EPTnot a lot
Your Clothes, Give them to me. [mafia] - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
not a lot | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 09:15 Douglas Quaid wrote: On why I'm not pursuing Jack - I have outstanding questions on several players right now, it's impossible for me to keep track of all of them. But thanks for reminding me, and I would like a response from Jack. 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. No, I don't get how you call something very scummy earlier in the day and then magically forget about it when creating your list of reads with no god-damn preference. | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
On October 19 2012 09:17 Harry Tasker wrote: No, I don't get how you call something very scummy earlier in the day and then magically forget about it when creating your list of reads with no god-damn preference. I forgot, since I'm pursuing a whole bunch of other stuff. What you want me to do - lie and give you a half-assed excuse? That wouldn't be too hard. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 09:20 Douglas Quaid wrote: I forgot, since I'm pursuing a whole bunch of other stuff. What you want me to do - lie and give you a half-assed excuse? That wouldn't be too hard. So should Jack have been on the list? If not, why not? Who ARE your preferred lynches? | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
For now, top two lynch candidates are Ben and John. But for emphasis - I really want to wait to see if John posts before we lynch anyone. There's absolutely no reason to rush things, and it benefits town the more discussion we can generate on D1. | ||
|
Alan Schaefer
42 Posts
Why? He completely ignored my response to his case. He also completely ignored ben's further questioning him on his case: On October 19 2012 01:42 Ben Richards wrote: @Alex 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? And yet, five different times later in the thread (I counted in his filter), he continued to insist that "we have a better lynch in Alan" and "there is a better case on Alan." He continued to bring up and talk about that case while ignoring the response, ignoring questions about it, ignoring the fact that everyone else was ignoring it. To me, that says he wants everyone to know that he is "making cases and having scum reads" but doesn't care enough to go in depth or fight with people over them. If you disagree with me, then one of the following things must be true: - you think I'm misinterpreting what he did - ie, you think he actually was trying to convince people, etc - you think it's possible to do exactly what I've described and still be town. could you tell me which of those it is and why? The more I think about this, the more I want to ##vote: Alex Hesse until I'm convinced otherwise. | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
Ugh. Actually I don't like how he's (not) pushed your case either. I just find Ben significantly scummier - I don't see any townieness in his posts whereas I can see townieness in Alex's. | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
If you want me to respond to your points against me I'll do that: Douglas Quaid says "lack of rationale for all his reads" but this is just absolutely untrue, I have rationale. If he can't be persuaded that I have rationale, then he needs to ask himself if it is scummy not to have any rationale yet be outspoken and active. Ben Richards, I responded to his points already. Maybe there was more but I probably ignored it because it was dumb. I don't know if there's anything else against me. Alan Schaefer has pointed out a random fact that I already explained and that he doesn't in any way try to explain why it is scummy instead of townie. Fact is that it is neither, I am not repeating my case because it's already there but no one can say that I am not pushing it. Can anybody tell me why Alan Schaefer is town? | ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
On October 19 2012 10:10 Alex Hesse wrote: I didn't repeat my case on Alan Schaefer because it's already there and his response didn't make me feel any more townie about him. His prodding around right now doesn't make me think that he's any more townie. I am confident that Ben Richards is town, I already made an early post to show distinct town traits in his posting and there's been a couple more since then. I'm on board with Alan Schaefer and John Matrix today and we need to start wrapping up. Which and why? | ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
Outline why you think Alan is scum for us, because I don't see it in your filter beyond what I posted before. Same goes for your town read on Ben. | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
| ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Harry Tasker
107 Posts
The very fact that he talked about it indicates he's capable of that level of understanding about how to play scum. | ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
|
Douglas Quaid
92 Posts
| ||
|
Alex Hesse
72 Posts
| ||
| ||
