On November 02 2012 10:22 marvellosity wrote:
depends, i'm a super lazy coach because i just ask questions ;p
depends, i'm a super lazy coach because i just ask questions ;p
yeah. agreed
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 02 2012 10:22 marvellosity wrote: Show nested quote + On November 02 2012 10:20 thrawn2112 wrote: On November 02 2012 10:17 Hapahauli wrote: /coach per usual? idk how you do that, seems like it'd be a huge amount of work depends, i'm a super lazy coach because i just ask questions ;p yeah. agreed | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
or if you'd like someone to cohost and thrawn isn't doing it Oh and did you go to 9 player setup per my convo with thrawn about it? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
just replacement then....Unless you want a super pro coach | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
using half and full retard is the best explanation when townies go wrong lol *btw I'm fully expecting you to give me a blue role marv | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
And considering in my only town game there was only 1 scum :/ | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 01:19 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Just wanted to let you know that PMing is allowed in this game Clarity, so feel free to send me some at your hearts desire once the game begins. /trollpost PMING IS NOT ALLOWED. DAMNIT CC DON'T RUIN THE GAME | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Yet again, i want to know if you will be here for lynch. I should be here, but sometimes my schedule changes due to sports If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn Anyways, my policy for this game is changing slightly. I am going to strongly consider lynching lurkers for a few reasons 1) there are only 9 players. The thread will be a lot lwss cluttered so you should be able to catch up quickly 2) this is a mafia favored setup. The game will be quick. There should only be 2 mafia, so less association reads can be made late game 3) we have no vig, and thus no way to handle lurkers besides the lynch | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Bailing out on porn with me and stealing my cheesecake FOS Cheesecake | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Would you consider lynching a lurker over an ok scumread for d1? Considering the setup, a lurker lynch d1 might possibly be better for us since we can get reads on everyone else later in a smaller game | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Its mafia favored compared to the last setup. Only 9 players means a quicker game. A quicker game is better foe mafia since they don't have to fake their townieness for so long. Also look at the roles like medic. Medic can't target the same person twice (was it also that he can't target himself? I'm on my phone and i really don't want to check | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 10:20 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + I like it how you say 99% of the time, yet I know from reading XXIX's scum QT that you were away on purpose for the last lynch. I also bet you haven't yet participated in anywhere near 100 lynches, so technically that's a lie. Although, I probably should have paid more attention to what you actually voted for that game as opposed to whether or not you were actually around so I'll let that one slide.On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote: If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn I'm Alsn, I'll be around for flip-time generally, but they happen at 1 am local time so don't expect me to stick around for too long afterwards. Prior games include XXV(VT), XXVIII(VT) and XXIX also as VT. And yea, if given the choice between weak scum reads and hardcore lurkers, I'll hunt down and feed the hardcore lurker gone off cheesecake first chance I get. That being said, I'm off to lurk(also known as sleep, for those of you concerned with base things such as human metabolic function). A lie? I've played in 3 games. With what? 3 lynches each. I only missed the last one cuz you said you would unvote my scum teammate if i didn't come back. So that's 90%. Not a lie. I was there only 45 minutes before the lynch, after u said that you weren't voting dandel if i was afk l. If you didn't say that, i wouldve come back. If fact, for mafia it is usually dumb to not be active around lynch due to the suspicion it causes and the lack of control ot gives the scumteam FOS Alsn for real. You know better than to call me a liar like that especially when 1) its an exaggeration if anything and not a lie and 2) when being afk around lynch is usually bad for scum | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 10:32 Obzy wrote: Wouldn't making a lurker-lynch policy be somewhat counterproductive? Like - lynching lurkers, that sounds smart. But if it's "policy", then everyone knows not to lurk - so there wouldn't be a lynch on lurkers - and if there was, why the heck would mafia be lurking? It's more like lynching the people with the least time, as long as everybody is at least somewhat active. If that makes any sense ._.; If anything, a lurker policy forces mafia to post. That's what we want. The greater the sample size, the greater the chance for a good read | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Nvm on the peace out | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
If you arent oblivious and actually look at my other games, i missed lynches cuz of irl. Odd that you don't acknowledge that | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On October 31 2012 10:12 Alsn wrote: Anyway, I really need to sleep. I promise that I will read and consider everything. It's just that if rolling the dice is the only option left, I'd rather it be a roll that I consider at least somewhat likely to have a good result. I rescind my argument on the bed thing. Consistent with last game. Btw my town meta is far from established. This is only my second game as town. And also my town meta was very different from my play last game, if you bothered to read the obs qt. I never said unconditionally forgive. It was a heads up. You're twistingmy words | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Whyd you put lie in red text :/ The statement itself was weak "basically a lie" yet the red text in lie made it appear much more emphatic | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Why are you addressing lurker policy still while me and alsn are arguing? Afraid to jump in and actually talk about something that doesnt make you commit? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:16 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:07 debears wrote: @djo Why are you addressing lurker policy still while me and alsn are arguing? Afraid to jump in and actually talk about something that doesnt make you commit? @ debears Your statement was incorrect, Alsn called you for it. Your FoS was a bit overreacting in my opinion. I didn't like him using the red font neither but he has his reasons for it. Last game was horrible for us. What does last game have to do with the argument between me and Alsn? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:18 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:13 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. I thought you were gonna come out with some kind of awesome flavor theory. Dissapointed. On others I'd point your joking attitude out as scum but I mean, you're Mr Cheesecake. Anyone stand out to you so far? I didn't joke at all last game, apart from a few trollish posts at the end hehe. I just think Debears is playing his scumgame from the last game right to the T. Aggressive opener, meaningless FoS. He also explicitly mentions that he's town and is being called a liar (someone saying you lied =/= being a liar). No. That's wrong. Saying you lied means you are lying. If you are lying, you are a liar. Odd that you are saying that | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:17 Obzy wrote: @debears - Your reaction really does seem out of place, when I'm rereading. I've been refreshing constantly, trying to read everything and make a useful post, but nothing really seemed like it would contribute to a discussion, and I don't want to have pointless posts for the sake of "being active". Contributing, not spamming. Upon looking at it that way, your posts and being interested in Alsn's word choice is surprisingly defensive. Given that there wasn't really any way for other players to pop their heads in and comment without semi-defusing the situation saying "it wasn't that big of a deal", why hold onto it? Quite specifically, Show nested quote + - why ask something like that? I didn't really think it worth paying any mind to, but you kept going on it.On November 03 2012 10:35 debears wrote: Anyways what's your guys thoughts on alsns post? (And now, just above, you're asking djo why he didn't get involved in your argument - I didn't want to get involved either, it seemed largely purposeless.) jesus i type this post, read for spelling mistakes, reopen a new browser to make sure i'm not missing some sort of new information and fucking blammo like 5 posts I wanted people to comment on the alsn post to move off lurker discussion. And yeah its weird that you dont want to comment on an argument. If I'm wrong, tell me why. I'm a sensible person.. i usually listen to points, especially good points, unless i clearly think you are mafia | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:21 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:18 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:13 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. I thought you were gonna come out with some kind of awesome flavor theory. Dissapointed. On others I'd point your joking attitude out as scum but I mean, you're Mr Cheesecake. Anyone stand out to you so far? I didn't joke at all last game, apart from a few trollish posts at the end hehe. I just think Debears is playing his scumgame from the last game right to the T. Aggressive opener, meaningless FoS. He also explicitly mentions that he's town and is being called a liar (someone saying you lied =/= being a liar). It's cause I read your Mafia QT I guess, you're right, in the thread itself you were super serious. So why the change of tone? XXIX is my first mafia game on TL, so it's my first encounter with debears. Maybe debears opens like this in every mafia game regardless? I'll go dig around. Feel free to comment debears. Look at the last page of last game. I said that i am specifically trying to be more aggressive as either alignment. Aggressiveness makes the game more fun imo. Also, i can ask the questions i want and get more immediate responses if i have good presence My aggressiveness, in other words, is a null tell. My reasoning is alignment indicative though (as shown by last game) | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:26 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 10:20 Alsn wrote: On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote: I like it how you say 99% of the time, yet I know from reading XXIX's scum QT that you were away on purpose for the last lynch. I also bet you haven't yet participated in anywhere near 100 lynches, so technically that's a lie. Although, I probably should have paid more attention to what you actually voted for that game as opposed to whether or not you were actually around so I'll let that one slide.If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn I'm Alsn, I'll be around for flip-time generally, but they happen at 1 am local time so don't expect me to stick around for too long afterwards. Prior games include XXV(VT), XXVIII(VT) and XXIX also as VT. And yea, if given the choice between weak scum reads and hardcore lurkers, I'll hunt down and feed the hardcore lurker gone off cheesecake first chance I get. That being said, I'm off to lurk(also known as sleep, for those of you concerned with base things such as human metabolic function). @Alsn Don't make the "lie" too big of a deal. People throw out random percentages all the time. Also, using red there was a bit over-dramatic, don't you think? @debears I don't see much of a good reason to push him on this issue anymore. TBH I was a bit frustrated with you not showing up at night 1 to help talk me down from shooting kush, but then again, if you were there, you might have pushed me into it (like dandel did) ^^ I get a sense of that same frustration from alsn right now, whether it's contrived or real. Because in the end, 99% is a straight up wrong statistic, and it's best if you don't use completely bs stats in trying to prove a point. Yeah i know I'm not pressing him anymore on it. Besides he's afk | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:34 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: From this post onward, nobody is allowed to discuss policy lynching. Agreed. Djo and rad Why are you two policy jerking each other? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
More specifically to djo | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:36 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:35 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:34 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: From this post onward, nobody is allowed to discuss policy lynching. Agreed. Djo and rad Why are you two policy jerking each other? You obviously don't understand the flavor of this thread. I suppose you are right lol | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:38 Djodref wrote: @ Rad I think I'm making a good point and I'm feeling like you are trying to shush me. But I would agree that it's not good to spend to much time discussing it too much. What else do you want to talk about ? I want to talk about you and your concentration on policy that is unwarranted. Furthermore you seem like you really don't want to address me | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Its pretty clear what the logic behind policy is. This is your fourth game right? This is rads second? I jumped on alsn, yet all you have to say about it is one sentence? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I think you both well understand what policy is | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:44 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Here's a topic: I don't want anyone playing the noob card as a defense. Ever. You can make decent arguments / cases even if it's your first game. Don't attribute your actions to "I'm sorry, idk what I'm doing! Newbie town here! Man I suck at this game." @Djo Do what you like, dat 30 page filter inc. Really? You didn't want to talk about policy, yet you bring up another? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:48 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:45 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:44 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Here's a topic: I don't want anyone playing the noob card as a defense. Ever. You can make decent arguments / cases even if it's your first game. Don't attribute your actions to "I'm sorry, idk what I'm doing! Newbie town here! Man I suck at this game." @Djo Do what you like, dat 30 page filter inc. Really? You didn't want to talk about policy, yet you bring up another? This is not a policy. This is a rule. Just don't play the "Imma newb" card. Eh. Semantics on my part. Anyways. Why bring it up? Everyone here was from last game except obzy. And none of them actually played the noov card | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese Yeah. Definitely unwarranted fos FOS Djo 1) he was joking 2) it was obvious he was joking 3) it wasnt confusing | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You have to be kidding me. Cheese jokes a lot. Did you not read the scum qt from last game? The motivation from both perspectives is to have fun, especially early d1 when there's nothing to talk about. "Influence your read on debears". Really? Its early day 1. You all have plenty of time to read me.. ill have a big filter most likely. That's bullshit. Scummy bullshit | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:09 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:07 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You have to be kidding me. Cheese jokes a lot. Did you not read the scum qt from last game? The motivation from both perspectives is to have fun, especially early d1 when there's nothing to talk about. "Influence your read on debears". Really? Its early day 1. You all have plenty of time to read me.. ill have a big filter most likely. That's bullshit. Scummy bullshit Please expand on the bolded part of your post I quoted debears. D1 starts out with nothing to actually talk about. That's why policy is a starter in newbies. Everything starts out of complete nothingness in terms of accusations | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:08 Rad wrote: @djo I don't think there's too much mafia motivation in throwing out 1 joke this early in day 1, especially with us all coming from the other game and it being a pretty friendly environment at the moment. I'd consider it the pre-game bleeding into the real game. I'm sure we will all start hating each other soon enough. Rad cheeses joking is a null tell. Check the scum qt from last game. Its his personality | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Its not really the pregame. He literally jokes and is pretty funny | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:13 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You also neglect to realize that my joke was in a RESPONSE to his joke. (I don't wear hats). You're really trying to dig where there is nothing. @ Cheese Ok, you had motivations for doing this joke but it doesn't really help town while it could be done with mafia motivation. And, at least, I'm trying to dig something. Would you prefer me to discuss how we should use plurality lynch ? Dig something up? Why? Because you have nothing to actually accuse people with since you're scum? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:15 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:54 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese Yeah. Definitely unwarranted fos FOS Djo 1) he was joking 2) it was obvious he was joking 3) it wasnt confusing @ debears So, it's ok for you to be aggressive in the early game but it's not ok for me ? Would you say that joking about scumtells is ok ? Its not your aggression that bothers me. Its your reasoning, which is shitty. And yeah its ok. He joked at me. I joked at him. He joked back again when the thread wasnt really moving. Its his personality | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:16 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:12 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:09 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 12:07 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You have to be kidding me. Cheese jokes a lot. Did you not read the scum qt from last game? The motivation from both perspectives is to have fun, especially early d1 when there's nothing to talk about. "Influence your read on debears". Really? Its early day 1. You all have plenty of time to read me.. ill have a big filter most likely. That's bullshit. Scummy bullshit Please expand on the bolded part of your post I quoted debears. D1 starts out with nothing to actually talk about. That's why policy is a starter in newbies. Everything starts out of complete nothingness in terms of accusations Okay, but you just meant early D1 right, not the entirety of it? It seems rather odd to go: "Yeah we should just joke around for now" Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:13 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:08 Rad wrote: @djo I don't think there's too much mafia motivation in throwing out 1 joke this early in day 1, especially with us all coming from the other game and it being a pretty friendly environment at the moment. I'd consider it the pre-game bleeding into the real game. I'm sure we will all start hating each other soon enough. Rad cheeses joking is a null tell. Check the scum qt from last game. Its his personality He kept it to the QT though, he was serious in the thread, as he pointed out. We shouldn't try to meta read someone with a sample size of 1, but he is acting quite different than last game, and he was scum in that. So if he's scum and he didn't joke in the game (which he did) while joking in the qt a lot, wouldnt you say he is being more genuine, which is a townie trait? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:17 Rad wrote: @debears I don't remember too many jokes from cheese throughout last game. Just pregame. Oh, and his "Sandy" response to the hurricane question. Anyway, it doesn't matter, I get a null read from his joke. @djo Why are you bringing up the idea of a discussion on plurality lynch? That's not even in our control, is it? Host said plurality, so it's plurality, end of story, unless I'm missing something? He did joke in game. I can't quote on my phone. Here are some from memory "Holy meta argument batbears" "A wild djo appears" "Lurkerception" "Why djodref is scum : a compilation of quotes by mr. Cheesecake" | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:23 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:15 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:13 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 12:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You also neglect to realize that my joke was in a RESPONSE to his joke. (I don't wear hats). You're really trying to dig where there is nothing. @ Cheese Ok, you had motivations for doing this joke but it doesn't really help town while it could be done with mafia motivation. And, at least, I'm trying to dig something. Would you prefer me to discuss how we should use plurality lynch ? Dig something up? Why? Because you have nothing to actually accuse people with since you're scum? I've clearly explained the mafia motivations I've found for his joke. I'm far to be able to be certain of Cheese alignment but he is leaning slightly scummy right now, hence the FoS. It's also a warning for him to not joke about scum tells in the future. I find you very jumpy and very prompt to call me scum. Are you seriously that sure of my alignment this early in the game ? Why so aggressive ? Could you explain me your motivations ? You're only part of motivations was that he would be trying to cause confusions, yet you disregard his personality, which is the cause of his jokes. They are a null read. I'm not certain you're scum at all. I'm being aggressive to get answers. I'm being aggressive to kickstart this thread and actuallu start talking about who is scum. That post is silly. You call me "jumpy". I'm being active. I didn't suddenly come out of nowhere and jump on you. I jumped on alsn early on. So what? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:27 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:20 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:16 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 12:12 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:09 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 12:07 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You have to be kidding me. Cheese jokes a lot. Did you not read the scum qt from last game? The motivation from both perspectives is to have fun, especially early d1 when there's nothing to talk about. "Influence your read on debears". Really? Its early day 1. You all have plenty of time to read me.. ill have a big filter most likely. That's bullshit. Scummy bullshit Please expand on the bolded part of your post I quoted debears. D1 starts out with nothing to actually talk about. That's why policy is a starter in newbies. Everything starts out of complete nothingness in terms of accusations Okay, but you just meant early D1 right, not the entirety of it? It seems rather odd to go: "Yeah we should just joke around for now" On November 03 2012 12:13 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:08 Rad wrote: @djo I don't think there's too much mafia motivation in throwing out 1 joke this early in day 1, especially with us all coming from the other game and it being a pretty friendly environment at the moment. I'd consider it the pre-game bleeding into the real game. I'm sure we will all start hating each other soon enough. Rad cheeses joking is a null tell. Check the scum qt from last game. Its his personality He kept it to the QT though, he was serious in the thread, as he pointed out. We shouldn't try to meta read someone with a sample size of 1, but he is acting quite different than last game, and he was scum in that. So if he's scum and he didn't joke in the game (which he did) while joking in the qt a lot, wouldnt you say he is being more genuine, which is a townie trait? Why are defending cheese's personality this game? We all get he's a funny guy and likes to joke. We only have 1 game from him to go on, and a scum QT. He could be acting different here for a variety of reasons. Why do you want us to get a town read on him just from being more genuine this game? Town motivation: Be more open and honest and townie. Scum motivation: Everyone knows his real personality now from the scum QT, he needs to switch it up or we'll be suspicious. It's a null tell. Why are you pushing the idea that it's a town tell? I said its a null tell. And when i said he was "genuine", that would be under the assumption that he didn't post jokes last game, which he did So, its a null tell | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:29 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:21 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 12:17 Rad wrote: @debears I don't remember too many jokes from cheese throughout last game. Just pregame. Oh, and his "Sandy" response to the hurricane question. Anyway, it doesn't matter, I get a null read from his joke. @djo Why are you bringing up the idea of a discussion on plurality lynch? That's not even in our control, is it? Host said plurality, so it's plurality, end of story, unless I'm missing something? He did joke in game. I can't quote on my phone. Here are some from memory "Holy meta argument batbears" "A wild djo appears" "Lurkerception" "Why djodref is scum : a compilation of quotes by mr. Cheesecake" @ debears You just have showed that he was using jokes when they were serving his scum agenda. None of the jokes i quoted served a scum agenda. The only one that would come close to that was the title of his case on you. But the title wasnt serving a scum agenda, the case was | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:35 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:23 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. [quote] He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. @ Cheese I was re-reading the thread and I really didn't like this "it's a scumtell" joke. I'm not against jokes but scumtells are quite serious business. I've got my eyes on you. There is no reason to tell us that you were reading the thread. We should know you are. This is the exact thing that Nack picked up about my scumplay last game. "This game is serious business" It's a couple hours into the first day, and most of the thread isn't even around. You're really trying to come off as town by plucking this insignificant little fact that everyone else giggled about and passed on by. And - mafia motivation for making a joke? We should get some George Carlins as scum if there is mafia motivation for making someone snicker a little. Also: My humor was mainly kept to the QT last game. Only a few stupid things in the thread were let through. /Engagecheesecakeseriousmode @ Cheese Your joke didn't pose any problem for me the first time (same for everyone I suppose) but I found it weird the second time I past through it. I have no problems with jokes and I'm making some myself. They are a null tell in general. But joking about scum tells is not really acceptable in my opinion and I've explained the possible mafia motivations I've seen behind it. So first you say his jokes last game served a scum agenda, which means they are scummy.. now you say jokes are a null tell, unless they are specifically joking about scumtells. Riddle me this. Why havent you fosed me for my joke fos on cheese in the beginning? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
