "careful" to you? But he never addresses that post at all.) So in my opinion, Alex Hesse is less interested in actually pushing his "case" or his "scum read" on me, and much more interested in reminding everyone of the fact that he made a case and has a scum read. He hasn't once tried to explain his case further, or made any attempt at arguing with the people (read: everyone else in the thread) who are just pretty much ignoring his case and his push. This is either the biggest combination of "vocal" and "inarticulate" that I've ever seen, or it's scum. | ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
| ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
On October 19 2012 06:03 Alex Hesse wrote: Hey Douglas Quaid Why did you drop this hyper aggressive lurker lynching policy you were talking about? Where is this "elsewhere" that you want us to spend our time? You are also accusing all over the place without ever taking a stance, first someone is scummy then someone else, but never a vote or anything. If we can't lynch Alan Schaefer then lets go for this Douglas Quaid guy. I didn't "drop" it. There's just no point in tunneling someone who isn't here. I'd rather use my time and attention elsewhere - tunneling a person who isn't posting isn't going to help us scum-hunt. And so what about my aggression? Fact of the matter is, I have a bunch of null reads on people, and I want them to answer questions so I can figure out what their motives are. Alex for example, still hasn't answered my question his seemingly inexplicable strong town read on Ben. Ben also still hasn't answered my last post on him. Very simple - I want to demand answers from people, and then I'll vote. I'm not going to vote someone I'm not sure is scum. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
2: I am not agreeing with the scum read. I am acquitting him of the bad things while pointing out the good thing. He is probably my biggest town read right now. You haven't explained much of your read on Alan either. Most of your case amounts to a gut feeling, which is an absurd reason to lynch someone. | ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
| ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
On October 18 2012 06:54 Alex Hesse wrote: I don't know why you can't just read his filter yourself but since you're apparently feeling too lazy to do that I'll summarize. His posting looks bad. His original contributions to this game looks wishy washy (here and here). On the contrary, contributions that he took with him from other games such as this and the first part of this post look a lot more confident. It's like he only dares to stick his neck out when it's something he knows is townie (or at least, he knows he'd think this as a townie because he thought it in other games). He also seems worried about his contributions in last part of this post with the "I'm going to post every time I open the thread", why does he think that he is not posting enough? He has a decent filter and all that. It's also just my opinion from other things that I can't really explain because I can't really quantify them. He's just acting a little more careful than I think his language shows that he usually is. ...which seems laughable rationale at best. | ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
| ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 02:47 Ben Richards wrote: I know that Harry's style is easy to emulate and logic would dictate that's one of the requisites for NKs. Add to the fact that I'm town, and I'm going to FLIP town, and the ideal place for a scum to hide would be among the loudest voices in my opposition. Why? Because it doesn't make any sense! Because why would scum do that? That's EXACTLY how I play scum, because most people are only interested in searching for the "optimal play". It was a playful jab intended to make you consider the ramifications of continuing to tunnel me. I'm trying to find scum, whether you believe that or not. Obviously it's my job to MAKE you believe it, regardless of my alignment. Rest assured that I fully intend to do so - but it's hard to do that when there are people in the game who just think I'm scum regardless what I do or say. Call that an excuse, at this point I don't care. I'm keeping my vote on John because honestly, at this point it like HAS to be intentional. And there's no town motivation for joining a game and proceeding to intentionally not post. Being an egotistical mofo, my mind started wandering - is my style really easy to emulate? Am I breakable down to a series of obvious tells, and the style of my writing is that mimicable? I don't actually know the answer to this, but it did make me think of something else - one thing about my play that IS hard to mimic is my activity. Firstly, I post quite a lot as you can tell by my post count. But secondly (perhaps more importantly?), I think it's clear that I'm quite attentive to the thread; if someone says something i want to respond to, I respond pretty quickly; or if I'm asked a question, usually I am quite fast on the uptake. This... this is not easy to copy. Not at all. And it brought me back to an earlier post of Ben's: On October 17 2012 15:41 Ben Richards wrote: Thread Consolidation - It's D1, so I gotta say it: please please PLEASE try and condense your thoughts into larger, well thought out posts. Not only is it going to make the thread easier to read, but it's going to force scum to fake-contribute more. Win-Win. The easier the thread is to read, the better it's going to be for town in the long run. This is not debatable. This is a fact. I've attacked this point before for the reason that getting reads off shorter posts and interactions is good, blablabla. But seriously, 3 well condensed posts per day (say) is way easier to mimic than someone who posts a lot and freely. And also like I said before, in a 7 player game, thread readability is not an issue. Having thought about the activity aspect of my play and how that is hard to copy, this point he makes seems to have a distinct scum agenda behind it. When you add this stuff to the fact Ben was bizarrely, and still unsatisfactorily explainedly (that's a word right ^^), linking me pursuing him to my NK (???) and that his opening post in general was uncontributory fluff, it's just really scummy. And: On October 19 2012 01:42 Ben Richards wrote: Elaborate on your read of Alan - I'm not seeing what you're seeing in Alan's posting. I tend to agree with Harry when he says that lurking is absolutely viable as a scum strategy, and presently I think John is our best bet for scum. To a lesser degree, Jack is fitting the bill of lurking, disinterested scum too. Why is Alan scummier than both of these guys? Throws in Jack as a scumread, I push him, and his subsequent explanation: On October 19 2012 02:10 Ben Richards wrote: Yes, but obviously I know my own alignment. How about how he's suspicious of DQ for "pushing a policy of lynching lurkers", yet is buddy buddy with you in spite of you being the one who took the initiative and actually VOTED for John Matrix? How about he's using your suspicion of me to further excuse not voting for his scumbuddy? I myself asked Jack on this and received what I thought was a reply that made a lot of sense. Jack clearly explained his viewpoint, but here Ben totally disregards Jack's answer. The second point about suspicions is just ludicrous. I see no townieness in this guy's play, and plenty of scumminess. Let's lynch Ben. ##Vote: Ben Richards | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