That was addressed to cheese right? I would like to see him defend himself time | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 12:49 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:34 Obzy wrote: I don't think that getting a read off of whether or not Cheese has a joking tone or not really means anything at all. At least, the fact that he's aware of it means that he could manipulate it either way. I agree, this isn't much better than making a Djodref smiley case. I think the two things to take away from all this though: - Debears defended Cheese - Djodref tunneling Cheese Might become useful later. Besides stating the obvious, do you agree with me or djo on this? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:06 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:48 debears wrote: Also answer my very important question to you @ debears Did I answer your question ? I'm not sure which one you were talking about. I guessed it was the one about "why cheese and not me?" I need to go to attend a wedding at Souel Gardien Hoteal soon so I would like to know you have more questions. Yeah that answered it. Go have fun at the wedding (I've never been to one but I've heard shit gets pretty wild at the reception...hellz yeah) I can address you when you get back | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I expect you all to have contributed something meaningful to this thread by the time I've woken up tomorrow. If not, you're on my shitlist for d1 | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:09 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 13:00 Djodref wrote: @ Cheese I'm pretty sure that the following quote was totally serving your mafia agenda in the last game. But I guess I should better trust you because I don't really see why you should be dishonest right now about it. On October 29 2012 13:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Holy meta argument Batbears. Are you saying that Dandel under pressure is basically = Kush in terms of meta? Let's take a look at the second one On October 28 2012 09:20 Rad wrote: Djo NOW YOU SHOW UP? On October 28 2012 09:21 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: A wild Djo appears? I don't know if you have seen Rad post or not before posting yours but I really felt that you were both accusing me of active lurking. Why the lolwut by the way ? What did you not understand in my comment ? @Djo The second part of the first quote isn't a joke. It's an analogy. Therefore it has nothing to do with anything. The second quote: Pokemon reference, it means I think of you as a pokemon. Pokemon are innocent and cute; I'm not casting aspersions on you in the least. Yes, @obsQT I just mentioned pokemon. We could go with this WIFOM crap all day. These "jokes" means absolutely nothing. Are we seriously still talking about a failboat joke? Stop this incessant attempt to tunnel me--it bears no weight at all because it is probably one of the most subjective things one could possibly focus on. Especially since it's coming from another game entirely. I declare this useless argument over *gavel slam*. @ Cheese I'll stop tunneling you when I'm satisfied with your answers. Why do you want us to stop discussing ? This discussion has derived from its original point to go something quite useless, I agree. My point is that you could have used these jokes to make me look bad. I know this was a pokemon reference but I think "a wild Djo appears" was implying active lurking, especially in the context of the thread, rather than implying that I was innocent as a pokemon. My point is that jokes can be used by mafia to cast suspicion on a player without looking like you are doing it. It's a great tool used this way. Djo, if you are town, stop arguing over stupid points. You're wrong. Get over it If you're mafia, keep arguing | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:25 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:22 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy Because he mentioned it here: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:13 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 12:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:02 Djodref wrote: It is confusing, especially when you are attacking the same guy over semantics just after your joke. It could be also a nice way to influence our read on debears while looking clean. I agree that he was making a joke but please consider the motivations for it. Town motivations I don't see town motivations for making a joke about a scumtell Mafia motivations Creates confusion and disturbs the thread. Allows to influence our read on debears while looking clean You also neglect to realize that my joke was in a RESPONSE to his joke. (I don't wear hats). You're really trying to dig where there is nothing. @ Cheese Ok, you had motivations for doing this joke but it doesn't really help town while it could be done with mafia motivation. And, at least, I'm trying to dig something. Would you prefer me to discuss how we should use plurality lynch ? Which got me curious what he had to say on the subject. Turns out the answer is nothing new. Which begs the question: Why did he mention it in the first place? Clarity, I think it was meant to be read as more of this: Do you want me to push something and try to get the thread going, or do you want me to talk about useless policy? Would you agree with that? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:26 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:22 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy @ debears My point is that it would benefit us to consider more than 2 candidates for the lynch. Anyway it's too late to discuss about it now, I was just answering Clarity's question about it. By the way it's not policy, it's lynch mechanics More semantics, anyways it's useless. What do you think of Obsy's, Dau0d's, and Sylver's epic uselessness so far? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
anything else that you find jumps out weird so far? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 10:32 Obzy wrote: Wouldn't making a lurker-lynch policy be somewhat counterproductive? Like - lynching lurkers, that sounds smart. But if it's "policy", then everyone knows not to lurk - so there wouldn't be a lynch on lurkers - and if there was, why the heck would mafia be lurking? It's more like lynching the people with the least time, as long as everybody is at least somewhat active. If that makes any sense ._.; Obsy has been around the thread. What I have found is that he seems to be actively lurking. Notice above post. Asking a pretty much useless question. It's newbie town/scum tell, so it's a null tell On November 03 2012 10:36 Obzy wrote: Right - no; I agree with that - I guess I was caught on the wording. Describing it as a policy lynch made it sound like there wouldn't be much discussion on the matter which sounded counterproductive. He has a few one-liners like the above. Mostly, his posts do not take a strong stance and his opinions seem to be easily swayed. Again newbie town/scum tell. On November 03 2012 10:36 Obzy wrote: Sheesh this thread moves fast I need to start quoting o_o; I write a post and there's 3 replies above me. I don't like this post. At all. Trying to come up with excuses to not be posting. Sure the thread is moving pretty decently (score one for town), but it's nothing huge and pretty easy to follow so far imo. On November 03 2012 10:40 Obzy wrote: In that case, sounds good. I agree. Regarding Alsn's post... It kinda looks like he's responding like that just cause you said pulling an Alsn? I guess? Or trying to goad some sort of discussion. Here he acts confused. He asks questions without answering them himself or even really attempting to answer them himself. On November 03 2012 11:17 Obzy wrote: @debears - Your reaction really does seem out of place, when I'm rereading. I've been refreshing constantly, trying to read everything and make a useful post, but nothing really seemed like it would contribute to a discussion, and I don't want to have pointless posts for the sake of "being active". Contributing, not spamming. Upon looking at it that way, your posts and being interested in Alsn's word choice is surprisingly defensive. Given that there wasn't really any way for other players to pop their heads in and comment without semi-defusing the situation saying "it wasn't that big of a deal", why hold onto it? Quite specifically, Show nested quote + - why ask something like that? I didn't really think it worth paying any mind to, but you kept going on it.On November 03 2012 10:35 debears wrote: Anyways what's your guys thoughts on alsns post? (And now, just above, you're asking djo why he didn't get involved in your argument - I didn't want to get involved either, it seemed largely purposeless.) jesus i type this post, read for spelling mistakes, reopen a new browser to make sure i'm not missing some sort of new information and fucking blammo like 5 posts Who have a tough time contributing early? Usually scum because 1) They are afraid to post and put themselves out there since they are guilty and know so 2) They know the players they are accusing are town and they can't actually find real evidence to use However, I admit this is also a newbie town trait. On November 03 2012 12:34 Obzy wrote: I don't think that getting a read off of whether or not Cheese has a joking tone or not really means anything at all. At least, the fact that he's aware of it means that he could manipulate it either way. Honestly, this post is just absolutely worthless. It has no actual input. Says nothing about the current happenings of the thread. Summary: Obsy has been actively lurking and blending in His posts are indicative of newbie town/scum however they are looking slightly scummy at this point @Obsy 1) Defend yourself against these points 2) Go ask for some coaching help (It'll help you improve more quickly) | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:36 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:31 debears wrote: Very well Clarity, anything else that you find jumps out weird so far? Last three pages was djo, you and me. Still no word from da0ud and sylver. I think you are wrong in saying Obzy is useless. He might not have posted a lot but he makes good points or asks decent questions when he does, maybe you feel that way because he's biggest post is directed at you? That's a good point. Also, add CC into that. Hmmmm that's good. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:42 Rad wrote: @Clarity That's a great point and I want to reemphasize it. @Obzy If you're town, please disregard any suggestions about you being useless so far. Just keep attempting to be useful and you'll get the hang of it. You don't have to post as much as debears, djo, or even myself to be useful so don't get discouraged. However, don't hold back and give your input on things when you have input as it'll be helpful to town if we get some more input from you. Also I see debears has directed some questions at you so here's a chance to open up a bit. Yeah. That case is in no way saying omg he's scum. It's more of light pressure to get him to state some views, be more active in this. However, Rad, what I would like to know is that, although you are obviously following the thread in the shadows, you aren't posting to much. Why is that? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:43 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:28 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:26 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:22 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy @ debears My point is that it would benefit us to consider more than 2 candidates for the lynch. Anyway it's too late to discuss about it now, I was just answering Clarity's question about it. By the way it's not policy, it's lynch mechanics More semantics, anyways it's useless. What do you think of Obsy's, Dau0d's, and Sylver's epic uselessness so far? @ debears The game has just started. Regarding daoud and sylver, the longer it takes for them to join the discussion, the bigger my expectations are for their future input. Obsy has to step up a little bit. @Obsy if you are town, you should definitively ask Hapa for help So you're saying Obsy is town????? Obvious scumtell omg guyszzzz instalynch him Lol NMM XXVIII Never forget | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:48 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:48 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:43 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:28 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:26 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:22 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy @ debears My point is that it would benefit us to consider more than 2 candidates for the lynch. Anyway it's too late to discuss about it now, I was just answering Clarity's question about it. By the way it's not policy, it's lynch mechanics More semantics, anyways it's useless. What do you think of Obsy's, Dau0d's, and Sylver's epic uselessness so far? @ debears The game has just started. Regarding daoud and sylver, the longer it takes for them to join the discussion, the bigger my expectations are for their future input. Obsy has to step up a little bit. @Obsy if you are town, you should definitively ask Hapa for help So you're saying Obsy is town????? Obvious scumtell omg guyszzzz instalynch him Lol NMM XXVIII Never forget Never joke about scumtells. It's confusing. Then put your cheesecake where your mouth is and vote me | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:52 Djodref wrote: I need to go to the wedding now, see ya ! Go get laid for me brotha! | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
In Djo's absence, I want you to answer this: While you're joking is a null tell, the fact is that you have 1) Not scumhunted 2) Focused on defending yourself and 3) Joking around a little too much Point 3, by itself, means nothing. Combined with 1 and 2, it means quite a bit. Who do you find scummy and why? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 13:59 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:47 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:42 Rad wrote: @Clarity That's a great point and I want to reemphasize it. @Obzy If you're town, please disregard any suggestions about you being useless so far. Just keep attempting to be useful and you'll get the hang of it. You don't have to post as much as debears, djo, or even myself to be useful so don't get discouraged. However, don't hold back and give your input on things when you have input as it'll be helpful to town if we get some more input from you. Also I see debears has directed some questions at you so here's a chance to open up a bit. Yeah. That case is in no way saying omg he's scum. It's more of light pressure to get him to state some views, be more active in this. However, Rad, what I would like to know is that, although you are obviously following the thread in the shadows, you aren't posting to much. Why is that? To quote myself: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 10:23 Rad wrote: I will be pretty active this weekend, but I'm also a huge sc2 fan and mlg will be taking most of my attention. Definitely going to be reading/thinking/posting on downtime and/or boring matchups. I don't see much value in chiming in on every little argument. When I have a good read on something being a bad argument, I'll chime in and try to stop it (as I have been doing), or if it's a good argument, I'll try to help push it (not many of these so far, but some I'm letting go because conversation is good). I feel I've contributed a good amount so far and with it being 1am here, I'm trying to enjoy my night as well as contribute here and there. Ah ok understood. I'll expect more from you tomorrow. Also, how are you watching MLG? Gomtv??? I'm more casual sc2 but I like watching | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Just so you lurkers know I'm serious | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I see some possibly good points in those. I'll consider that. It is early game so you could possibly be reading too much into his posting. Something that I want to add to the reread part is that I find it unlikely that Djo would be rereading the thread, and only notice your joke as weird. He didn't notice obsy's posts, or guys like rad active lurking also, he seemed to shy away from me in the beginning and focus on policy/mechanics too much. What do you think of Clarity - i don't see too much wrong with his posting Rad - active lurking with mlg excuse | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 14:21 Obzy wrote: K - This is in response to debears post asking about me. I may screw up the formatting but hopefully not - Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Obsy has been around the thread. What I have found is that he seems to be actively lurking. Notice above post. Asking a pretty much useless question. It's newbie town/scum tell, so it's a null tell Yeah, I've been trying to read and refresh the thread regularly, I think I've been away from it for maybe an hour total since game start. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: He has a few one-liners like the above. Mostly, his posts do not take a strong stance and his opinions seem to be easily swayed. Again newbie town/scum tell. I've typed out a few posts that were a bit longer, but after re-reading, it didn't look like they did anything to advance town interests and the only thing they did was look spammy and unhelpful, so I've mostly been deleting them. I am, as mentioned, not really certain whether or not I'm judging things properly and taking a concrete stance on something that turns out to be stupid feels sort of dumb. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: I don't like this post. At all. Trying to come up with excuses to not be posting. Sure the thread is moving pretty decently (score one for town), but it's nothing huge and pretty easy to follow so far imo. No comment, it does move really fast. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Here he acts confused. He asks questions without answering them himself or even really attempting to answer them himself. I didn't really want to call you out directly. You responded really strongly to Alsn's red font, and it seemed counterproductive - but stifling discussion is a problem; given that you've been the primary generator of discussion. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Who have a tough time contributing early? Usually scum because 1) They are afraid to post and put themselves out there since they are guilty and know so 2) They know the players they are accusing are town and they can't actually find real evidence to use However, I admit this is also a newbie town trait. I don't have a problem with posting, I don't want to post meaninglessly. Writing about things that are actually useful and will help everybody is difficult, because when I look at what I've drafted it looks moronic and doesn't help anybody. Answering being directly called out is a lot easier, since I don't have to cast about for what to say, I just have to explain how I'm playing. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Honestly, this post is just absolutely worthless. It has no actual input. Says nothing about the current happenings of the thread. I wanted the conversation to shift away from talking about Cheese using jokes or not. It was a meaningless thing to discuss. Pointing it out so early and then dwelling on it for so long meant that it isn't a good scumtell for Cheese, while also making him aware of the fact he was doing it (Assuming that it WAS a scumtell, it no longer is). That entire discussion was just a waste of time, so I would say that it makes sense that my post, pointing it out, was equally useless. I definitely have been reading the thread, but haven't done a very good job of blending in. That's not really the point, anyways. You haven't been blending in, because you've been actively advancing the interests of town. I'm not a good enough judge to know if you're doing so genuinely, but you're the most active player currently (IMHO). I haven't read past this post yet, but I'll go ahead and do so now. If I see something, I'll comment. So what is your exact read on me? Scum, slightly scum, null, slightly town, or town? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 14:22 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 14:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 13:51 Djodref wrote: @ Cheese Regarding your pokemon joke explanation, I didn't like how you focused on the content instead of precising what were your motivations for this joke at that time. It would be acceptable if you just told me that it was genuine or an attempt to frame me (it occurred during last game after all). Nevertheless, I would agree that we should drop this discussion. But you are still on my radar. I made this exact mistake last game as scum, "Djo is not off the hook" thing. He wants to ensure that his suspicions for me are known. As town, he would not have to make this statement because he would have faith that we already know that. I'd like to point out that throughout the last newbie game, I kept pointing out that djo was still on my radar. I don't consider this a scum tell. Perhaps bad town, perhaps not, but certainly not necessarily scum tell (at least at this level, no idea if it is at a higher level). I considered it a "keep the pressure on" type move last game. I would agree it's a null tell on its own. But, I think if you combine it with his cruddy reasoning for attacking CC, and how he seemed to avoid me earlier, it makes some sense. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: [/b]Debears: Null. Regardless of if he's scum or town, he is getting the ball rolling which is good for us. Problem is... that was what he was doing in XXIX as well and he was scum in that. Older games suggest this is simply his meta so there is no read to be made about his opening. What I'm curious about is if he's going to pull a vanishing act in D2 / D3 again. @ Debears What's your ready on Obzy?. @Clarity I have newbie town read right now. He pointed out good reasoning for believing I might be town. His activity is good for now. I do want to see some legit scumhunting from him though. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 19:45 da0ud wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 14:05 debears wrote: ##Vote Dau0d Just so you lurkers know I'm serious @Debears You are being an active player, maybe too active and all over all arguments same as last game for me to get a read out of it. I will consider this more as a neutral townie-ish read but at least even if you were not town you do contribute and it will be easier to catch you later on. What I don't like about your post is to create noise in the voting thread. You are creating some activity by voting, unvoting, revoting, etc. I don't like that. You could have just FoSed me, and I would have agreed with you on that. I would have explained as well that the timezone differences do not help, but I will do my best to participate as much as I can. I will not post just for the sake of posting or fluffing though... You may not like it, but pressure votes are usually effective. Considering you're lack of activity last game, I want you to step it up. Hence, my vote on you. ##Unvote | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 20:58 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 10:21 debears wrote: @obsy Its mafia favored compared to the last setup. Only 9 players means a quicker game. A quicker game is better foe mafia since they don't have to fake their townieness for so long. Also look at the roles like medic. Medic can't target the same person twice (was it also that he can't target himself? I'm on my phone and i really don't want to check @ debears So, are you saying that the fact that we have a medic which cannot target the same person twice is such a big imbalance that this game is obviously mafia favored or are you role-fishing ? I'm not sure why you mention this in this post, could you elaborate ? Idk how you get that I'm role fishing from that. 1) I talked about the speed of the game and number of players being mafia favored 2) Combined with the roles setup, the game is pretty mafia favored imo How do you get that I'm role fishing for that when I in no way ask anyone if they are blue? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 21:23 Clarity_nl wrote: Where did I make a list? Unless you're talking about my reads on everyone, which I don't see can ever be a bad thing. You are the one who pointed out that it is a plurality lynch, and that we should not focus too deeply on a select few. My "list" forces everyone to comment on it, and perhaps gain insight on others through my observations or sees a flaw in my logic and helps me out by pointing it out. Yeah, I've read that lists are generally a mafia tell, or newbie town, but this is only the case if they do not contribute. Are you saying that my post will not contribute? Don't do lists like that. They really aren't that helpful. You ask too many questions and you can't pursue them, which is something scum want. Pick a couple people at a time to pursue and question them specifically on stuff. No more lists like that | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. A lot of people are dicking around... lots of oneliners, debears and cheesecake geez you're firing off the oneliners like crazy, you've already got 4 and 3 page filters respectively (75% of it post-gamestart) You've got tons of posts within 1 minute of each other, and often at least one of them has no content. I mean, posting a lot is great, but you're posting a lot of nothing. You're also posting shit with content, but can you PLEASE make your posts a little more substantial so it isn't impossible to read your filter? Would be really helpful. I like Rad's suspicion about people labeling CC being funny as a towntell. Shit, last game people were calling "only posts towntells" as scummy (including on people who turned out to be townie when lynched/NK'd) Cheesecake is also filling this thread with fluff a lot too. I don't kno wwhat to think about Alsn or debears. Could be one of the two is scum, need to see more from them on this topic. Don't like debears fluff. da0ud, please post. Don't pull what you did last game and vacation your life away. (If you're on vacation again, I'm going to be mildly annoyed you even chose to /in) Obviously, morning over there now. You've got time. ##Vote debears Your fluff, and your reaction against Alsn seem odd to me. Also, your claim of always being perfect about on at lynchtime. Now we can't even use it (in the future) as a scumtell on you because it'd turn into WIFOM. + Show Spoiler [off-topic complaint] + TL went down for several minutes as I'm typing this. Frustrating, can't finish the post because I want to check more filters! This post screams scummy to me for a few reasons. 1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning 2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while 3) He neglects that I actually do have content in my filter 4) He pretty much peaced out right after (was onlly posting for 45 minutes, made very few posts) 5) He casts suspicions on me and Cheese 6) Fails to refer the convo's btw me and alsn----me, CC, and Djo 7) He lectures us about not having conent in the thread, yet he hasn't been here, and he has provided literally nothing. what good does that do for town. 8) How do you know who the townies are, and how do you know they are more dedicated? The only ones posting alot are me, CC, and Djo with a little Rad and Clarity sprinkled in. So, since we are showing dedication, you obviously think we are town, yet you vote me and spread suspicion on cheese. Scumslip alert boys ##Vote Sylver Explain yourself | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
look at point 8 about the red text and scumslip | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 23:44 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 23:33 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 20:58 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 10:21 debears wrote: @obsy Its mafia favored compared to the last setup. Only 9 players means a quicker game. A quicker game is better foe mafia since they don't have to fake their townieness for so long. Also look at the roles like medic. Medic can't target the same person twice (was it also that he can't target himself? I'm on my phone and i really don't want to check @ debears So, are you saying that the fact that we have a medic which cannot target the same person twice is such a big imbalance that this game is obviously mafia favored or are you role-fishing ? I'm not sure why you mention this in this post, could you elaborate ? Idk how you get that I'm role fishing from that. 1) I talked about the speed of the game and number of players being mafia favored 2) Combined with the roles setup, the game is pretty mafia favored imo How do you get that I'm role fishing for that when I in no way ask anyone if they are blue? @ debears Maybe you were waiting for a possible medic to confirm you the fact that he cannot heal himself. I would expect a medic to carefully read his role's rules and I'm expecting you to know that medics usually cannot heal themselves. But you are asking this question nevertheless. I'm agreeing that the speed of this game is benefit the mafia but I don't see why the role setup would be mafia favored. It is only because the medic cannot heal the same person twice ? That, with no vig, no vet, yet the Mafia still have the same power roles for possiblities, except the godfather. Oh, and roleblocks aren't notified. Mainly it's the number of players and speed of the game combined with only having 2 mafia | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
What do you think of my points on Sylver? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 22:06 da0ud wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 22:01 Djodref wrote: Definition of casting suspicion: suggest that something or someone might be suspect I had to look up in the dictionary to be sure ^^ This coupled to the fact that his reasons to vote debears are insufficient in my eyes (you vote someone for some facts, not because he is fluffy without showing where he is fluffy) made sylverfire my top scumread right now. I see your point Djodref but I don't think because someone else votes another one for being a "poor" contirbutor and sees that as a scum read would make himself scum. He is trying to put pressure on Debears in order to get him to maybe post less and better content. What does me posting less exactly accomplish? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 00:06 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? I felt a bit of inig coming through in obzy. Overwhelmed, confused, but potentially useful to town. I didn't want to see him shy away due to how fast the conversations were coming and going here. I wanted him to open up and let his thoughts be known. Yes, I'll be watching MLG pretty much every minute it's on until it's done on Sunday. I do that for every MLG I get a chance to watch. My fiance is working all day today so all I got is MLG and this newbie mafia to pay attention to :D Might play a game here and there (ns2), but I expect a lot of my time today to be dedicated towards this game while watching MLG. As for my being more careful, it's based strictly on how I changed over the course of last game. I based my cases on a lot of stupid things and confirmation bias but couldn't ever realize it until after townies started flipping when I was sure they were scum. I want to avoid that this time and at least have some more solid reasoning when I decide to center in on someone. Rad, alot of early d1 cases will end up being stupid in hindsight. Hapa, a good player, even stated so in GSL III I believe. That doesn't excuse you from scumhunting. I understand getting Obsy to post to avoid having him lurk, but you seemed too focused on it. What are your thoughts on Dau0d/syler/Djo from the last couple of pages? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 00:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On the Sylverfyre vote... While I don't necessarily agree with a vote on Debears, I can see where he's coming from. A half-assed FoS on Alsn, asking all the questions to seem pro-town; it's exactly how he played last game. About Sylver's "scumslip"... hmm, perhaps. He could just be referring to the entire town (thread) in general. You don't get it. He said he likes town's dedication; The ones showing dedication are me, djo, you, rad, and clarity Yet, he votes me, who is definitely most dedicated right now (and he thinks the town is dedicated) See the mafia-oriented contradiction? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 00:29 da0ud wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 23:59 debears wrote: @Djo What do you think of my points on Sylver? your case against Sylver is way more constructed than Djo's initial scumslip read. I agree on most point apart maybe for the last point in red which might be over exagerated interpretation. Dont you think Debears ? Why is it over exaggerated? I need specifics | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 00:46 Rad wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2012 00:10 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 00:06 Rad wrote: On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? I felt a bit of inig coming through in obzy. Overwhelmed, confused, but potentially useful to town. I didn't want to see him shy away due to how fast the conversations were coming and going here. I wanted him to open up and let his thoughts be known. Yes, I'll be watching MLG pretty much every minute it's on until it's done on Sunday. I do that for every MLG I get a chance to watch. My fiance is working all day today so all I got is MLG and this newbie mafia to pay attention to :D Might play a game here and there (ns2), but I expect a lot of my time today to be dedicated towards this game while watching MLG. As for my being more careful, it's based strictly on how I changed over the course of last game. I based my cases on a lot of stupid things and confirmation bias but couldn't ever realize it until after townies started flipping when I was sure they were scum. I want to avoid that this time and at least have some more solid reasoning when I decide to center in on someone. Rad, alot of early d1 cases will end up being stupid in hindsight. Hapa, a good player, even stated so in GSL III I believe. That doesn't excuse you from scumhunting. I understand getting Obsy to post to avoid having him lurk, but you seemed too focused on it. What are your thoughts on Dau0d/syler/Djo from the last couple of pages? I haven't said I don't plan on scumhunting. What gives you that impression? You're coming to a false conclusion on what I've been talking about. Concerning obzy, what do you mean I seemed too focused on it? I tried to help him understand my stance on lurkers because he had some issues with it. Then I had to jump in and make sure he didn't get super demotivated because YOU were calling his posts useless and worthless. What does a town want a newbie town to do? Learn how to play the game and be useful to town. What does a scum want a newbie town to do? Feel scared at the thought of being terrible at the game, back off, say nothing out of fear. How exactly are you helping town by talking shit to the new guy at the beginning of d1? You are way overblowing my post on obsy. 1) I only said useless, not worthless. Stop putting words in my mouth 2) Yeah it's cool to encourage him, but you have to still scumhunt 3) You said that you were going to make a case later today and be more passive. How is that case going to come about if you aren't actively trying to find scum in the thread? I was in no way talking shit to him. I was stating my views on him. 1 sentence and 1 word in that sentence is hardly talking shit. In no way was it an, 'OH HES DEFINITELY SCUM GUYS'. It was a "you're posts are slightly scummy, defend yourself and contribute". Why are you overblowing my post? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I concede on the worthless point. Also, there are two ways of encouraging newbies to post 1) Pressure 2) Kindness I chose 1 initially. Notice my reaction after Obsy responds. Would you say that is talking shit to him? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
A little bit of context for the useless and worthless words. They were used to group 3 players, not just obsy On November 03 2012 13:28 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:26 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:22 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:11 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:04 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay re-reading your post you're saying we shouldn't focus on one/two people, instead considering everyone and not consolidate on a lynch? @ Clarity Exactly, I think you everyone should just vote for his top scumread while giving enough reason to do so and then we start again from there and see who is likely to be lynched, be it 2 or 3 players. I think it's the best way to use plurality lynch. Considering only 2 possibilities narrows the discussion and allows mafia players to have some excuse to lynch town (cf Cheese last game lynching daoud in the daoud/ini match-up). The downfall is that the end of the day could be a bit messy. seriously.....why are we having to explain this? 1) Scumhunt 2) Vote for your top scumread 3) When the voting comes down to 2 candidates and lynch is near, pick one of two said candidates and give reasoning why you're voting them Is that clear enough for all of you to understand? Please stop talking about policy @ debears My point is that it would benefit us to consider more than 2 candidates for the lynch. Anyway it's too late to discuss about it now, I was just answering Clarity's question about it. By the way it's not policy, it's lynch mechanics More semantics, anyways it's useless. What do you think of Obsy's, Dau0d's, and Sylver's epic uselessness so far? Also, why didn't I bash him for being general if I'm so set on shutting him out? Why did I ask a very specific question that is easy to answer in response? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Debears on the other hand is OMGUS voting. His points 1 and 2 contradicts each other, his point 8 mentions a supposed scum slip when the paragraph is merely an answer to what sylver thinks about lurker policy, something which debears brought up in the first place! Saying that the town seems more dedicated when there's not a single truly lurking player in the game(at least considering the short amount of time the game has been up) seems about as genuine an answer that one can give at this point. Give me some specifics on why my points are wrong | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: You're reading what you want to read. Remember that I spent last game mostly obsing, and it was depressing watching town lose because of inactivity when 2 out of 3 scum had blatantly labelled scum. I said what I said because I don't WANT that to happen this game. And I don't think any of these 9 players will do that. Just because "oh, I'm the most active" doesn't mean you're the only one contributing. I am expecting a better game this time, and predicting that we aren't going to need to enact a policy lynch on lurking, or have town suffer from excessive lurking. Why are you trying to read more into what I said anyway? Maybe I said townies because I am scum. Maybe I said townies because I'm town. You can't read into it - it's just a dumb WIFOM loop. Or maybe, I'm just talking about the whole friggin game and you're reading WAY TOO MUCH into arbitrary word choice. (technically, even scum are "part of the town" when it comes to posting voting and lynching) I reiterate: Your vote is both OMGUS and backed up by arbitrary "scum tells". Also it's interesting that you're defending your own "make them post with pressure" while OMGUS voting me. You know your OMGUS vote is doing here? Nothing. It's just keeping my pressure on you, because they remove any reason. (Press F5 to check thread again) I liked "Confidence" a whole hell of a lot better than "Useless." Useless reeks of hostility. Last game literally has nothing to do with voting me for "fluff" when I do have content. You weren't active. You hadn't posted anything. That's no content up to the point you vote for me in my view. The "townies showing dedication" comment is not WIFOM at all. WIFOM is whether a scum would make a certain action (nks for example) The townies comment is about you contradicting what you said You either thought or know that the actives are townies, based on your word choice. You vote one of the actives Yeah I have my vote on you because I find your inital post pretty scummy. I'm keeping my vote on you because I want to pressure you back. OMGUS? Sure. Warranted if I find you scummy? Hell yes. And about useless. It reeks of "hostility". Does it reek of scumminess? If not, your just trying to cast suspicion on me for bullshit reasons | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 01:44 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 23:44 debears wrote: 1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning 2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while You say it's a big post and that it must have taken a while to write, yet you don't even acknowledge the possibility that maybe that's why you weren't around any more? Because it had taken him a lot of time to write it and you had simply left at that point? Given your point 2) I don't see how you can at the same time accuse him of deliberately waiting until you were gone. Alsn, you don't find the timing convenient at all? It seems he had covered the whole thread at that point. What's the best way to discredit someone? Waiting til they aren't there to argue with you | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
What do you think of Djo's seriousness attitude this game? His personality seems different from last game in that regard, where he seemed much more amicable | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:01 Rad wrote: @debears At one point in last game, djo said something like "debears, you know my scum play is better than this!" Think it was right before he was lynched. What's your take on djo's past scum game and his play this game? I don't really want to read much into his past scum game or his first town game, besides his general personality. HIs last game was much more indicative of how I believe he will play from now on. And I do think he is acting different off the top of my head. I'll have to research though before I can say definitively. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
the reason why about his first 2: he was playing the noob card and was his first time playing both sides | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:04 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + The fact that you keep bringing this up made me go look it up. Seriously, he posted his case 6 minutes after you posted your good night post. If he was truly being deliberate about wanting you to be gone, don't you think he would've waited a little longer? I didn't even realise how massive a contradiction your points 1) and 2) were until now.On November 04 2012 01:58 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 01:44 Alsn wrote: On November 03 2012 23:44 debears wrote: 1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning 2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while You say it's a big post and that it must have taken a while to write, yet you don't even acknowledge the possibility that maybe that's why you weren't around any more? Because it had taken him a lot of time to write it and you had simply left at that point? Given your point 2) I don't see how you can at the same time accuse him of deliberately waiting until you were gone. Alsn, you don't find the timing convenient at all? It seems he had covered the whole thread at that point. What's the best way to discredit someone? Waiting til they aren't there to argue with you You are seriously suggesting that he had typed up his introduction post, figured if he was going to frame you as scum that it would be best to sit and F5 spam until you left, and then immediately post it? That's about the most far fetched conspiracy theory I've ever heard. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=374466&user=73803 here's his filter from last game Closest thing to around 14:00 was at 13:30 and that was only once the entire game. Very odd timing from him | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:08 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:03 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 Rad wrote: @debears At one point in last game, djo said something like "debears, you know my scum play is better than this!" Think it was right before he was lynched. What's your take on djo's past scum game and his play this game? I don't really want to read much into his past scum game or his first town game, besides his general personality. HIs last game was much more indicative of how I believe he will play from now on. And I do think he is acting different off the top of my head. I'll have to research though before I can say definitively. I only bring it up at this point because you were suggesting a difference between last game (town) and this game (unknown). I feel like he's pretty confident in his scum play due to his claim about it last game. I think you could bring in some interesting insight on that point since you're the one he made that final appeal to before his lynching. His last game was, well, pretty terrible yeah? If he's town this game, I'd think he'd want to try to take things a bit differently because he even admitted last game that he thought he was scummy, and didn't really blame us for the mislynch. Differences between last game and this game probably won't say much because of that. It's a fine line to walk with his meta. If I am going to use meta this game on Djo, it's gonna be from last game. The newbie card from his first two make his style less predictable. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:08 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 01:56 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: You're reading what you want to read. Remember that I spent last game mostly obsing, and it was depressing watching town lose because of inactivity when 2 out of 3 scum had blatantly labelled scum. I said what I said because I don't WANT that to happen this game. And I don't think any of these 9 players will do that. Just because "oh, I'm the most active" doesn't mean you're the only one contributing. I am expecting a better game this time, and predicting that we aren't going to need to enact a policy lynch on lurking, or have town suffer from excessive lurking. Why are you trying to read more into what I said anyway? Maybe I said townies because I am scum. Maybe I said townies because I'm town. You can't read into it - it's just a dumb WIFOM loop. Or maybe, I'm just talking about the whole friggin game and you're reading WAY TOO MUCH into arbitrary word choice. (technically, even scum are "part of the town" when it comes to posting voting and lynching) I reiterate: Your vote is both OMGUS and backed up by arbitrary "scum tells". Also it's interesting that you're defending your own "make them post with pressure" while OMGUS voting me. You know your OMGUS vote is doing here? Nothing. It's just keeping my pressure on you, because they remove any reason. (Press F5 to check thread again) I liked "Confidence" a whole hell of a lot better than "Useless." Useless reeks of hostility. Last game literally has nothing to do with voting me for "fluff" when I do have content. You weren't active. You hadn't posted anything. That's no content up to the point you vote for me in my view. The "townies showing dedication" comment is not WIFOM at all. WIFOM is whether a scum would make a certain action (nks for example) The townies comment is about you contradicting what you said You either thought or know that the actives are townies, based on your word choice. You vote one of the actives Yeah I have my vote on you because I find your inital post pretty scummy. I'm keeping my vote on you because I want to pressure you back. OMGUS? Sure. Warranted if I find you scummy? Hell yes. And about useless. It reeks of "hostility". Does it reek of scumminess? If not, your just trying to cast suspicion on me for bullshit reasons I come to thread. I see it has exploded by like 10 pages. Then when I more closely examine those 10 pages, I see a lot of fluff. I was disappointed, and I expressed as much. I was calling out the actives for posting a lot of garbage. It isn't condusive to scumhunting to post "LOL" as the entire content of a post. It fills up filters and threads with emptyness. Hostility breeds a bad environment for town be free to speak their minds, a bad environment for scumhunting. I'm not saying you're scum by saying you're hostile, but I'm saying hostility isn't going to help town. Case in point: Nack was being pretty hostile. In the end, he had the right reads, but had a very hard time convincing people of them because he was so hostile. Bad for town. I can see your point. But I am being completely arrogant like Nackht? I'm being aggressive (hostile), but is it within reason? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:14 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:08 sylverfyre wrote: On November 04 2012 01:56 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: You're reading what you want to read. Remember that I spent last game mostly obsing, and it was depressing watching town lose because of inactivity when 2 out of 3 scum had blatantly labelled scum. I said what I said because I don't WANT that to happen this game. And I don't think any of these 9 players will do that. Just because "oh, I'm the most active" doesn't mean you're the only one contributing. I am expecting a better game this time, and predicting that we aren't going to need to enact a policy lynch on lurking, or have town suffer from excessive lurking. Why are you trying to read more into what I said anyway? Maybe I said townies because I am scum. Maybe I said townies because I'm town. You can't read into it - it's just a dumb WIFOM loop. Or maybe, I'm just talking about the whole friggin game and you're reading WAY TOO MUCH into arbitrary word choice. (technically, even scum are "part of the town" when it comes to posting voting and lynching) I reiterate: Your vote is both OMGUS and backed up by arbitrary "scum tells". Also it's interesting that you're defending your own "make them post with pressure" while OMGUS voting me. You know your OMGUS vote is doing here? Nothing. It's just keeping my pressure on you, because they remove any reason. (Press F5 to check thread again) I liked "Confidence" a whole hell of a lot better than "Useless." Useless reeks of hostility. Last game literally has nothing to do with voting me for "fluff" when I do have content. You weren't active. You hadn't posted anything. That's no content up to the point you vote for me in my view. The "townies showing dedication" comment is not WIFOM at all. WIFOM is whether a scum would make a certain action (nks for example) The townies comment is about you contradicting what you said You either thought or know that the actives are townies, based on your word choice. You vote one of the actives Yeah I have my vote on you because I find your inital post pretty scummy. I'm keeping my vote on you because I want to pressure you back. OMGUS? Sure. Warranted if I find you scummy? Hell yes. And about useless. It reeks of "hostility". Does it reek of scumminess? If not, your just trying to cast suspicion on me for bullshit reasons I come to thread. I see it has exploded by like 10 pages. Then when I more closely examine those 10 pages, I see a lot of fluff. I was disappointed, and I expressed as much. I was calling out the actives for posting a lot of garbage. It isn't condusive to scumhunting to post "LOL" as the entire content of a post. It fills up filters and threads with emptyness. Hostility breeds a bad environment for town be free to speak their minds, a bad environment for scumhunting. I'm not saying you're scum by saying you're hostile, but I'm saying hostility isn't going to help town. Case in point: Nack was being pretty hostile. In the end, he had the right reads, but had a very hard time convincing people of them because he was so hostile. Bad for town. I duly apologize for some of my one liners last night, I just couldn't stop laughing at Djo's accusation hence the LOL. And yeah, I agree that most of the fluff wasn't really doing much. In terms of hostility = anti-town, I would say so at this level. Look at people like Kush who are genuinely hostile regardless of alignment, and get lynched/shot right away. Kush is hostile in a different way as town. The problem is that people assume hostility = anti-town. Look at marv's games. He's a boss at hostility as town | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:15 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + That 13:30 post also happened to be... drumroll please. His introductory post.On November 04 2012 02:08 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:04 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:58 debears wrote: The fact that you keep bringing this up made me go look it up. Seriously, he posted his case 6 minutes after you posted your good night post. If he was truly being deliberate about wanting you to be gone, don't you think he would've waited a little longer? I didn't even realise how massive a contradiction your points 1) and 2) were until now.On November 04 2012 01:44 Alsn wrote: On November 03 2012 23:44 debears wrote: 1) Sylver had obviously been following the thread before this post, yet he posts it AFTER I leave the thread. This is especially alarming considering he suddenly accuses and votes me for terribad reasoning 2) It's a big post, showing that he had it written for a while You say it's a big post and that it must have taken a while to write, yet you don't even acknowledge the possibility that maybe that's why you weren't around any more? Because it had taken him a lot of time to write it and you had simply left at that point? Given your point 2) I don't see how you can at the same time accuse him of deliberately waiting until you were gone. Alsn, you don't find the timing convenient at all? It seems he had covered the whole thread at that point. What's the best way to discredit someone? Waiting til they aren't there to argue with you You are seriously suggesting that he had typed up his introduction post, figured if he was going to frame you as scum that it would be best to sit and F5 spam until you left, and then immediately post it? That's about the most far fetched conspiracy theory I've ever heard. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=374466&user=73803 here's his filter from last game Closest thing to around 14:00 was at 13:30 and that was only once the entire game. Very odd timing from him You do have a point there lol :/ | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:21 Djodref wrote: @ Cheese Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. <snip> Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 01:08 sylverfyre wrote: <snip> I'm not saying townies will be more dedicated this game. I'm saying PLAYERS will be more dedicated this game. <snip> Is this not denial ? On a side note, regarding my seriousness in this game, it's because I don't want to play like last game where everybody was suspicious of me. But it doesn't work out so well Djo, that's a damned if you do, damned if you don't line of thinking. I don't have a problem that he explained it that way since town or scum would do that. However, his original word choice and contradiction with it was scummy | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:22 Alsn wrote: I'd say the latter half of your filter is mostly you defending yourself, which isn't fluff in the slightest. However off the top of my head I remember you addressing the fucking observers at one point, and sylver certainly wasn't wrong in saying that you've seemed almost deliberate in "splitting" your posts such that your thoughts are less condensed. Of course my thoughts weren't condensed early d1. People were in and out. There's not much to go on. I was simply reacting to other's posts and giving my thoughts. I did condense my thoughts on Obsy and Sylver cuz there's something to go on there. I had jokes. so what? They are easy to distinguish and they are one line. Honestly if you have a hard time determining that....well idk lol | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:25 Alsn wrote: Djod, I'd say you should just play like you want to play, within reason. Spending too much time thinking about what other people will think about you is what scum do. That is a great point. Djo why are you so concerned about not being suspicious? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.[quote] You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:29 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:25 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:25 Alsn wrote: Djod, I'd say you should just play like you want to play, within reason. Spending too much time thinking about what other people will think about you is what scum do. That is a great point. Djo why are you so concerned about not being suspicious? This one's obvious guys. You were both in last game. He was town and looked more scummy than anyone else right up to getting lynched for it. Obviously if he's town here he wouldn't want to have that happen again. This is a bad WIFOM line of questions. Rad, scum naturally care more about being suspicious. If you're townie, you know your motives are true, so it's way easier to defend yourself if people find you suspicious. It gives off a feeling of a guilty conscience on him right now | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.[quote] Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? [quote] For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