His strong town read on Ben is the thing that gets to me the most - Ben's recent posting has been off (treating Harry like he's town), and I haven't seen any rationale for the read at all. Also, to clarify exactly where I stand, my scumreads are (in no particular order): Ben - for treating Harry like he's town (scumslip?) Alex - for lack of rationale of all his reads John Matrix - For not posting. If John continues to not post into tomorrow, he has to be lynched. There's simply no excuse for not posting in a game that you PM'd the host to enter. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Jack Slater
46 Posts
On October 19 2012 04:09 Douglas Quaid wrote: 1) How do you know mafia's going to do this? Sure they could, but it's far from set in stone. Also, there's this guy named Jack Slater who has a strong town read on you. What do you think of him? -snip- Just for the record I have never had a strong town read on Ben, but I don't think you meant to write that I am willing to vote for Ben too, DQ would you vote for him? | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
I do want to vote Ben, however, I also want to give him a chance to explain himself, as well as give a chance for John Matrix to post. I don't want to rush things when we have 24 hours to go. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 08:47 Douglas Quaid wrote: Oh geezus I'm starting to confuse names. Gimme one sec to sort things out. I do want to vote Ben, however, I also want to give him a chance to explain himself, as well as give a chance for John Matrix to post. I don't want to rush things when we have 24 hours to go. There is no '24 hours to go'. 72 hours was an arbitrary time Palmar said he'd start thinking about wrapping things up if we hadn't got our voting shoes on. It was precisely playing to the 72-hours that got town in a funk in GSL II played recently. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On October 19 2012 02:16 Douglas Quaid wrote: Couple of things Regarding the John Matrix lynch - I'm all for a policy lynch on someone who hasn't posted, but there's no point in voting/pressuring him now. We have a lot of time to lynch him (36 hours), and it's best if we not focus on what his rationale could be and simply pressure the players that actually post. Regarding Alex's Defense - Seems calm and reasoned, and he gets some townie points. Though, I would like a more thorough explanation of Ben Richards being his "biggest town read." @Jack Slater I found this post horrendously scummy: Makes no damn sense. I've been scummy to you since the beginning of the game, and your top suspect is Ben? Also, for someone who's suspicious of me, I haven't seen you push your suspicions at all. You interacted with me a little bit when I was explaining policy and the like, but that's it. You have never posted a single thing about why I'm suspicious after the initial burst of posting - yet you still have a scumread on me. I call bullshit. On October 19 2012 08:39 Douglas Quaid wrote: He might have a real reason, but I haven't seen it. His initial defense seemed fairly calm/logical, but I still have some major questions about his lack of rationale for just about anything else. His strong town read on Ben is the thing that gets to me the most - Ben's recent posting has been off (treating Harry like he's town), and I haven't seen any rationale for the read at all. Also, to clarify exactly where I stand, my scumreads are (in no particular order): Ben - for treating Harry like he's town (scumslip?) Alex - for lack of rationale of all his reads John Matrix - For not posting. If John continues to not post into tomorrow, he has to be lynched. There's simply no excuse for not posting in a game that you PM'd the host to enter. There's some things I don't like about these posts. Probably the most glaring is how in the first quote he said Jack was super scummy for his post, but then... in his later post doesn't mention Jack at all as a potential scumread? This is despite the fact that Jack didn't address that first post in any way (incidentally, why not Jack?). He hasn't pursued Jack in any way for it either, despite wanting the day to extend so that people can answer questions. Generally speaking I also find Douglas quite non-committal - always waiting for answers, wants more time, etc. Further, in the 2nd post there - he posts 3 scumreads in no particular order - what use is that? There's nothing to be held accountable for there. No preferred lynch, but a bunch of names... ugh, I'm totes talking myself into a scumread here. | ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
On October 19 2012 08:10 Alan Schaefer wrote: doug what do you think of my contention that alex is more interested in reminding us that he has a scum read on me and reminding us that he made a case, than he is in actually persuading people or pushing his case? | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
Secondly, I am very non-committal in regards to the Ben lynch, and I believe rightfully so. I'm surprised you aren't as well (if you're town). We have a player who hasn't posted yet, and there is a risk that he's scum. We can't ignore this, or mafia gets a huge D1 win and we have nothing to hold them accountable for. I have scumreads yes, but nothing set in stone. I find Ben scummy, but I think there are possible ways for him to explain his actions if he's town. Alex and Jack as well. I want to wait for responses rather than jumping the gun on inconclusive evidence. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
WardiTV Qualifier
PiGosaur Monday
RSL Revival
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Replay Cast
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Harstem vs SHIN
Solar vs Cham
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Reynor vs Scarlett
ShoWTimE vs Classic
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