@Alsn What do you think of Djo's pregame comments On November 02 2012 13:37 Djodref wrote: I'll tunnel you this time debears ! Whatever read I have on you, I shall conclude with the opposite when compared to his lack of jumping on me earlier and even now. It seems like he doesn't want to engage with me. Why? 1) If he's town, he must think I'm town and doesn't want to mislead everyone 2) If he's scum, he knows I'm town and wants to avoid arguing with me since it would put him in the spotlight I find that, if Djo was town, he would follow up on his pre game comments since it'd be in good fun and since he wouldn't know whether I'm mafia or not | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:34 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + Here's the thing. I don't have a problem with you posting some fluff, the problem is that you keep rationalising it as if somehow we shouldn't pay any attention to it. It's the same kind of behaviour I meant with regards to how you responded to my 99% lie post. You keep acting as if we need to forgive anything we find scummy about you as "look guys, I'm pro-town, don't worry about anything".On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel I want you to acknowledge the content more than the fluff. The fluff is a null read by itself. If i have no content with fluff, then we have a problem. But I have content, which means the fluff is null | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:36 Alsn wrote: I refuse to answer pre-game stuff on principle. Please don't bring it up again. Very well. It still seems he's uneager to engage with me. He pretty much just sat on the sidelines when you and I were going at it | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?[quote] So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: [quote] How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity? and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 03:15 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 03:03 debears wrote: @Sylver Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity? and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key We're picking out lynch candidates already? Weren't you the one who said we should vote our big scumtells first? I'm not ready to call you a lynch candidate. It's nowhere near lynch time, we still have more than 24 hours. We still haven't seen a lot from some players. Just answer the question. If you were considering lynch candidates, would you consider me based on my activity? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Then why did you say this? The biggest red flag to me was: On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote: Btw to all obs I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town. If activity is not something you lynch on, then why is my inference of activity the biggest red flag for you? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
The biggest red flag to me was: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote: Btw to all obs I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 03:38 sylverfyre wrote: At the time, your posts were a lot of oneliners. If you have a 30 page post of oneliners (instead of longer posts, with more than one sentence of information per post) then it's much harder to read your filter. Which is bad for town. All I'm asking there is to up your words per post and cool down on the tripleposting. It's worth noting, you're actually doing what I'm asking of you right now, even as you're calling me out for being frustrated at you for it. Thanks, I guess? While you consider a long filter bad for town, have you considered that an active town, especially super active town, is extremely bad for scum. They lose control of the thread, and have a threat who is invested and reads things over. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 03:51 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + And artificially increasing your filter is what? At best it's a genuine attempt at making the observers laugh about something, at worst you're scum trying to hide behind Hapa's advice that he has posted after/during almost every single newbie lately, that lynching the most active player is almost always a mislynch. Neither of those help us find scum.On November 04 2012 03:46 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 03:38 sylverfyre wrote: At the time, your posts were a lot of oneliners. If you have a 30 page post of oneliners (instead of longer posts, with more than one sentence of information per post) then it's much harder to read your filter. Which is bad for town. All I'm asking there is to up your words per post and cool down on the tripleposting. It's worth noting, you're actually doing what I'm asking of you right now, even as you're calling me out for being frustrated at you for it. Thanks, I guess? While you consider a long filter bad for town, have you considered that an active town, especially super active town, is extremely bad for scum. They lose control of the thread, and have a threat who is invested and reads things over. Where do you get that I'm artificially increasing my filter? I'm not posting for the sake of filter. I'm posting for the sake of discussion and finding scum | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
It could be. I find his earlier actions scummier than his wording though. Anyways, ##Unvote ##Vote Dau0d Dude is most definitely the most inactive player right now | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 05:31 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 05:16 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 05:12 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 05:02 Clarity_nl wrote: Although caution can be a good thing Rad, you should be careful. If you don't have enough information to make a read make sure to get more information. It would be too easy for scum to go: "Ah, I dunno, don't really have any reads" You shouldn't be getting away with this as town. I'm curious as to any cases you might make in the next 24 hours. I haven't shown any reason for you to believe I won't be scum hunting plenty between now and end of d1. Well yeah but.... you haven't shown me any reason that you WILL either. You mean besides my persistent scum hunting against debears? What do you want me to do, scum hunt against everyone at the same time? I try to comment on other people's arguments as they come up but I can only handle so much at once. Your "scumhunting" has been a refusal to answer a simple question I asked you and then harp on me about wanting someone to be more specific in their accusation to 1) Figure out how much fluff you think I have 2) Figure out if you're possibly mafia trying to keep an escape door by being general You should really reconsider reading what exactly I was asking for. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 06:22 Alsn wrote: Of course scum worries about trying to show that they are acting with pure intentions. But you're saying it like just because one is worried about others not thinking you have pure intentions that if they are, it must be a slip. Do you think that a townie doesn't have to be worried about what everyone else thinks of them? Alsn, in my experience, townies are much less worried about how they are viewed among the town. They are more worried about scumhunting since town know they are innocent. Mafia, on the other hand, must try to "scumhunt" while appearing town, due to a guilty conscience. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 06:41 Alsn wrote: Show nested quote + Less so maybe, but reading for example the newbie guide will tell you that a townie's first priority is to establish your own innocence. If that doesn't mean town needs to worry about their image, I don't know what it means. If you don't make sure that you look genuine, it would mean any scum voting for you seemingly had good reasons for doing so. Hell, just look at my play during XXVIII, I made pretty much everyone in the game(including you) suspect me because I wasn't careful enough about being consistent which derailed the thread and allowed SDM to flawlessly vote me out of the game without arousing any suspicion whatsoever. I spent the better part of four days trying to "fix my reputation" but in the end ultimately failed to do so, causing my lynch with arguably almost no benefit for town at all.On November 04 2012 06:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 06:22 Alsn wrote: Of course scum worries about trying to show that they are acting with pure intentions. But you're saying it like just because one is worried about others not thinking you have pure intentions that if they are, it must be a slip. Do you think that a townie doesn't have to be worried about what everyone else thinks of them? Alsn, in my experience, townies are much less worried about how they are viewed among the town. They are more worried about scumhunting since town know they are innocent. Mafia, on the other hand, must try to "scumhunt" while appearing town, due to a guilty conscience. I'm merely saying that you can't accuse someone just because "scum would think that way!" if it's actually also true that town should think that way too. You can just as well make the case that it was a town slip(like, say, the one he made in XXIX that made everyone in the thread wrongly suspect him for 4 days straight?). I think if we keep paying attention to "weak slips" just because we managed to nail kush on it that one time, we haven't learned anything at all from XXIX. It makes sense. The one thing that you should consider is that as town, I don't feel "pressure" to make cases or appear I'm making cases. I just want to find scum. Djo's words implies that he feels pressure that he must appear townie, and I don't think that townies actually feel pressure to prove they're innocent, unless it's lylo. A townie may want to appear innocent, but if they don't day1 it's not a big deal. Scum want to from the very beginning of day1 | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
He's either a strongly confirmation biased town or a scum. His 180 on me leads me to believe he's scum Summary: - Telling others how to post. Saying "let's get off topic x" - t - Talking about last game - these types of things are easy for scum to say. It makes them look like they are contributing without . doing so and care about the town - Excuse to not make reads - i don't get why you wouldn't make reads as town. If you're wrong, you're wrong and there's no shame in that. If you're scum, not making reads is good since you can just sheep later - 180 on me - His 180 and sudden aggressiveness on my obsy post doesn't seem like it was his idea. It feels coached/coming from his partner (this point I would really like some input on from everyone) and it most definitely doesn't feel like a genuine change of suspicion about me - refusal to answer my % fluff question - it wasn't a hard question to answer and he wouldn't do it Thread cop mentality + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 11:32 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:24 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Rad wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Djodref wrote: @ Rad That's my problem with a lurker policy this game, I think that it can be used only against daoud or Obzy (maybe sylverfire). I think it would be much better to call directly these players for lurking rather agreeing on a policy which could be a perfect excuse for the mafia to push a mislynch on them, assuming that they are town. It's a small game and if you have a problem with the activity level of anyone, you can call them on it, no need for a policy. @Djo If no one lurks, the lurker policy has done its job. That's all it's there to do, stop people from lurking. Nothing more, nothing less. Let's move on shall we? The policy prevents mafia players from lurking but it doesn't stop anyone from being inactive. And the policy is the best excuse ever for mafia to lynch an inactive town player with IRL issues. This game is full of active players and small enough to call directly a player on active lurking, blending in or pure lurking. I don't think we need the policy and I'm going to get very suspicious on players lynching according to the policy only. You're over-thinking this. KISS - keep it simple stupid Let's lynch lurkers so we can guarantee only active players and increase our chance to get good reads. Also, let's move on from this debate as it's cluttering up the thread. Here Rad says "let's move on from policy", yet he fails to offer a suggestion. On November 03 2012 11:42 Rad wrote: @djo Not sure, something useful I'm sure debears will think of something if he's shooting for a filter size that only you could possibly achieve. He then says that he wants me to come up with something. He is taking a backseat. On November 04 2012 00:34 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 00:20 Djodref wrote: On November 04 2012 00:12 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 00:03 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 23:48 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 23:44 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 23:33 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 20:58 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 10:21 debears wrote: @obsy Its mafia favored compared to the last setup. Only 9 players means a quicker game. A quicker game is better foe mafia since they don't have to fake their townieness for so long. Also look at the roles like medic. Medic can't target the same person twice (was it also that he can't target himself? I'm on my phone and i really don't want to check @ debears So, are you saying that the fact that we have a medic which cannot target the same person twice is such a big imbalance that this game is obviously mafia favored or are you role-fishing ? I'm not sure why you mention this in this post, could you elaborate ? Idk how you get that I'm role fishing from that. 1) I talked about the speed of the game and number of players being mafia favored 2) Combined with the roles setup, the game is pretty mafia favored imo How do you get that I'm role fishing for that when I in no way ask anyone if they are blue? @ debears Maybe you were waiting for a possible medic to confirm you the fact that he cannot heal himself. I would expect a medic to carefully read his role's rules and I'm expecting you to know that medics usually cannot heal themselves. But you are asking this question nevertheless. I'm agreeing that the speed of this game is benefit the mafia but I don't see why the role setup would be mafia favored. It is only because the medic cannot heal the same person twice ? That, with no vig, no vet, yet the Mafia still have the same power roles for possiblities, except the godfather. Oh, and roleblocks aren't notified. Mainly it's the number of players and speed of the game combined with only having 2 mafia @ debears I think that cop and jailkeeper are powerful roles, we might not have both of them though. Vig is not so good in newbie games (could you confirm this one, Rad?). Please also note that a framer couldn't use his power on his mafia partner. Anyway, I don't think the setup is imbalanced from a role point of view and I was surprised that you were only mentioning the medic. I'm not totally satisfied with your explanations but it was a minor thing. I'm more interested in sylverfire and daoud right now. Can the framer frame himself ? Regarding your bolded question to me, what do you want me to confirm? Define "good." Good for town winning or good for me having a blast? Cause I had a blast, even though I got the wrong shot, it was so fun trying to figure out who to use it on, and I submitted the kill request the very last second I could (probably why the night post took longer, I bet thrawn had to rewrite it). Had I gotten a scum with the shot, who knows what that would have done to me, hell it might have pushed my confirmation bias even further. Certainly I would have centered in on cheese 100% if kush flipped scum that game. Anyway, "good for town"? I have no idea. Good for getting me super interested last game? You bet. Also, it taught me some lessons I would not have learned otherwise. @ Rad Of course I was meaning good for town The risk of having of town player killed by a vigilante is greater in newbie games so I don't think this role really benefits the town. I wanted to take last game as an example so that's why I was mentioning you. Anyway, let's drop this right now and focus and more important matters. I'm urging you to answer debears and give your input on the latest events in the thread @Djo I intend to answer debears. It's a question that requires some research and thought. Let's try to make this game cleaner in terms of the filters. Give people time to answer questions rather than restate that a question is waiting to be answered. It's of no use to town. If you find someone has skipped answering a question for a long period of time, that's when you can jump in and point it out. Talking about last game + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2012 00:12 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 00:03 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 23:48 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 23:44 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 23:33 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 20:58 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 10:21 debears wrote: @obsy Its mafia favored compared to the last setup. Only 9 players means a quicker game. A quicker game is better foe mafia since they don't have to fake their townieness for so long. Also look at the roles like medic. Medic can't target the same person twice (was it also that he can't target himself? I'm on my phone and i really don't want to check @ debears So, are you saying that the fact that we have a medic which cannot target the same person twice is such a big imbalance that this game is obviously mafia favored or are you role-fishing ? I'm not sure why you mention this in this post, could you elaborate ? Idk how you get that I'm role fishing from that. 1) I talked about the speed of the game and number of players being mafia favored 2) Combined with the roles setup, the game is pretty mafia favored imo How do you get that I'm role fishing for that when I in no way ask anyone if they are blue? @ debears Maybe you were waiting for a possible medic to confirm you the fact that he cannot heal himself. I would expect a medic to carefully read his role's rules and I'm expecting you to know that medics usually cannot heal themselves. But you are asking this question nevertheless. I'm agreeing that the speed of this game is benefit the mafia but I don't see why the role setup would be mafia favored. It is only because the medic cannot heal the same person twice ? That, with no vig, no vet, yet the Mafia still have the same power roles for possiblities, except the godfather. Oh, and roleblocks aren't notified. Mainly it's the number of players and speed of the game combined with only having 2 mafia @ debears I think that cop and jailkeeper are powerful roles, we might not have both of them though. Vig is not so good in newbie games (could you confirm this one, Rad?). Please also note that a framer couldn't use his power on his mafia partner. Anyway, I don't think the setup is imbalanced from a role point of view and I was surprised that you were only mentioning the medic. I'm not totally satisfied with your explanations but it was a minor thing. I'm more interested in sylverfire and daoud right now. Can the framer frame himself ? Regarding your bolded question to me, what do you want me to confirm? Define "good." Good for town winning or good for me having a blast? Cause I had a blast, even though I got the wrong shot, it was so fun trying to figure out who to use it on, and I submitted the kill request the very last second I could (probably why the night post took longer, I bet thrawn had to rewrite it). Had I gotten a scum with the shot, who knows what that would have done to me, hell it might have pushed my confirmation bias even further. Certainly I would have centered in on cheese 100% if kush flipped scum that game. Anyway, "good for town"? I have no idea. Good for getting me super interested last game? You bet. Also, it taught me some lessons I would not have learned otherwise. Here Rad goes way off tangent about how much fun he had as vig last game. Wtf does that have to do with this game and Djo's question? On November 03 2012 11:54 Rad wrote: I used newbie card 2-3 times last game, I think. I don't really know what to say about it. When I used it last game, I meant it, clearly, as I was town, and that was my very first game. So, I was just being honest. I think it's an interesting thing to bring up though, because had it not been brought up last game, I would have used it much more, and it probably would have hurt more than helped. Since it was brought up at the beginning, I at least attempted not to use it, and only used it when I felt it was the only explanation. So I would agree, attempt to stay away from the newbie card if at all possible. Here he mentions how he played the newbie card last game. What good does this post do? We already know playing th newbie card is bad. I believe Djo had already mentioned it. This is the type of post that makes it look like you are contributing without actually doing so. Excuse for not making reads for 1st half of d1 + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 15:14 Rad wrote: @Obzy Tomorrow and Sunday I will be trying to figure out some sort of a case for sure. I made a lot of terrible reads my first game (newbie XXIX) that lead to dead townies, so I'm going to be trying to approach it differently this time (more like how I was approaching the game near end of XXIX, not that I expect you to know what I mean by that, but everyone else in this game might understand the differences). Why do we need to know you aren't making reads for the first half of d1? Why does making cases on townies by accident when the mafia is heavily interfering have any influence on this game? You don't even know if mafia is active or not if you are town. Everyone makes bad cases. I don't see others making excuses for not making reads because of it. It sounds like you are trying to defend yourself when you have no reason to, which is inherent of a guilty conscience. Sudden 180 on me + Show Spoiler + After my obsy post, Rad didn't immediately jump on it saying I was attacking Obsy. This is what he said On November 03 2012 13:42 Rad wrote: @Clarity That's a great point and I want to reemphasize it. @Obzy If you're town, please disregard any suggestions about you being useless so far. Just keep attempting to be useful and you'll get the hang of it. You don't have to post as much as debears, djo, or even myself to be useful so don't get discouraged. However, don't hold back and give your input on things when you have input as it'll be helpful to town if we get some more input from you. Also I see debears has directed some questions at you so here's a chance to open up a bit. In this post, he doesn't seem to think I'm attacking Obsy. He seems to think that I'm giving Obsy some questions to kick start his participation. Read the last line. Yet, he suddenly turns into this after I ask him for reads on sylver/dau0d/djo and tell him there's no reason to not scumhunt because you might make a few bad cases On November 04 2012 00:46 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 00:10 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 00:06 Rad wrote: On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? I felt a bit of inig coming through in obzy. Overwhelmed, confused, but potentially useful to town. I didn't want to see him shy away due to how fast the conversations were coming and going here. I wanted him to open up and let his thoughts be known. Yes, I'll be watching MLG pretty much every minute it's on until it's done on Sunday. I do that for every MLG I get a chance to watch. My fiance is working all day today so all I got is MLG and this newbie mafia to pay attention to :D Might play a game here and there (ns2), but I expect a lot of my time today to be dedicated towards this game while watching MLG. As for my being more careful, it's based strictly on how I changed over the course of last game. I based my cases on a lot of stupid things and confirmation bias but couldn't ever realize it until after townies started flipping when I was sure they were scum. I want to avoid that this time and at least have some more solid reasoning when I decide to center in on someone. Rad, alot of early d1 cases will end up being stupid in hindsight. Hapa, a good player, even stated so in GSL III I believe. That doesn't excuse you from scumhunting. I understand getting Obsy to post to avoid having him lurk, but you seemed too focused on it. What are your thoughts on Dau0d/syler/Djo from the last couple of pages? I haven't said I don't plan on scumhunting. What gives you that impression? You're coming to a false conclusion on what I've been talking about. Concerning obzy, what do you mean I seemed too focused on it? I tried to help him understand my stance on lurkers because he had some issues with it. Then I had to jump in and make sure he didn't get super demotivated because YOU were calling his posts useless and worthless. What does a town want a newbie town to do? Learn how to play the game and be useful to town. What does a scum want a newbie town to do? Feel scared at the thought of being terrible at the game, back off, say nothing out of fear. How exactly are you helping town by talking shit to the new guy at the beginning of d1? He is super defensive. He suddenly changes his opinions on my post on obsy for literally no reason. Oh and I posted this earlier after my original obsy post. On November 03 2012 13:47 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:42 Rad wrote: @Clarity That's a great point and I want to reemphasize it. @Obzy If you're town, please disregard any suggestions about you being useless so far. Just keep attempting to be useful and you'll get the hang of it. You don't have to post as much as debears, djo, or even myself to be useful so don't get discouraged. However, don't hold back and give your input on things when you have input as it'll be helpful to town if we get some more input from you. Also I see debears has directed some questions at you so here's a chance to open up a bit. Yeah. That case is in no way saying omg he's scum. It's more of light pressure to get him to state some views, be more active in this. However, Rad, what I would like to know is that, although you are obviously following the thread in the shadows, you aren't posting to much. Why is that? My intent on making a post on obsy seems pretty clear to me that I was trying to get him to be active. Yet, Rad somehow interprets my post as an attack on Obsy's ego. On November 04 2012 01:27 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 01:16 debears wrote: @Rad I concede on the worthless point. Also, there are two ways of encouraging newbies to post 1) Pressure 2) Kindness I chose 1 initially. Notice my reaction after Obsy responds. Would you say that is talking shit to him? Pressure's fine with me. That wasn't pressure though. That was an attack on his ego and the only motivation I can see for it is to shut him down fast and create a lurker out of him (which, as you know, many of us would want to lynch). What reaction of yours to his response are you talking about? All I see is "So what is your exact read on me? Scum, slightly scum, null, slightly town, or town?" but that's just a question, not motivational or de-motivational. Did he forget that I told Obsy to go get coaching help? How is my original post on Obsy an "attack on his ego? Refusal to answer a simple question + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.[quote] You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. After asking Alsn to quote all my fluff posts then all my content posts, Rad jumps on me about "wasting time". How would that be wasting time if you think I'm scummy? Also, he refuses to answer how much percentage fluff there is in my filter off the top of his head. His refusal to respond to a simple question is anti-town. His response is basically "that's useless". | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
read the 180 part with rad real quick. You can read the rest of the case later | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
How about you read before jumping on me On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: [quote]Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: [quote] That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
answered a long time ago. Look at the post above yours | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Let me try to state it to where you understand 1) You (slyverfyre) accused me of too much fluff without thinking of the content 2) Although there was fluff in my filter, it was a large filter that contained content 3) Thus, I wanted you to do that so you could see that there was plenty of content in my filter Got it? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 08:54 Rad wrote: + Show Spoiler + Jesus debears, what is with you wanting me to give a percentage estimate of your fluff? When have I ever shown interest in it? That was a conversation between you and someone else (alsn and/or sylver) that suddenly you thought I was the original person. Here's where you first ask me to come up with a percentage: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. I never said you were posting so much fluff. I said that IF you're town, it would be a waste of time for Alsn to split up your entire filter based on fluff vs not fluff, and IF you're scum you clearly don't think that the percentage is damning so it would be a huge waste of time. I've restated it over and over again but you still haven't answered my question. You just keep wanting me to give you a percentage, which doesn't make any sense because I wasn't a part of any argument about the quality of your posts. On November 04 2012 02:56 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: [quote] Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming He made up a number to get you to shut up about it. I'm not done with this until you give me a good reason you would want anyone to: a) Go through all your posts (large filter already), separate them into fluff and non fluff b) Come up with an exact percentage of your fluff. If you're town, you wouldn't want anyone to waste their time doing either of the above because it wouldn't matter at all. Scum hunting town is ultimately wasting time in the end. Only you know if you're town, so as town, you would want people to not scum hunt you. You don't have to worry about any fluff case alsn has until it has put you at risk of being lynched. If you're scum, it makes sense to want to make people waste their time. Explain your motivation. Explain it already! @Rad Was this a response to my case on you? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
When saying how much I "attacked" Obzy, did you notice this at the end of my original post about him? 2) Go ask for some coaching help (It'll help you improve more quickly) That seems, if anything, like the rebuttal to any of your me attacking obsy accusations. I still find it very odd that you would miss that part, even with confirmation bias | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 09:29 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 09:23 debears wrote: @Rad When saying how much I "attacked" Obzy, did you notice this at the end of my original post about him? 2) Go ask for some coaching help (It'll help you improve more quickly) That seems, if anything, like the rebuttal to any of your me attacking obsy accusations. I still find it very odd that you would miss that part, even with confirmation bias Town motivation: urge people to get help from their coach so they play the game better. Scum motivation: use demeaning words like useless and worthless and then tell them they should go talk to their coach so they think they're bad at the game That piece is a null tell so don't use it as a defense on you being an anti-town with your attacks. I've told people to go talk to their coaches before. Ask Djo. I've gotten coaching in each of my games. That in no way means I think you're bad. It's not like I'm sitting high and mighty telling everyone they suck. I know how bad I am. The premise of your argument on Obsy is that I was attacking him as a person, instead of calling him out for his actions in the game. You're taking this wayyyyy too far. Funny thing is that Obsy even agrees with me, yet you keep holding on to this point. That is scummy or extremely misguided | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 09:44 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 08:58 debears wrote: @Rad How about you read before jumping on me On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: [quote] That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: [quote] What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming You think I missed this before, but I didn't. It's an invalid point for me. I don't care how much fluff/content you have. It hasn't been a concern of mine. My concern was that there's no town motivation to make another person waste time going through your posts. Only scum motivation. You're claiming there's a town motivation to help point out that your 65% is useful content, but who the hell cares? The fluff argument wasn't going anywhere, it didn't have any potential to get you lynched at that point. You wanted alsn to spend his time reading through your filters, separating fluff from good content and coming up with a percentage just so you could make that point?! If you're town, why would you want that instead of him focusing on hunting down scum? If you're scum, I GET IT. You wanted him to waste his time. You could have just as easily come out and said it if you really thought it defended you against his fluff argument. When someone discredits me for a bullshit reason, I will defend myself and straighten the point. You say the fluff argument wasn't going anywhere, except that others like Alsn agreed with it. CC went so far to apologize about his fluff. Sylver's argument convinced enough people at that point that I needed to address it. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 10:07 Obzy wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 07:59 sylverfyre wrote: @Obzy Why am I scummy to you? Do you have your own arguments, or are you sheeping onto debears? You've said three times that I look bad, but you haven't given any of your own reasons. Looks like sheeping to me. Do you really want me to go through the whole thread and pick out all the times that debears chain-posted oneliners? I think it's a waste of time. He's done it, he's not really doing it anymore, I'm satisfied as far as that is concerned. If you're so interested, look for yourself. Shit, if I'm your only scum read, why aren't you putting pressure on me? You entered the thread and immediately voted debears with reasoning that I wasn't sure about (disagreement with the parts of the filter that were meaningless fluff), and later unvoted upon being challenged - given how resistant a lot of people are to voting, unvoting due to pressure seemed out of place. I'm wary of putting pressure on you because I don't want to be wrong while feeling uncertain. If I'm going to be wrong, I want to at least have conviction in my reads, instead of guessing. If I thought that you were scum, rather than looking scummy and worth thinking about, I would have voted. If that makes any sense :0 @obsy Who do find suspicious at this point? Also, if you were to name two people that are the best lynch candidates, who are they right now? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 10:22 Obzy wrote: If I had to pick two people right this instant because the lynch is happening in two minutes, I would at least pick da0ud due to the fact he hasn't said much. I'm expecting him to say more over the next 23? ish hours, though. I want to see what he thinks before talking about lynching a lurker. (That isn't the case, luckily.) I've been suspicious of Sylver because he backed off under pressure. Why? If he wasn't willing to follow through, why did he vote? I'm worried about voting at all because I don't want to get it wrong and feel dumb. With so little conviction behind an accusation, it seemed like he was voting for you because it wouldn't be exceptionally controversial... if that makes sense? I may be misremembering, I don't want to reread the thread yet again at this moment lol >.<; Just was my gut feeling upon reading his original post. I've got misgivings with regards to Mr. CC, but he's answered that, somewhat. I think the argument between Rad and you(db) is a little... Hm. I don't know what to think of it, since it's largely revolving around a set of questions aimed towards myself. It's hard to think about it impartially, and it doesn't help that I think you're both town. Sort of unexpected for you two to argue. Very well. I would say both are among my top candidates. My main point on the 180 was that it was not a genuine reaction imo (it also didn't feel like an original idea from him but that's something that input from everyone will tell me more about). 1)It was a sudden 180 when compared to his earlier posts about what I had said. Also, it took him a few hours to suddenly flip out like that. 2) For town, suspicions usually don't suddenly change like that after your reaction was different earlier, because it's easier to stick with a gut feeling. 3) Mafia, however, have to search for things to call people out on. Usually, a mafia has to look back to find something to use since a) it's hard to think on the spot whether a post would sound scummy from a town perspective b) mafia have to determine whether pointing out something scummy will fill their agenda | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Nice. We can have some fun now What input do you have on the my cases on Sylver and Rad? What input do you have on other cases? Who are your top scumreads and lynch candidates right now? Also, will you be here for lynch? If not, what is the closest time before lynch you will be here? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
It's 8 PM CST for me. Which is 3:30 hours before now | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Has Sylver done anything to to make you think he is town? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Has clarity actually brought up anything original on anyone (not counting Dau0d)? @dau0d On sylver, the fact that he said townies showing dedication, and I'm one of them, showing the most dedication, and he votes me is the reason why I still find it suspicious. Townies is much different than the town or everyone. My first 3 points on Rad revolved about him just chiming in on stuff that was easy to do so on. His 180 is by far the strongest point though in my case. Idk if you looked at all my posts on the % thing. In essence, the points boil down to this. On November 04 2012 09:03 debears wrote: ebwop ninja'd Let me try to state it to where you understand 1) You (slyverfyre) accused me of too much fluff without thinking of the content 2) Although there was fluff in my filter, it was a large filter that contained content 3) Thus, I wanted you to do that so you could see that there was plenty of content in my filter Got it? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
@Djo My problem with Clarity is that I don't feel that Rad or Sylverfyre have scumhunted sufficiently either. And the Rad 180 on me gives me him as my strongest scumread atm. Your strongest point may be the non-committal and scumhunting part. I'll look over him more and tell ya if I find anything. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
What are your thoughts on Obsy? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Reading over Clarity's filter, I see what you mean. His posts are talking about general stuff. He asks a few questions but doesn't pursue them. If I recall correctly, he was much more aggressive day 1 last game, seeing as he was keying on me and I actually wanted to nk him them. His post of null reads is something that scum like to do (although newbies too). Fortunately, we have about another 19 hours or so before lynch to see if any of the three out of Rad, Sylver, and Clarity do some unique/original scumhunting | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 04 2012 14:44 Djodref wrote: @ debears I have doubts regarding sylverfire being scum because it would have been very ballsy for a mafia player to open with a post like this. He was sure to stand out by using his vote as a stronger FoS on you. Also slips are not that indicative Clarity, on the other hand, makes sure to not stand out. He didn't follow up Cheese even though this one didn't answer his question, I didn't feel pressure from him in Alsn direction or in my direction. He has not done anything original apart from nit-picking some sentences here and there. I have to check Rad's filter but I can understand where he stands right now because of last game. The ballsy part is WIFOM. Also, who is a better person to attack than the most active player? Realistically, there's almost no chance of lynching the most active player d1. If you target the most active player, people think "oh, original scumhunting" and then, when you vote someone else, people say "oh, his top scumread isn't getting lynched so it's ok he switched his vote". Know what I'm saying? Anyways, him attacking me is a null tell. His reasoning, imo, was suspect, which is what really matters | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16787463 First, look at Djo's case about Clarity's - non committal attitude - blending in - lack of scumhunting I would like to add two things to that. 1) Scumhunting Method Clarity's scumhunting method for day 1 appears to be looking for people who don't answer questions. Why is this a scum favored strategy? It's an easy way to scumhunt. You don't have to read for changes in behavior/motivations. Also, if everyone answers the questions, then you can say "oh, idk who is scum cuz all my questions were answered" Example of what I mean On November 04 2012 17:08 Clarity_nl wrote: All the answers I got were sufficient. Hell, your answer had an entire case on sylver attached to it. Maybe I should be pushing people harder. I feel like there are plenty of people already doing that though. My top scrumreads at the time were you and Alsn, Alsn wasn't around at all and you were already being pushed by others. I was just reading, and as I said I will end up posting at least a solid case today, you can tell me if my information gathering has been weak at that point. 2) Contradiction to his scumhunting views On November 04 2012 17:20 Clarity_nl wrote: Top 3 choices in my eyes are Debears, Sylver and you. As for people who haven't answered my questions: Alsn, Cheese, Sylver. In this post, clarity names 3 top scumreads. He has no reasoning. Not only that he acknowledges that 3 people haven't answered his questions. Now let's look at what he said about people who don't answer his questions. On November 04 2012 16:54 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 16:48 Djodref wrote: @ Clarity A few people never answered your questions from the list. Why do you not push them as well ? Because I felt it would go along nicely with any cases I would make. If you "miss" a question asked to you that's super scummy because town reads and re-reads a lot. Scum just sorta play.. Because they don't need extra information[. and this On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote: @Cheese >:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way: I don't think it's directed at you specifically, but it's interesting that you think it is. The reason Cheese said to not drop the newbie card is because it's not town behavior. When you are town you want people to believe you, if you come out of the gate saying you're awful and no one should listen to you then that's anti-town. It also prevents scum from using "omg sorry I'm just new!", the less excuses scum have available the better for town. My reads at this point in time: Obzy: Leaning slightly town. He hasn't quite come out of his shell yet but he seems genuinly interested in discussion and progressing. @ Obzy Do you think you can get over this "I'm new" thing and give us the best reads you've got? Instead of posting something that's obvious to everyone perhaps post something that stands out to you. _ Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? _ Alsn: Leaning slightly scum, very little info about him though. He opened super aggressive this game, which is the opposite of how he played in the majority of XXIX. Perhaps the only reason he snapped at debears so hard is because debears said On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote: If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn @ Alsn Why the change in behavior from last game? What do you think of debears at this point? _ Mr Cheesecake: Null. He went SUPER defensive when he was called out about making a ton of jokes, but that discussion got blown way out of proportion. The fact that he's acting more like the way he was in mafia QT XXIX than in the actual XXIX thread is indicative of town. @ Cheese You did have some jokes in the XXIX thread. Can you tell us if these were jokes for the sake of jokes or if you used them to push a scum agenda? An argument can be made for both. _ Djodref: Leaning slightly scum, He was obsessed with policy. Everyone was ready to move on but he kept mentioning it over and over. He's also the person that blew up the whole *Cheese's scum joke* thing, which bogged us down for a couple of pages. @ Djodref If you had to lynch someone right now, would it be da0ud or someone else? _ Debears: Null. Regardless of if he's scum or town, he is getting the ball rolling which is good for us. Problem is... that was what he was doing in XXIX as well and he was scum in that. Older games suggest this is simply his meta so there is no read to be made about his opening. What I'm curious about is if he's going to pull a vanishing act in D2 / D3 again. @ Debears What's your ready on Obzy? _ Sylverfire: Null. Only have 3 real posts to read him on. He opened really aggressive onto debears, even though he's keeping the ball rolling, an odd choice. He showed up way late but Rad pointed out that he is sticking to the same schedule he's had in previous games. @ Sylverfire You've only shared your read on debears, is there anything else that stands out to you? _ So with all that said, I only have two slight scumreads on Alsn and Djo, so I hope they defend themselves as soon as possible. Even if we end up lynching da0ud for lurking, currently with 0 posts, we can at least gather as much information as possible Hopefully this gets some discussion going, please comment on as much as possible in my post and point out any flaws. Do no avoid answering the questions I addressed to you, it would be a very scummy thing to do. It's a contradiction, and a contradiction in a mafia oriented way. His scumhunting method is a way to avoid actually having to scumhunt, then he doesn't even use it when he gives his top scumreads 3) Avoiding Making Cases Throughout d1, Clarity has repeatedly avoided making cases, stating they'll come sometime in the last 24 hours. On November 03 2012 21:39 Clarity_nl wrote: My two weak scumreads are still you and Alsn, but that's what they are... weak. My post is simply to gather as much info as possible. I will end up making a case before the day is over, but I figured giving this thread a good kick would help. Why is clarity having such a hard time making cases? As town, you would be naturally suspicious of everyone. Yet, Clarity is having trouble. Who tend to have trouble making cases? Scum, since they know that their targets for lynch are town. 4) Taking the Backseat Also, notice how he wants to take a backseat this game. Refer to the example quote before. "Other people are already pushing enough as it is". That is not a townie mindset at all. The meta - Clarity's scumhunting attitude is way different than his last game as town. Here's an example post On October 26 2012 06:43 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On October 26 2012 01:22 Dandel Ion wrote: On October 26 2012 01:20 Clarity_nl wrote: On October 26 2012 01:15 Dandel Ion wrote: As I get Ninja'd, a wild Clarity appears. Will be active from now on, just didn't have it in the back of my head to check TL a lot. Now that the game has started I will basically be checking as much as possible. 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: Show nested quote + On October 25 2012 10:08 Dandel Ion wrote: On October 25 2012 10:02 Inigmaticalism wrote: For lurking I think it seems even more of an issue in Newbie games than regular games because too many lurkers results in mafia wins most of the time in the Newbie games I looked at. That said, if we get any confirmed mafia I'll always vote confirmed mafias over suspicious lurkers. Btw Im a noob ... That goes without saying. Having a confirmed scum can be hard though.. And is next to impossible day 1 (since no possible DT checks) unless there is a serious slip. That is why policy lynches day 1 can end up being a necessity. That said, I'm going to sleep. See you in a few hours. 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: Show nested quote + On October 25 2012 12:00 Rad wrote: 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? You're being especially confusing right now, at least for me. Dan basically said sure, if we have a confirmed mafia d1 (which he claims would be difficult without a major slip), lynch, otherwise it might be necessary to policy lynch. This seems reasonable. Your statement, however, is extremely confusing. Without knowing your previous game in depth, none of what I quoted above means anything. Can you please explain more briefly/clearly "where your confidence got you"? Also, what does your previous confidence have to do with any potential scenario for a d1 lynch? 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: Show nested quote + On October 25 2012 12:53 Djodref wrote: On October 25 2012 10:30 debears wrote: On October 25 2012 09:52 Djodref wrote: 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 ? Djo, why did you suddenly drop this after cheesecake responded? Also, why did you interpret his post as taking lurker policy "so seriously" when he was respondjng to a question? @debears The part I've bolded in Cheese's post was a comment about dandel's post you have picked on. It was not related to the part where he was answering your questions. He didn't mention any other good candidates for lynching than inactive players so I thought he wanted to lynch based on lurker policy lynch today. But he has clarified his position since then. 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: Show nested quote + On October 25 2012 13:27 Rad wrote: On October 25 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote: I've realized that in my last newbie game. Not being confident led me to write wish-washy posts and it is not good for general town mentality. Also I like DarthPunk style with his early heavy pressure. Pretty newbie scums can slip very easy, kush or not kush. Plus I had some difficulties in my last mafia games to post properly when people where directly pressure me. Why even think about artificial confidence though? Why is the concept of confidence even something to be considered beyond "if you're confident, push your case!" That's all confidence is good for. Artificial confidence does nothing. I get the point of "try to be more confident in your reads" or something to that extent, but I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker. We should do whatever we think is best at that point, not necessarily 1 thing or the other. 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: Show nested quote + On October 25 2012 13:27 Rad wrote: On October 25 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote: I've realized that in my last newbie game. Not being confident led me to write wish-washy posts and it is not good for general town mentality. Also I like DarthPunk style with his early heavy pressure. Pretty newbie scums can slip very easy, kush or not kush. Plus I had some difficulties in my last mafia games to post properly when people where directly pressure me. Why even think about artificial confidence though? Why is the concept of confidence even something to be considered beyond "if you're confident, push your case!" That's all confidence is good for. Artificial confidence does nothing. I get the point of "try to be more confident in your reads" or something to that extent, but I don't understand what's good about having confidence in pushing for a d1 scum lynch instead of lynching a lurker. We should do whatever we think is best at that point, not necessarily 1 thing or the other. 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 Show nested quote + 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? Look at how he's willing to actually analyze actions over the whole day 1 last game, yet this game he has done NOTHING of the sort. He hasn't tunneled anyone either, like he tunneled me last game. That, combine with his "answer questions or you're scummy" approach is very different play from his town self. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
##Vote Clarity | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
In the clarity case, the most important part is point 1 and 2. Points 3 and 4 go along with it. Also, on point 4, meta is meta and can change. But does personality change? You gotta remember. Clarity was the one modkilled for sending out a pm eager to discuss reads, yet he hasn't really been discussing reads all game | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 00:30 da0ud wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 00:21 debears wrote: @Dau0d In the clarity case, the most important part is point 1 and 2. Points 3 and 4 go along with it. Also, on point 4, meta is meta and can change. But does personality change? You gotta remember. Clarity was the one modkilled for sending out a pm eager to discuss reads, yet he hasn't really been discussing reads all game True, I had forgotten he got modkilled last time for PMing on his reads, I was the one getting back his roll as Jailkeeper from VT ^^ Wait he was jk last game? So as the most import blue, he was outgoing with his arguments (making me want to nk him last game), yet this game showing complete lack of being aggressive? - If he is blue this game, his sudden change would be weird - if he was townie, a less important role, he would most likely be more aggressive (fear less of being nked) - if he was mafia, he would most likely be more passive These are more general heuristics (I think that's the right word +1 for Ver lol) than concrete. But honestly I don't see someone being so much less aggressive as townie after being aggressive with the most important blue role | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
add my last post to my case on clarity | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
While Djo has said some wtf kind of things, he did so last game. He has been pretty active, and he made the case on clarity first, and his points are valid, which means he shares a similar line of thinking as me. Also, his early d1 thing about cheese's jokes, while had bad reasoning, can be explained by starting to kickstart the thread (I did the same thing with Alsn) @Sylver On November 05 2012 00:38 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being crucified for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) I wish he hadn't left so abruptly though. Da0ud seems in the same boat. He's on the quiet side, and now he's waiting before making another move. What is the purpose of this post? You spread suspicions on 3 people, yet refuse to acknowledge the case on clarity. You haven't addressed any specific points on clarity. Your defense on him is weak "reading too much stuff into clarity". Between Dau0d, me, Djo, it's impossible for all 3 of us to be scum. So why are you trying to discredit all 3 people who have said clarity looks scummy without any real evidence and a few short statements? Did you read the case on Clairty? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 00:53 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 00:50 debears wrote: @CC While Djo has said some wtf kind of things, he did so last game. He has been pretty active, and he made the case on clarity first, and his points are valid, which means he shares a similar line of thinking as me. I just find those "wtf things" hard to dismiss, but I kind of have to because, well, it's smileyDjo. The only problem I have with the bolded is that idk if you're scum or not this game, so him sharing the same line of thinking as you could be a very bad thing. CC, can you direct me to/restate the exact posts you are talking about. I'm looking at Djo as well since it seems him/Clarity is the direction this lynch is heading | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 01:29 Alsn wrote: Djod, Clarity said that he was going to sleep, considering he was up until 7 am and then only seemed to sleep for 4 hours if we are to believe what he said yesterday, I don't find it unlikely that he would sleep in the afternoon local time. That being said, rest assured that I'll be looking at his case in great detail. I'm holding off on making a judgement right now because I actually have a slight town read on him so far and I think you are both exaggerating the importance of your cases against him. Particularly the fact that debears is basing his case in large part on meta on a player who has played 24 hours total of mafia before being modkilled. Or that you seem to be accusing him of blending in, yet nothing he has really said to my eyes jumps out as if he was trying to push a scum agenda. If his only crime was blending in, who are you to say he's blending in on purpose? Sure, if he later jumps in and votes with bad reasoning, I'll hold it against him, but right now I find both of your cases weak. I'll hold off on elaborating further until he actually shows up however as I don't want to give him any unnecessary help. The main part of my case is not meta. I've stated that the first two points: his lackluster method of scumhunting, lack of scumhunting, and contradiction to why he finds me, djo, and someone else more scummy than those who haven't answered his questions, as stated by himself. Read my case again | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 01:17 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: + Show Spoiler + @Debears Here's just some stuff off the top of my head. @Djo This is not for you to make a defense against, it is merely for Debears' reference. I already know your PoV on the issues. On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. @ Cheese I was re-reading the thread and I really didn't like this "it's a scumtell" joke. I'm not against jokes but scumtells are quite serious business. I've got my eyes on you. - Two mistakes I made last game, remember? 1.) Feeling like he needs to tell the thread that he's been reading and 2.) reiterating that he is suspicious of me when his stance is clear. - He also says that "scumtells are srs bizniz" which just seems like he's trying too hard to come off as town, especially when nobody beforehand had even cared about what I had said. On November 03 2012 12:35 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:23 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. [quote] He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. @ Cheese I was re-reading the thread and I really didn't like this "it's a scumtell" joke. I'm not against jokes but scumtells are quite serious business. I've got my eyes on you. There is no reason to tell us that you were reading the thread. We should know you are. This is the exact thing that Nack picked up about my scumplay last game. "This game is serious business" It's a couple hours into the first day, and most of the thread isn't even around. You're really trying to come off as town by plucking this insignificant little fact that everyone else giggled about and passed on by. And - mafia motivation for making a joke? We should get some George Carlins as scum if there is mafia motivation for making someone snicker a little. Also: My humor was mainly kept to the QT last game. Only a few stupid things in the thread were let through. /Engagecheesecakeseriousmode @ Cheese Your joke didn't pose any problem for me the first time (same for everyone I suppose) but I found it weird the second time I past through it. I have no problems with jokes and I'm making some myself. They are a null tell in general. But joking about scum tells is not really acceptable in my opinion and I've explained the possible mafia motivations I've seen behind it. Again, telling people that he's been reading. Also, there is no mafia motivation behind a little joke so early in the game. There wasn't last game, there ain't this game. On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. Then there's this little snippet, where he doesn't think Alsn deserves a FoS but then he FoS's me right away for no better reason. I found it contradictory. In additon, I won't re-quote for this one, is his stance on "pressure votes". I understand where he's coming from in his argument, I really do, but his play last time just seems like the same thing Sylver was doing and now he's condemning him for it. On November 04 2012 05:40 Djodref wrote: @ Rad 1My main goal with the sudden FoS on Cheese was to spark some discussion. I said it was confusing but it was more a pretext. The truth is that I didn't like it. Using sarcasm was not a brillaint idea but agin, I wanted to show that I was trying to spark discussion. This one just rang bells for me. Town don't try to show that they are sparking discussion, they just do it. All this little stuff just sticks right out at me. He tells me not to "nit-pick" at his posts, but I find that hard to do. It's not always someone's actions that denote them as scum (as scumhunting, etc can be faked), it's subtext and rhetoric which are much more difficult to stop doing as scum. It's just like when you guys(Djo+Debears) pick on Sylver for saying townies and not players. We all have our definitions of scumslips, and I don't want to dismiss these simply because he's smileydjo. As I said before, I'm not going to be looking much more into this because It's just a game of cat and mouse with Djo. Has he done anything specifically since these posts to make you think he's scum? Also, anything to make you think he's town? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
can you repost that so I know what exactly you are adding to that? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. So what are you exactly saying here? That because we have a similar line of thinking we are associated? You find us either a scumteam or one of us scum? What are your reasons specifically? Make some cases let's hear it | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 01:48 Djodref wrote: Right now, I think he is waiting for me to sleep before posting his case. That last sentence isn't valid. Speculation. I did it earlier with Sylver I believe. It's dumb and adds nothing | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. Funny how you pop in right after Sylver does and come to the same conclusion with the same intent On November 05 2012 01:55 Clarity_nl wrote: I'm here now. Please give me a bit to reply as I do need to make dinner as well. Yes Djo my case was going to be about you, it's funny how that works huh, debears popping in with a giant case with bolded red lettering all over it? Funny how easy it is to point something out like that. Seriously, address the case first before you try to discredit it with bullshit reasoning | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I'm still waiting for your case on me. You too Alsn | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 02:07 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:39 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 01:17 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: + Show Spoiler + @Debears Here's just some stuff off the top of my head. @Djo This is not for you to make a defense against, it is merely for Debears' reference. I already know your PoV on the issues. On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. @ Cheese I was re-reading the thread and I really didn't like this "it's a scumtell" joke. I'm not against jokes but scumtells are quite serious business. I've got my eyes on you. - Two mistakes I made last game, remember? 1.) Feeling like he needs to tell the thread that he's been reading and 2.) reiterating that he is suspicious of me when his stance is clear. - He also says that "scumtells are srs bizniz" which just seems like he's trying too hard to come off as town, especially when nobody beforehand had even cared about what I had said. On November 03 2012 12:35 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:23 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. [quote] He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. @ Cheese I was re-reading the thread and I really didn't like this "it's a scumtell" joke. I'm not against jokes but scumtells are quite serious business. I've got my eyes on you. There is no reason to tell us that you were reading the thread. We should know you are. This is the exact thing that Nack picked up about my scumplay last game. "This game is serious business" It's a couple hours into the first day, and most of the thread isn't even around. You're really trying to come off as town by plucking this insignificant little fact that everyone else giggled about and passed on by. And - mafia motivation for making a joke? We should get some George Carlins as scum if there is mafia motivation for making someone snicker a little. Also: My humor was mainly kept to the QT last game. Only a few stupid things in the thread were let through. /Engagecheesecakeseriousmode @ Cheese Your joke didn't pose any problem for me the first time (same for everyone I suppose) but I found it weird the second time I past through it. I have no problems with jokes and I'm making some myself. They are a null tell in general. But joking about scum tells is not really acceptable in my opinion and I've explained the possible mafia motivations I've seen behind it. Again, telling people that he's been reading. Also, there is no mafia motivation behind a little joke so early in the game. There wasn't last game, there ain't this game. On November 03 2012 12:06 Djodref wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 12:00 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 10:50 Djodref wrote: @ debaers I don't think this one deserves a FoS. When Alsn says that it is technically a lie, that's just Alsn arguing about math and logic. On November 03 2012 11:52 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 11:12 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:11 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 03 2012 11:10 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 11:09 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 11:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Debears you seem really paranoid. On November 03 2012 10:42 debears wrote: Yeah i am. He calls me a liarin red and then peaces out without wanting to hear my thoughts. Aint that scummy? Considering how active he was around lynch time last game, which was only an hour before this He didn't call you, Debears the person, a liar. You're taking Alsn's nit-pick of a post awfully personally. The quick, useless FoS is also the same exact tactic you used last game. Old hat, Debears, old hat. 1) i don't wear a hat 2) i rescind my argument. The red text threw me off Scumtell. Howso? Mafia usually wear hats. He's so adamant that he most certainly does NOT wear a hat. Therefore, scumtell. @ Cheesecake Please refrain from joking when talking about scumtells. It's confusing. FoS Cheese The logic is strong with this one. Then there's this little snippet, where he doesn't think Alsn deserves a FoS but then he FoS's me right away for no better reason. I found it contradictory. In additon, I won't re-quote for this one, is his stance on "pressure votes". I understand where he's coming from in his argument, I really do, but his play last time just seems like the same thing Sylver was doing and now he's condemning him for it. On November 04 2012 05:40 Djodref wrote: @ Rad 1My main goal with the sudden FoS on Cheese was to spark some discussion. I said it was confusing but it was more a pretext. The truth is that I didn't like it. Using sarcasm was not a brillaint idea but agin, I wanted to show that I was trying to spark discussion. This one just rang bells for me. Town don't try to show that they are sparking discussion, they just do it. All this little stuff just sticks right out at me. He tells me not to "nit-pick" at his posts, but I find that hard to do. It's not always someone's actions that denote them as scum (as scumhunting, etc can be faked), it's subtext and rhetoric which are much more difficult to stop doing as scum. It's just like when you guys(Djo+Debears) pick on Sylver for saying townies and not players. We all have our definitions of scumslips, and I don't want to dismiss these simply because he's smileydjo. As I said before, I'm not going to be looking much more into this because It's just a game of cat and mouse with Djo. Has he done anything specifically since these posts to make you think he's scum? Also, anything to make you think he's town? @Debears I liked the cases on Clarity from both of you, and I can see him being potential scum (especially after his active-lurky comment on my underlined djo clause). He's been pretty tame since then. Only thing I don't like is his "Hey, get us 3 up there, because I've got nothing to hide" mentality, but that's just me. Is that mentality necessarily scum? I can easily see a townie saying that too. It's a null tell | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 02:16 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:41 debears wrote: @Sylver can you repost that so I know what exactly you are adding to that? I'm sorry, repost what? My response was to this post On November 05 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. He's got a 4 page filter which doesn't read as fluffy to me (I admit I'm just skimming right now) Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being called out for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) His latest posts really make me think he isn't pulling off some active lurking strategies. BTW, game 1 he had page and a half when he got modkilled. At the same time this game, he has almost twice that. I really can't call that "more passive" even though he's not coming out swinging this game. which is almost a carbon copy of this post On November 05 2012 00:38 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being crucified for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) I wish he hadn't left so abruptly though. Da0ud seems in the same boat. He's on the quiet side, and now he's waiting before making another move. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 02:19 Clarity_nl wrote: I am going to put my comments into the quote itself, I will use green for added effect. Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 23:54 debears wrote: Hey guys, I believe Clarity is scum http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16787463 First, look at Djo's case about Clarity's - non committal attitude - blending in - lack of scumhunting I would like to add two things to that. 1) Scumhunting Method Clarity's scumhunting method for day 1 appears to be looking for people who don't answer questions. Why is this a scum favored strategy? It's an easy way to scumhunt. You don't have to read for changes in behavior/motivations. Also, if everyone answers the questions, then you can say "oh, idk who is scum cuz all my questions were answered" My scumhunting method is not "looking for people who don't answer questions". You are taking something I said I believe is scummy and turning into saying it's the only thing I think is scummy. Example of what I mean On November 04 2012 17:08 Clarity_nl wrote: All the answers I got were sufficient. Hell, your answer had an entire case on sylver attached to it. Maybe I should be pushing people harder. I feel like there are plenty of people already doing that though. My top scrumreads at the time were you and Alsn, Alsn wasn't around at all and you were already being pushed by others. I was just reading, and as I said I will end up posting at least a solid case today, you can tell me if my information gathering has been weak at that point. 2) Contradiction to his scumhunting views On November 04 2012 17:20 Clarity_nl wrote: Top 3 choices in my eyes are Debears, Sylver and you. As for people who haven't answered my questions: Alsn, Cheese, Sylver. In this post, clarity names 3 top scumreads. He has no reasoning. Not only that he acknowledges that 3 people haven't answered his questions. Now let's look at what he said about people who don't answer his questions. On November 04 2012 16:54 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 16:48 Djodref wrote: @ Clarity A few people never answered your questions from the list. Why do you not push them as well ? Because I felt it would go along nicely with any cases I would make. If you "miss" a question asked to you that's super scummy because town reads and re-reads a lot. Scum just sorta play.. Because they don't need extra information[. and this On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote: @Cheese >:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way: I don't think it's directed at you specifically, but it's interesting that you think it is. The reason Cheese said to not drop the newbie card is because it's not town behavior. When you are town you want people to believe you, if you come out of the gate saying you're awful and no one should listen to you then that's anti-town. It also prevents scum from using "omg sorry I'm just new!", the less excuses scum have available the better for town. My reads at this point in time: Obzy: Leaning slightly town. He hasn't quite come out of his shell yet but he seems genuinly interested in discussion and progressing. @ Obzy Do you think you can get over this "I'm new" thing and give us the best reads you've got? Instead of posting something that's obvious to everyone perhaps post something that stands out to you. _ Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? _ Alsn: Leaning slightly scum, very little info about him though. He opened super aggressive this game, which is the opposite of how he played in the majority of XXIX. Perhaps the only reason he snapped at debears so hard is because debears said On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote: If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn @ Alsn Why the change in behavior from last game? What do you think of debears at this point? _ Mr Cheesecake: Null. He went SUPER defensive when he was called out about making a ton of jokes, but that discussion got blown way out of proportion. The fact that he's acting more like the way he was in mafia QT XXIX than in the actual XXIX thread is indicative of town. @ Cheese You did have some jokes in the XXIX thread. Can you tell us if these were jokes for the sake of jokes or if you used them to push a scum agenda? An argument can be made for both. _ Djodref: Leaning slightly scum, He was obsessed with policy. Everyone was ready to move on but he kept mentioning it over and over. He's also the person that blew up the whole *Cheese's scum joke* thing, which bogged us down for a couple of pages. @ Djodref If you had to lynch someone right now, would it be da0ud or someone else? _ Debears: Null. Regardless of if he's scum or town, he is getting the ball rolling which is good for us. Problem is... that was what he was doing in XXIX as well and he was scum in that. Older games suggest this is simply his meta so there is no read to be made about his opening. What I'm curious about is if he's going to pull a vanishing act in D2 / D3 again. @ Debears What's your ready on Obzy? _ Sylverfire: Null. Only have 3 real posts to read him on. He opened really aggressive onto debears, even though he's keeping the ball rolling, an odd choice. He showed up way late but Rad pointed out that he is sticking to the same schedule he's had in previous games. @ Sylverfire You've only shared your read on debears, is there anything else that stands out to you? _ So with all that said, I only have two slight scumreads on Alsn and Djo, so I hope they defend themselves as soon as possible. Even if we end up lynching da0ud for lurking, currently with 0 posts, we can at least gather as much information as possible Hopefully this gets some discussion going, please comment on as much as possible in my post and point out any flaws. Do no avoid answering the questions I addressed to you, it would be a very scummy thing to do. It's a contradiction, and a contradiction in a mafia oriented way. His scumhunting method is a way to avoid actually having to scumhunt, then he doesn't even use it when he gives his top scumreads I did not have cases ready. Yes I was on and checking mafia but I was also working. Djo specifically asked me who my current scumreads were, and who hadn't answered my questions yet. I answered both. Again you put an emphasis on people not answering my questions, when that is only part of it. The same way your "meta" read on me (which is 1 post, that I made about you, that was accurate.) is not the entirety of your case. I had a strong read on you. I do not have a strong read in this game yet | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 03:56 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 02:19 Clarity_nl wrote: I am going to put my comments into the quote itself, I will use green for added effect. On November 04 2012 23:54 debears wrote: Hey guys, I believe Clarity is scum http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16787463 First, look at Djo's case about Clarity's - non committal attitude - blending in - lack of scumhunting I would like to add two things to that. 1) Scumhunting Method Clarity's scumhunting method for day 1 appears to be looking for people who don't answer questions. Why is this a scum favored strategy? It's an easy way to scumhunt. You don't have to read for changes in behavior/motivations. Also, if everyone answers the questions, then you can say "oh, idk who is scum cuz all my questions were answered" My scumhunting method is not "looking for people who don't answer questions". You are taking something I said I believe is scummy and turning into saying it's the only thing I think is scummy. Example of what I mean On November 04 2012 17:08 Clarity_nl wrote: All the answers I got were sufficient. Hell, your answer had an entire case on sylver attached to it. Maybe I should be pushing people harder. I feel like there are plenty of people already doing that though. My top scrumreads at the time were you and Alsn, Alsn wasn't around at all and you were already being pushed by others. I was just reading, and as I said I will end up posting at least a solid case today, you can tell me if my information gathering has been weak at that point. 2) Contradiction to his scumhunting views On November 04 2012 17:20 Clarity_nl wrote: Top 3 choices in my eyes are Debears, Sylver and you. As for people who haven't answered my questions: Alsn, Cheese, Sylver. In this post, clarity names 3 top scumreads. He has no reasoning. Not only that he acknowledges that 3 people haven't answered his questions. Now let's look at what he said about people who don't answer his questions. On November 04 2012 16:54 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 16:48 Djodref wrote: @ Clarity A few people never answered your questions from the list. Why do you not push them as well ? Because I felt it would go along nicely with any cases I would make. If you "miss" a question asked to you that's super scummy because town reads and re-reads a lot. Scum just sorta play.. Because they don't need extra information[. and this On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote: @Cheese >:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way: I don't think it's directed at you specifically, but it's interesting that you think it is. The reason Cheese said to not drop the newbie card is because it's not town behavior. When you are town you want people to believe you, if you come out of the gate saying you're awful and no one should listen to you then that's anti-town. It also prevents scum from using "omg sorry I'm just new!", the less excuses scum have available the better for town. My reads at this point in time: Obzy: Leaning slightly town. He hasn't quite come out of his shell yet but he seems genuinly interested in discussion and progressing. @ Obzy Do you think you can get over this "I'm new" thing and give us the best reads you've got? Instead of posting something that's obvious to everyone perhaps post something that stands out to you. _ Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ Rad Why the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? _ Alsn: Leaning slightly scum, very little info about him though. He opened super aggressive this game, which is the opposite of how he played in the majority of XXIX. Perhaps the only reason he snapped at debears so hard is because debears said On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote: If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn @ Alsn Why the change in behavior from last game? What do you think of debears at this point? _ Mr Cheesecake: Null. He went SUPER defensive when he was called out about making a ton of jokes, but that discussion got blown way out of proportion. The fact that he's acting more like the way he was in mafia QT XXIX than in the actual XXIX thread is indicative of town. @ Cheese You did have some jokes in the XXIX thread. Can you tell us if these were jokes for the sake of jokes or if you used them to push a scum agenda? An argument can be made for both. _ Djodref: Leaning slightly scum, He was obsessed with policy. Everyone was ready to move on but he kept mentioning it over and over. He's also the person that blew up the whole *Cheese's scum joke* thing, which bogged us down for a couple of pages. @ Djodref If you had to lynch someone right now, would it be da0ud or someone else? _ Debears: Null. Regardless of if he's scum or town, he is getting the ball rolling which is good for us. Problem is... that was what he was doing in XXIX as well and he was scum in that. Older games suggest this is simply his meta so there is no read to be made about his opening. What I'm curious about is if he's going to pull a vanishing act in D2 / D3 again. @ Debears What's your ready on Obzy? _ Sylverfire: Null. Only have 3 real posts to read him on. He opened really aggressive onto debears, even though he's keeping the ball rolling, an odd choice. He showed up way late but Rad pointed out that he is sticking to the same schedule he's had in previous games. @ Sylverfire You've only shared your read on debears, is there anything else that stands out to you? _ So with all that said, I only have two slight scumreads on Alsn and Djo, so I hope they defend themselves as soon as possible. Even if we end up lynching da0ud for lurking, currently with 0 posts, we can at least gather as much information as possible Hopefully this gets some discussion going, please comment on as much as possible in my post and point out any flaws. Do no avoid answering the questions I addressed to you, it would be a very scummy thing to do. It's a contradiction, and a contradiction in a mafia oriented way. His scumhunting method is a way to avoid actually having to scumhunt, then he doesn't even use it when he gives his top scumreads I did not have cases ready. Yes I was on and checking mafia but I was also working. Djo specifically asked me who my current scumreads were, and who hadn't answered my questions yet. I answered both. Again you put an emphasis on people not answering my questions, when that is only part of it. The same way your "meta" read on me (which is 1 post, that I made about you, that was accurate.) is not the entirety of your case. I had a strong read on you. I do not have a strong read in this game yet You are completely denying the fact that you said people not answering your questions is very scummy twice. Yet, you know who hasn't answered your questions, and you don't find them in your top 3 suspicions | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 02:11 Djodref wrote: @ sylverfyre Yeah, I live and work in South Korea so you can check that it is indeed 2 am in the banner of this thread. Was it a general statement ? I thought it was a reference at you and debears going into OMGUS mode just before your post. Why does your profile location say france then? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 02:57 Alsn wrote: My case for why I think debears is scum. His reaction's so far to pressure. 1)When I made my introductory post, I merely wanted to point out that he was being a little bit unfair in using skewed statistics to make us all forgive him if he should happen to be away. However, he instantly throws a FoS at me in order to discredit me instead of calmly explaining how I was wrong. Looking at his behaviour in XXVIII when he was town, the main reason I never got completely convinced he was scum was because he kept his cool and calmly explained why Z-BosoN was using faulty logic instead of going crazy about it. 2)Later, when sylver votes him for what he later explains is a strong FoS, he basically goes completely OMGUS on sylver instead of again, calmly explaining why sylver is wrong, accusing him of "bullshit reasoning"(see this post at the end. Unless debears has completely changed his town meta I don't see how I can view this behaviour as town debears. 3)Then there's his attitude towards Obzy, saying he's posting useless and worthless content. It's the exact same strategy he used in XXIX to discredit Inig, a timid beginner townie. Sure, you told him to get coaching, but how does that one line make up for saying his content is useless and worthless? In fact, it's more of the same from debears, seeing as Obzy was pointing fingers at debears it's yet more flaming in order to discredit someone who is suspicious of him. 4)His voting pattern so far He voted for da0ud "just so lurkers know that he's serious". This is definitely something which I can't blame him for, since da0ud did indeed start posting shortly thereafter. But then he goes on to OMGUS vote sylver, maintaining for a very long time that sylver had "bullshit reasons" for voting him. Yet all is forgiven as soon as sylver backs off? No, actually not, he has kept criticising sylver. Interestingly however, he picks Clarity as his next target, a player who I can't yet see is behaving all that scummy. A paragon of town, definitely not, but probable scum? I don't think so. Interestingly, he's also sheeping off of Djodref instead of pursuing the scum reads he has shared so far. Largely, I find that the way he votes this game is very similar to the way he voted in XXIX so largely, I'd say this is a meta read more than anything else. However, I'd like to preface this by saying I definitely have concerns with regards to the cases against Clarity. I find that his behaviour overall is pretty null, or maybe even slightly town. But depending on how he actually addresses the cases brought forward thus far, I can definitely see myself changing my mind about him. Because while both of you are correct in criticising him for his actions, I'd just prefer to hear his side of the story first as you're being pretty hyperbolic about how important your points are. So, since I'm not yet convinced enough of Clarity's guilt, as well as the fact that I feel unless we have more than one wagon, it'll be harder to find out much of substance after the vote, I'm voting for my top scum read: ##Vote: debears 1) I didn't like how you used lie in red font, especially that early. It seemed to me the post was to discredit me, something I didn't think town Alsn would do. 2) When somethings bullshit reasoning, it's bullshit reasoning. I was not calm with Z-Bo, me and him had a pretty lengthy flamewar. Also, look at my actions before my lynch that game. I was very aggressive, and took my suspicions from Z-Bo, to SS, to SDM 3) Obsy agrees with me that the post was not an insulting or demeaning post. If he got the message, you guys clearly are overreacting + Show Spoiler + On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote: Hm. Okay. I've been looking at FoS the same way as a vote. Assuming people intend to vote the way they are suspicious, I didn't really think there was a difference; letting the mod keep track makes an amount of sense, though. @Cheese >:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way: Show nested quote + Again, another exact mistake I made last game. Feeling the need to tell people that you have been reading the thread. For the second part, he's assuring that we realize that he knows this game is important to him. As town, he wouldn't feel the need to tell us that the game is important. That sounds like the sort of thing I would do. Bringing up the not using newbness as an excuse without calling me out specifically (as the only player who was not participating in the previous game) and then pointing out a scumtell based on inexperience looks like a trap. It may be valid, but combined with the earlier statement, there doesn't really seem to be an answer besides inexperienced town and scum, and you've already indicated that inexperienced town is unacceptable. Why wouldn't you just vote? FoS Mr. Cheese. @Djo Notes: ignores deb/Als argument, policy discussion, mechanics discussion, argument with Cheesecake. If I didn't dislike CC's argument, I'd be a little more doubtful, but... I do dislike it. I think part of the problem for Djo is I have a hard time reading some of his sentences, so it's a little harder to follow his exact train of thought lol. Given that I'm suspicious of CC, I don't have a real problem with Djo at this time. @debears [I seriously clicked your filter and cringed before realizing it's 4 pages, not 40.] (Also, @sylver..) However I may have mentioned FoS vs vote confusion at the top of this post that I wrote like 30 minutes ago, I really don't like the vote on debears at all. If I'm wrong, fucking bummer, but debears is driving conversation. His filter's not easy to read, but the content is useful to Me, at least. I wish I wasn't getting attacked har har, but the activeness in making me respond to stop lurking is a townie move IMHO. If he was mafia, he would've let me continue happily lurking and reading to my heart's content and then blasted me in a day, rather than trying to get me to start contributing early on. For god's sake, it had been less than 6 hours from the start of the game, you hadn't even appeared yet, there were people with only a few words and he writes up a post designed to get me to contribute? That definitely feels townie to me. I don't see how you could come to the opposite conclusion. Some (Maybe even a lot!) of the filter is pretty pointless and could've gone unsaid. The parts that DID go said are, I think, the best in the thread. If he didn't have quality bits in the filter along with the spam I'd think differently but the quality parts look solid. I definitely think he's town at the moment. You haven't interacted with anybody besides Rad and myself, and your first post comes in and blasts debears? @da0ud What the hell dude, get in here and post >_> You can't do worse than me ffs I'm going to take a break now and probably sleep. If anybody has any questions, concerns, claims, or suspicions about me please say something because being called out is good for stopping lurking -_- And when the thread is going fast with a focused discussion it's really hard to jump in. 4) Considering my anti-lurker policy game, the vote was a pressure vote to get him to post. He reacted to it and posted more. It did it's job, hence my removal of it. On Sylver, I am OMGUS because I found how he popped in the thread, votes me because of fluff (ignoring my content all the same) and then bails out within 45 minutes. Also, I didn't like how he criticized us (not enough substance) even though he wasn't even there Also, you read my case on Clarity, no? Does the reasoning make sense? I believe so. Just because I make a case and vote on someone you think is slightly town, does not mean I am scummy. If my reasoning is bad and I do so, then yes I would look scummy. You yourself said some of my points on Clarity have mert Also, on sheeping. You guys have the wrong terms for sheeping. Sheeping means you agree with someone without bringing anything new to the table. All of my cases have original content and input Summary: Alsn, this case is based mainly on my meta, and incorrect meta at that. In my town game, I exhibited aggressiveness with Z-Boson early on, and SS, Z-bo, and SDM late game. Also, you seem to be denying the fact that in the postgame for XXIX, I said I was trying to adopt an aggressive meta from both alignments. My aggressiveness is a null tell (meaning attacking, moving my vote around). My reasoning is what you must look for. Finally, today is d1. Scum reads aren't the strongest and they can change. My votes have moved around for two reasons 1) pressure - it helps get questions answered quicker 2) uncertainty - I don't know who is scum, and my reads have changed over the day. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 03:40 Clarity_nl wrote: 1) + Show Spoiler + My case on debears: All game long he's been accusing people of FoS'ing him while he's away. The reason it's interesting is that he doesn't mention when he leaves, it's just "unlucky" I guess. But it's a good way to redirect attention to whomever is accusing him. By itself this doesn't mean much, but by the end of this post you should know why I'm extremely suspicious of debears. On November 03 2012 13:25 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:09 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 13:00 Djodref wrote: @ Cheese I'm pretty sure that the following quote was totally serving your mafia agenda in the last game. But I guess I should better trust you because I don't really see why you should be dishonest right now about it. On October 29 2012 13:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Holy meta argument Batbears. Are you saying that Dandel under pressure is basically = Kush in terms of meta? Let's take a look at the second one On October 28 2012 09:20 Rad wrote: Djo NOW YOU SHOW UP? On October 28 2012 09:21 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: A wild Djo appears? I don't know if you have seen Rad post or not before posting yours but I really felt that you were both accusing me of active lurking. Why the lolwut by the way ? What did you not understand in my comment ? @Djo The second part of the first quote isn't a joke. It's an analogy. Therefore it has nothing to do with anything. The second quote: Pokemon reference, it means I think of you as a pokemon. Pokemon are innocent and cute; I'm not casting aspersions on you in the least. Yes, @obsQT I just mentioned pokemon. We could go with this WIFOM crap all day. These "jokes" means absolutely nothing. Are we seriously still talking about a failboat joke? Stop this incessant attempt to tunnel me--it bears no weight at all because it is probably one of the most subjective things one could possibly focus on. Especially since it's coming from another game entirely. I declare this useless argument over *gavel slam*. @ Cheese I'll stop tunneling you when I'm satisfied with your answers. Why do you want us to stop discussing ? This discussion has derived from its original point to go something quite useless, I agree. My point is that you could have used these jokes to make me look bad. I know this was a pokemon reference but I think "a wild Djo appears" was implying active lurking, especially in the context of the thread, rather than implying that I was innocent as a pokemon. My point is that jokes can be used by mafia to cast suspicion on a player without looking like you are doing it. It's a great tool used this way. Djo, if you are town, stop arguing over stupid points. You're wrong. Get over it If you're mafia, keep arguing Debears does two things here. 1. He halts discussion. He doesn't change subject, he just stops the current one. 2. He calls djo wrong. There is no explanation. Just: "You're wrong. Get over it" He's also telling Djo to stop being an idiot, NOW. Why would he want him to stop if he had nothing better to discuss? My current scumreads have changed wildly with recent developments. To me, a debears/djodref scumteam seems most likely, but since djo has set it up so that I cannot post a useful case about him now I'm posting this instead. 2) + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. Here it starts, the whole "fluff debate". Fluff talk about fluff. It is the epitome of useless. Here are all his posts regarding this issue: + Show Spoiler + On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote: debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho.On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote: Holy shit, this flavor. What. If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote: That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote: [quote]debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote: Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote: [quote]That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote: [quote]Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Wait... but what did debears say in that previous quote.... stop arguing over stupid points? On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote: On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote: On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote: [quote] That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming I end up trying to shut him up, and it works. He manages to convey that he posts more content than fluff, with SEVEN fluff posts. I figured maybe he was trying to bury something, but if it's there I can't find it. Regardless, flooding the thread with useless posts is anti-town. Although this stood out, by itself it doesn't mean much. He spammed because he wanted to prove a point.... I guess On November 04 2012 04:02 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 04 2012 03:51 Alsn wrote: On November 04 2012 03:46 debears wrote: And artificially increasing your filter is what? At best it's a genuine attempt at making the observers laugh about something, at worst you're scum trying to hide behind Hapa's advice that he has posted after/during almost every single newbie lately, that lynching the most active player is almost always a mislynch. Neither of those help us find scum.On November 04 2012 03:38 sylverfyre wrote: At the time, your posts were a lot of oneliners. If you have a 30 page post of oneliners (instead of longer posts, with more than one sentence of information per post) then it's much harder to read your filter. Which is bad for town. All I'm asking there is to up your words per post and cool down on the tripleposting. It's worth noting, you're actually doing what I'm asking of you right now, even as you're calling me out for being frustrated at you for it. Thanks, I guess? While you consider a long filter bad for town, have you considered that an active town, especially super active town, is extremely bad for scum. They lose control of the thread, and have a threat who is invested and reads things over. Where do you get that I'm artificially increasing my filter? I'm not posting for the sake of filter. I'm posting for the sake of discussion and finding scum Oh, okay. On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote: Btw to all obs I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter Because talking a lot is pro town right? But day 1 debears is always the same, every game I've looked into anyway. He starts out aggressive, regardless of alignment. But last game where he was scum, he actively lurked the more the game went on, he fed off of his "townie vibe" because he posted a lot. But never has he proclaimed he will be posting a lot, this game he has. Why is that? I believe that he's forcing himself to be active all game. By posting this he is forced to keep his promise or he will stick out. He gets over his fear of posting later in the game as scum this way. It's easy to be active D1 scum, you can keep your story straight. The longer the game goes the more problems you'll have and debears has experienced this and knows it as a weakness. 3) + Show Spoiler + But what REALLY caught my eye were these: On November 03 2012 14:27 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 14:21 Obzy wrote: K - This is in response to debears post asking about me. I may screw up the formatting but hopefully not - On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Obsy has been around the thread. What I have found is that he seems to be actively lurking. Notice above post. Asking a pretty much useless question. It's newbie town/scum tell, so it's a null tell Yeah, I've been trying to read and refresh the thread regularly, I think I've been away from it for maybe an hour total since game start. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: He has a few one-liners like the above. Mostly, his posts do not take a strong stance and his opinions seem to be easily swayed. Again newbie town/scum tell. I've typed out a few posts that were a bit longer, but after re-reading, it didn't look like they did anything to advance town interests and the only thing they did was look spammy and unhelpful, so I've mostly been deleting them. I am, as mentioned, not really certain whether or not I'm judging things properly and taking a concrete stance on something that turns out to be stupid feels sort of dumb. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: I don't like this post. At all. Trying to come up with excuses to not be posting. Sure the thread is moving pretty decently (score one for town), but it's nothing huge and pretty easy to follow so far imo. No comment, it does move really fast. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Here he acts confused. He asks questions without answering them himself or even really attempting to answer them himself. I didn't really want to call you out directly. You responded really strongly to Alsn's red font, and it seemed counterproductive - but stifling discussion is a problem; given that you've been the primary generator of discussion. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Who have a tough time contributing early? Usually scum because 1) They are afraid to post and put themselves out there since they are guilty and know so 2) They know the players they are accusing are town and they can't actually find real evidence to use However, I admit this is also a newbie town trait. I don't have a problem with posting, I don't want to post meaninglessly. Writing about things that are actually useful and will help everybody is difficult, because when I look at what I've drafted it looks moronic and doesn't help anybody. Answering being directly called out is a lot easier, since I don't have to cast about for what to say, I just have to explain how I'm playing. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote: Honestly, this post is just absolutely worthless. It has no actual input. Says nothing about the current happenings of the thread. I wanted the conversation to shift away from talking about Cheese using jokes or not. It was a meaningless thing to discuss. Pointing it out so early and then dwelling on it for so long meant that it isn't a good scumtell for Cheese, while also making him aware of the fact he was doing it (Assuming that it WAS a scumtell, it no longer is). That entire discussion was just a waste of time, so I would say that it makes sense that my post, pointing it out, was equally useless. I definitely have been reading the thread, but haven't done a very good job of blending in. That's not really the point, anyways. You haven't been blending in, because you've been actively advancing the interests of town. I'm not a good enough judge to know if you're doing so genuinely, but you're the most active player currently (IMHO). I haven't read past this post yet, but I'll go ahead and do so now. If I see something, I'll comment. So what is your exact read on me? Scum, slightly scum, null, slightly town, or town? On November 04 2012 03:03 debears wrote: @Sylver Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity? and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key Why is debears so concerned about what specific people think of him? Surely if you're town you just behave normally and address concerns as they come? Or maybe he's trying to get people to say that he's town, so he can use it in his defense later. Regardless I do not see a town motive for asking these questions. All they do is divert from what people are discussing, for an answer that doesn't mean a thing. If people think you're scum, they'll say so, no need to ask. My final point is his entire case against me. It comes out of nowhere. Please read through debears filter and find posts where he questions me or says he's suspicious of me. It's too convenient. Has anyone noticed that after he posted his case things have gone "smoothly"? 1) Alright. You are forgetting the context here. Djo was arguing that CC's jokes were a scumtell. They were not, based on CC's personality in the scum QT and the pregame from both games. 1. Djo's argument was considered dumb by everyone else at this point 2. It was destructive to the thread 3. a. Since Djo's arguments were dumb, I was thinking he was either 1) Misguided townie or 2) Scum If I tell him to back off and he's a misguided townie, it stops a useless argument in the thread If he's scum, it stops him from painting a bs case on a townie 2) When someone refuses to answer a simple question that takes 2 seconds to answer, that is anti-town. Rad jumped on me for asking Alsn to look over my filter. If you're going to accuse me of something, I want specifics. So, when Rad said that is wasting time, I asked for a percentage off the top of his head, and he freaked out. Also, the reason I stopped going on about it is that you did give me a percentage. I've gone over this with Alsn and he gets it. Ask him if you don't understand. I wanted to show Rad that there was a considerable amount of content in my big filter to go with the fluff, since multiple people had bought into Sylver's so much fluff argument. If you honestly think I'm purposely posting stupid stuff to raise my filter to 30 pgs, then you are wrong. If you look at the obs qt from last game, multiple vets commented on Djo's 30 pg filter pace. I'm just having fun with playing this. Also, look at my filter. Look at the content that is in there. I'm making cases, asking specific questions, driving discussion. In other words, I'm a town leader, which is what I have been striving for all along. The 30 page filter will be, if I get there, a byproduct of actively discussing scumreads with others. Also, why would I set a page filter limit as scum? To look active? To spam the thread? As I recall, I don't have a problem with being active. It's a null tell. As town, l want to do it to generate discussion, take a leadership role, and force scum to post. Also, I would like to point out that veteran players on this site, like Marv, do have long filters as town, because they can control the pace of the game. It's a style I think I like, so I'm going for it. 3) Yet again, you are taking my posts out of context. In the first, Obsy made a whole post about me, and he didn't make a clear read in it. I asked him specifically which of those were his read. Specificity = bad for scum Second, Sylver had mentioned how much fluff and long filter don't play well for town On November 04 2012 03:00 sylverfyre wrote: The biggest red flag to me was: Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote: Btw to all obs I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town. Alright, enough about the fluff. I simply have asked a favor. As for the continued Vote on debears: At this point, I'm more concerned about you making up conspiracy theories about me. You OMGUS voted me (not surprising) but you're standing by it for really weird reasons. I'm not the only one calling them weird. Making up weird reasons about me is not getting us anywhere. I am finding it 1% more scummy with each straw you grasp at. Maybe you're overreacting because you're a scum in a bind? I find it strange, and suspicious. That was why I asked whether he would consider me a lynch target based off activity. If he would have said yes, I would have painted him as scum on the spot because activity is a null tell when you're active. Summary: I believe either a) this case is based off heavy confirmation bias or b) scum bias (meaning Clarity would be scum) Considering the rest of Clarity's filter, and my earlier case on Clarity, this strengthens my scumread on Clarity 1) This case is based mostly on taking my posts out of context 2) The part that isn't lacking the whole context has already been explained before, meaning that Clarity isn't reading the thread | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 04:49 Alsn wrote: debears, I know you had a pretty lengthy flame war with Zbo, but as I recall it I always thought you were the reasonable one in that particular feud. IIRC I even pointed it out during the game. I just find your reactions so far uncharacteristic. Whether Obzy has thick skin enough to shrug it off is besides the point. You were being demeaning to a new player which is exactly what you did last game. Admittedly, you seem to be painting "everyone" with bullshit this game, which is a slight change. I actually am a bit concerned, seeing that there's a lot of people who has avoided taking any stances completely until wagons were already well under way. I'm starting to suspect that both you and Clarity might end up being town, but at this point I don't have a better option. I'll see if I can make a better case against someone else, but I don't see how it would benefit town if we fumble around frenetically leading up to the lynch(see my play D3 last game). Especially since it's still D1, the most important thing is to simply make sure that we hold people responsible for their actions going forward. Anyway, I'm still not inclined to trust that you've town's best interest in mind. But I'll keep an eye out for how the thread develops. Someone has crept up on my radar: Slyverfyre. I will post on him in a little Alsn, I strongly recommend you to read the end of the game where I accuse Z-Bo,then SS, then SDM within a short amount of time. I flipflopped so hard cuz I wasn't sure. I found all of them scummy to some degree. I still don't get why you guys are thinking it was a personal attack on Obsy. I'll call people out when I think they aren't contributing. Being on the aggressive side usually makes them more alert and responsive. I think the key here is that I haven't kept bashing him. I like his posting since. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 04:06 sylverfyre wrote: I dunno. I really can't say Djo Debears scumteam. But every time djo tunnels someone, debears is right behind - scum teaming up onto a townie to look more genuine himself? Also, he's wasted peoples time a lot. With fluffy posts and oneliners, then with the entire "percentage fluff" argument with Rad - which he wasn't even willing to drop after Clarity gave him a percentage. Also there's the large amounts of OMGUS coming from debears. Like, everyone who has ever accused him, I think? Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 02:45 Djodref wrote: Anyway, you are not showing town mentality at all, as debears rightly emphasized it with his case. I'm more and more certain that you are scum. You mean Clarity, right? I'm definitely agreeing with clarity being fishy. Definitely some suspicious... mediocre content that he's bringing forward. But he is consistently bringing content up, he has a 4 page filter (with low fluff, but also not with huge, attention grabbing accusations) I'm not willing to evaluate timing for scumminess/innocence - there's too many factors going into timing. Ultimately, though, I don't want to vote for him because there's just not enough material to read into motivations yet. Shit, his recent case about debears is responding pretty convincingly to being called out for low content. Meanwhile debears quadruple posts. I understand that one was a mispost, but you don't need to dedicate another post to "ugh mispost" then make two more oneliner posts following that. That's exactly what I was complaining about earlier. As we get closer to lynchtime it's that much more unproductive, and also demoralizing to people who come back from any flavor of AFK and realize there's that many more posts to crawl through. And exactly why Djo's thing says "France" is irrelevant. He's made it clear where he is, that's the only useful piece of information there. Djo's response to it, regardless of what exactly it is, will have nothing to do with scumhunting. ##Unvote ##Vote Debears 1) Order of suspicion does not usually matter, especially with only 2 scum. Reasoning is the main issue. I've had unique/original reasoning to go with each of my cases. 2) OMGUS is fine when it's warranted. I OMGUS'd you because I felt you were scummy, and your recent actions haven't made you look town at all. 3) You're calling me out for quadruple posting when I'm responding to relevant stuff in the thread. The mispost post is to tell people there's nothing to read there since there's a large amount of text in the spoiler 4) You're trying to make it sound as though every post I make is worthless, where I have good cases/good points about cases with specific questions in my filter Yet again, you seem to think that activity = scumminess since you seem to be blatantly ignoring the content posts that I have | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 06:08 sylverfyre wrote: Debears, much of your 'unique reasoning' was full of holes. Anyone can make a case built on scraps, but your cases haven't held together in my eyes. Thus, I think you did it in order to hide the fact that you wanted to point fingers in the same direction as someone else and hide your OMGUSing. So that's all you have to say on my response to your vote post? Very nice. No rebuttal and you still think I'm scum? That's not scummy at all And you think your case is bulletproof? Your main accusation against me, fluff, isn't viewed like that by people who actually want to determine whether I'm town or scum On November 05 2012 05:25 Rad wrote: On debears and fluff Alright, I've looked back into the debears fluff concerns. I started with sylver's first post calling debears out on fluff and looked at debears' posts before that. I'm not concerned with anything after that, at this point, because his posts before then is what triggered the fluff talking point. I feel pretty good with his content up to that point (~66 posts I think, I may have miss counted). I don't feel like it was a ton of fluff (using clarity's definition). debears tends to respond quickly to people addressing a point or two at a time, so he simply ends up with a big filter comprised mostly of smaller posts. I glanced through his XVIII game (was town) and even there, most of his posts are shorter and addressing a specific point. He seems pretty consistent in that throughout the 3 games. His posts almost always spawn additional discussion and that's good for town. He had a few joke posts in there that were clearly useless, but those aren't difficult to ignore and don't really affect the readability of his filter. Also, the theme of this game was bound to produce some of the joke posts by debears and cheese, so that's forgivable. In the end, I don't think this is a great point on the case vs debears. It seems like an incredibly easy "scum tell" sort of thing to just throw out there that instantly becomes a talking point and may never end. It's not attacking a particular statement or logical thought process, it's just saying "you write shitty content that clutters up the thread and that's scummy." That's fine if he's actually doing that, but after looking through his posts, I don't feel he was. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 06:19 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:08 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: @Rad I liked how you had that townie read on me last game . I think you had that read because I was playing very neutral (no strong ultra-mega reads) and using logical points. Is Obzy doing that this game? To you, does he seem like me in the previous game? Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:08 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: ebwop: Is Clarity doing that this game* No, I feel like Clarity is putting himself out there more than you did last game. You were very safe attacking djo because everyone thought he was scum. Though I don't agree with his fluff argument, it seems sincere, and really the whole fluff argument is entirely subjective (which is why I thought it would get dropped early, but it's stuck around). Rad, something I would like to point out. Did clarity start off the game by putting himself out there? Or did it take 2 cases on him to start actually taking stances? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
How did you go from this On November 05 2012 01:55 Clarity_nl wrote: I'm here now. Please give me a bit to reply as I do need to make dinner as well. Yes Djo my case was going to be about you, it's funny how that works huh, debears popping in with a giant case with bolded red lettering all over it? to this On November 05 2012 03:40 Clarity_nl wrote: My case on debears: All game long he's been accusing people of FoS'ing him while he's away. The reason it's interesting is that he doesn't mention when he leaves, it's just "unlucky" I guess. But it's a good way to redirect attention to whomever is accusing him. By itself this doesn't mean much, but by the end of this post you should know why I'm extremely suspicious of debears. Show nested quote + On November 03 2012 13:25 debears wrote: On November 03 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote: On November 03 2012 13:09 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: On November 03 2012 13:00 Djodref wrote: @ Cheese I'm pretty sure that the following quote was totally serving your mafia agenda in the last game. But I guess I should better trust you because I don't really see why you should be dishonest right now about it. On October 29 2012 13:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Holy meta argument Batbears. Are you saying that Dandel under pressure is basically = Kush in terms of meta? Let's take a look at the second one On October 28 2012 09:20 Rad wrote: Djo NOW YOU SHOW UP? On October 28 2012 09:21 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: A wild Djo appears? I don't know if you have seen Rad post or not before posting yours but I really felt that you were both accusing me of active lurking. Why the lolwut by the way ? What did you not understand in my comment ? @Djo The second part of the first quote isn't a joke. It's an analogy. Therefore it has nothing to do with anything. The second quote: Pokemon reference, it means I think of you as a pokemon. Pokemon are innocent and cute; I'm not casting aspersions on you in the least. Yes, @obsQT I just mentioned pokemon. We could go with this WIFOM crap all day. These "jokes" means absolutely nothing. Are we seriously still talking about a failboat joke? Stop this incessant attempt to tunnel me--it bears no weight at all because it is probably one of the most subjective things one could possibly focus on. Especially since it's coming from another game entirely. I declare this useless argument over *gavel slam*. @ Cheese I'll stop tunneling you when I'm satisfied with your answers. Why do you want us to stop discussing ? This discussion has derived from its original point to go something quite useless, I agree. My point is that you could have used these jokes to make me look bad. I know this was a pokemon reference but I think "a wild Djo appears" was implying active lurking, especially in the context of the thread, rather than implying that I was innocent as a pokemon. My point is that jokes can be used by mafia to cast suspicion on a player without looking like you are doing it. It's a great tool used this way. Djo, if you are town, stop arguing over stupid points. You're wrong. Get over it If you're mafia, keep arguing Debears does two things here. 1. He halts discussion. He doesn't change subject, he just stops the current one. 2. He calls djo wrong. There is no explanation. Just: "You're wrong. Get over it" He's also telling Djo to stop being an idiot, NOW. Why would he want him to stop if he had nothing better to discuss? My current scumreads have changed wildly with recent developments. To me, a debears/djodref scumteam seems most likely, but since djo has set it up so that I cannot post a useful case about him now I'm posting this instead. What makes you think you can't post a case on Djo right now when he's one of your top scumreads? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
He did say he'd be back a few hours before lynch right? And is there anything new in your case that hasn't been said yet about him? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
@Alsn And I agree with you on CC neutrality. I'm also looking at Sylver/Clarity for a few reasons. And if people don't show up for lynch (I think dau0d was the only one that said he couldn't be here for lynch) we are gonna have some problems | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Could you look over Sylver's filter? I see a few worrisome things 1) In an active game, he has been fairly inactive - only 2 pages in the filter. In other words, he isn't invested in the game/the lynch discussion 2) He still hasn't addressed my response to his case On November 05 2012 06:08 sylverfyre wrote: Debears, much of your 'unique reasoning' was full of holes. Anyone can make a case built on scraps, but your cases haven't held together in my eyes. Thus, I think you did it in order to hide the fact that you wanted to point fingers in the same direction as someone else and hide your OMGUSing. 3) His reasoning for voting me was bad 4) His latest troll post On November 05 2012 06:03 sylverfyre wrote: oOo Rad, it's a list. Some people think those are scummy to post! Da0ud is quiet, but he speaks up and contributes when he's around. I can't really call that scummy. I definitely don't think it's worth lynching him over it. 5) He's not here before lynch 6) His reasons for suspicion are pretty ambiguous against me/Djo when there has been plenty said of us On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. 7) He defends Clarity by throwing out random suspicions on Djo/me/dau0d On November 05 2012 00:38 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being crucified for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) I wish he hadn't left so abruptly though. Da0ud seems in the same boat. He's on the quiet side, and now he's waiting before making another move. 8) He reposts pretty much the same thing an hour later On November 05 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. He's got a 4 page filter which doesn't read as fluffy to me (I admit I'm just skimming right now) Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being called out for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) His latest posts really make me think he isn't pulling off some active lurking strategies. BTW, game 1 he had page and a half when he got modkilled. At the same time this game, he has almost twice that. I really can't call that "more passive" even though he's not coming out swinging this game. What do you think Alsn? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
*high fives CC* | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
For the reasons stated in the my earlier post | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Considering the flavor claim. I would like to point out a few things 1) If Cheese is scum, the other scum probably went in on the flavor claim also, since both would know it 2) If Cheese is town, I doubt there were any scum in the claims that just happened | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 08:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Wait, how would people know about the VT role PM besides the VTs.... I think to give the mafia safeclaims | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 08:58 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 08:56 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did I didn't want to assume things. I didn't know that either but I had considered it much earlier. I noticed the OP is different from my PM role. Hold on there. I could understand that maybe you thought the mafia had a name safe claim. But the whole role pm? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 08:59 Alsn wrote: Wait, if I'm to understand marv correctly, were some players not aware that the VT role was "regular fapper"? Or what? I didn't know that everyone knew the flavor and whole pm | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:00 Clarity_nl wrote: @ Alsn The reason debears says that is because the OP role says Townie That and the fact that I wasn't told that any other role/alignment had it | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Who didn't know about everyone having the role pm? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:04 Rad wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:03 debears wrote: Ok. Let's try this Who didn't know about everyone having the role pm? Wouldn't that out every VT and be extremely anti town? Eh. didn't think about that.......yeah.....nvm | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:08 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:07 Alsn wrote: On November 05 2012 09:04 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Yea and I'm just supposed to take your word for it? For all I know you and Clarity are both scum and you figured since the OP doesn't mention it you'd claim and then say "amagad, we couldn't possibly not be town!".I guess the scum did know about the flavor text, but I didn't know they knew about it. I think we have to assume the whole flavour thing to be a null tell. That means the only new info we have is that Cheese claimed VT..... ? Pretty much. And we have no idea whether anything anyone says is true.....so back to legit scumhunting | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
##Vote Cheesecake I have my reasons. Found out this is a mafia oriented move | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Nvm | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
My top two candidates before the claim were Clarity and Sylver We gotta restart this. only 45 minutes before lynch. Who are our top candidates? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
##Vote Cheese Yeah the timing made no sense | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:22 Alsn wrote: I'm still convinced Cheese is scum. A VT claim that he thinks will save him an hour before lynch? Way too convenient. Just like it was stated in the post-game of XXIX, convenient claims don't mean much. He also went out pretty sure of himself in saying "I'm thinking I'll be pretty neutral D1 even in the future" or something like that, only to go "Ohshi, better do something fast!" as soon as I accused him. That seems to suggest to me that he knows my alignment and got caught saying something that wasn't true so he needs to listen to me. Yeah idk why he would claim so soon when no votes on him. Doesn't make any sense | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:23 Clarity_nl wrote: Okay, so your currently reasoning to lynch Cheese is entirely based off of his VT claim? That and the points about neutrality earlier. Honestly the timing of the claim is sooo off. He also didn't act too confused about the claim, which if he was VT I think he would be | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:25 sylverfyre wrote: Well, as I said, I'm willing to vote cheese too. I think it's cheesecake debears, and that debears might be trying to get out of this by bussing CC. ##Unvote ##Vote Cheese That association....idk what to even say about that. You've been saying me/Djo association all day. Now you suddenly switch? That's ridiculous | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:28 Clarity_nl wrote: I think if Cheese flips red there's no way debears is scum.... 9 player mafia and scum busses eachother day 1? No way. STOP WITH THE DAMN ASSOCIATION SHIT PLZ. Focus on the lynch RIGHT NOW | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:30 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: I seriously thought that way of claiming would get me confirmed town because nobody else knew the flavor for VT besides VT's xD. And I figured, as a confirmed town, that I'd get the NK because confirmed towns are a good target over going for a longshot blue snipe. Hey, Debears got what I was going for right away. I'll be afk until the green flip. Lol you serious? You aren't town. Giving up? That's not town motivated at all. That's self pity. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:32 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Lol what do you want me to say, bro? You should Know i wouldn't do something this stupid as scum xD 1) You're VT - you don't know about everyone knowing. You think it'll confirm you to other VTs. But why so early when there was really only Alsn on you? 2) You're Scum - You know everyone has the PM. You act like you were VT who didn't know that. Trick ppl to thinking you're VT. If you wouldn't have claimed at such a weird time, I think you would be more believable. If you would defend yourself, I think it'd be more believable | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:35 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: LOL I claimed it way later, like right before lynch time on the last day. I also got the Inig lynch, thanks for that btw Alsn. Now you're trolling | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 09:46 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Just think guys: What the hell is the scum motivation of blowing up the thread like this? Be logical here. If I were scum, why would I risk everything so suddenly? Hmm? Makes not a bit of sense. That claim was almost asking to get lynched. As a scum, and if I had the role PM, I should have known this would happen. But I didn't, because I didn't know everyone had the VT role PM. But why did you claim so early? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
it makes no sense from either a scum or town perspective | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 10:40 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:23 Djodref wrote: On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. If that is not a big scumtell Huh? I didn't think ANYONE would follow me. And cheese voting debears basically cemented nobody following a debears lynch, regardless of what cheese true alignment was. I was starting to consider if it was wrong is all. You seriously need to stop trying to pull up one sentence, take it out of context, and call it a scumtell. You did it last game to me too. Maybe something about my writing style? I don't know. Did you consider me scummier than CC at the point where you voted CC over me before the lynch? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 11:53 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:46 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 10:40 sylverfyre wrote: On November 05 2012 10:23 Djodref wrote: On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. If that is not a big scumtell Huh? I didn't think ANYONE would follow me. And cheese voting debears basically cemented nobody following a debears lynch, regardless of what cheese true alignment was. I was starting to consider if it was wrong is all. You seriously need to stop trying to pull up one sentence, take it out of context, and call it a scumtell. You did it last game to me too. Maybe something about my writing style? I don't know. Did you consider me scummier than CC at the point where you voted CC over me before the lynch? I did. I still do. Calling for a VT-rolecall really bugs me. So you didn't vote for your top scumread when the voting was close? That doesn't make sense | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. On November 05 2012 09:25 sylverfyre wrote: Well, as I said, I'm willing to vote cheese too. I think it's cheesecake debears, and that debears might be trying to get out of this by bussing CC. ##Unvote ##Vote Cheese So basically, I would be suspicious no matter what the flip was. Alright. So, no matter what, I am scum based on the outcome of this lynch. Yet, he's not sure that Cheese is, shown by the second quote. Why wouldn't he vote the person he is sure is scum? Sylver's voting: He had his vote parked on Cheesecake. What was he saying the whole time? On November 05 2012 09:10 sylverfyre wrote: Scumteam Cheese Debears? Trying to call out for all VT to roleclaim... ANY kind of mass roleclaim on day 1... no. Just no. No no no no. No way is that something a townie would ask for. During most of day1, sylver had a djo/me scumteam theory. Then, he suddenly switches to me/cheese? That doesn't make any sense On November 05 2012 09:50 sylverfyre wrote: Stuff to consider for tomorrow: Clarity was awfully eager to go along with Cheese's claim. Debears called for a roleclaim before everyone jumped on cheesecake. It seemed pretty clear that Sylver thought I was scum. Why didn't he vote me? On November 05 2012 10:03 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:02 debears wrote: Didn't you say you found me more scummy than CC? Yes, I jumped on you pretty early after your call for claim. And I still think you're bad. But everyone else is tunneling cheese so hard and there's negative time left now. When I asked why he wasn't voting me, he comes up with some bullshit excuse. The voting was close. He could've easily made it a likely lynch for his top scumread. Instead, he gives terribad reasoning for not voting his top scumread and keeps the vote on someone who we know is town. Why? Town - I have no fucking idea Scum - Get rid of a townie, while being able to keep suspicion on an active, dangerous townie (me). If a scum gets me lynched when I was his scumread all day, he has to find a new target. However, by lynching CC, it allows him to stay focused on me and twist everything I say On November 05 2012 12:05 sylverfyre wrote: So. Cheesecake does his flavor-roleclaim. Who follows? Clarity's the first to really manipulate people into looking at him favorably. (when he had looked bad all game) FOS: Clarity Debears is involved as well, but he doesn't make much of it for a bit - he sits back and lets it play out. He's not for or against it. It's not until Rad warns about dropping blue targets that debears backs off. FOS Debears. Strong Town read on Rad. Oh look, another scumteam theory involving me. He sure loves changing me into every scumteam theory he has. Very funny how he didn't vote his obvious top scumread, as shown by his multiple scum theories, tunneling on me, and his pre lynch statements Also, look at his activity before the lynch. He disappears until less than an hour before lynch in the middle of the claim ordeal On November 05 2012 09:02 sylverfyre wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 05 2012 08:23 debears wrote: @Alsn Could you look over Sylver's filter? I see a few worrisome things 1) In an active game, he has been fairly inactive - only 2 pages in the filter. In other words, he isn't invested in the game/the lynch discussion 2) He still hasn't addressed my response to his case Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:08 sylverfyre wrote: Debears, much of your 'unique reasoning' was full of holes. Anyone can make a case built on scraps, but your cases haven't held together in my eyes. Thus, I think you did it in order to hide the fact that you wanted to point fingers in the same direction as someone else and hide your OMGUSing. 3) His reasoning for voting me was bad 4) His latest troll post Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:03 sylverfyre wrote: oOo Rad, it's a list. Some people think those are scummy to post! Da0ud is quiet, but he speaks up and contributes when he's around. I can't really call that scummy. I definitely don't think it's worth lynching him over it. 5) He's not here before lynch 6) His reasons for suspicion are pretty ambiguous against me/Djo when there has been plenty said of us Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. 7) He defends Clarity by throwing out random suspicions on Djo/me/dau0d Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 00:38 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being crucified for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) I wish he hadn't left so abruptly though. Da0ud seems in the same boat. He's on the quiet side, and now he's waiting before making another move. 8) He reposts pretty much the same thing an hour later Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. He's got a 4 page filter which doesn't read as fluffy to me (I admit I'm just skimming right now) Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being called out for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) His latest posts really make me think he isn't pulling off some active lurking strategies. BTW, game 1 he had page and a half when he got modkilled. At the same time this game, he has almost twice that. I really can't call that "more passive" even though he's not coming out swinging this game. What do you think Alsn? 1, 2) Maybe count the number of sentences instead of the number of posts. I'm spending a lot of time on my posts, and if that makes me scummy then I just don't know what to say. 3) My original reason for voting you was to pressure you. As with many early pressure FOS/Votes, I kinda pulled a reason out of thin air because I don't know much. Then I got more reasons, and used them, when you OMGUS retort on me and so forth. 4) My troll post is a veiled criticism of people earlier saying "Lists are bad" 5) I'm here. Watching MLG Finals and handling some IRL obligations, but I'm here. 6) My reasons to suspect you are not ambiguous. I just don't know which of you to suspect. 7) I defend clarity... by throwing out suspicions on the same people I have been suspecting all game. If I suspect you, why the hell would I trust your opinion lynch targets and think that people should follow them? 8) Holy shit, I didn't realize I did that. Why was that post in two browser tabs :/ O_O I literally thought that was an incomplete post and kept writing on it. Massive mistake, I'm sorry. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 14:18 sylverfyre wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 05 2012 13:22 debears wrote: Some thoughts on Sylver pre-lynch Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:25 sylverfyre wrote: Well, as I said, I'm willing to vote cheese too. I think it's cheesecake debears, and that debears might be trying to get out of this by bussing CC. ##Unvote ##Vote Cheese So basically, I would be suspicious no matter what the flip was. Alright. So, no matter what, I am scum based on the outcome of this lynch. Yet, he's not sure that Cheese is, shown by the second quote. Why wouldn't he vote the person he is sure is scum? Sylver's voting: He had his vote parked on Cheesecake. What was he saying the whole time? Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:10 sylverfyre wrote: Scumteam Cheese Debears? Trying to call out for all VT to roleclaim... ANY kind of mass roleclaim on day 1... no. Just no. No no no no. No way is that something a townie would ask for. During most of day1, sylver had a djo/me scumteam theory. Then, he suddenly switches to me/cheese? That doesn't make any sense Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:50 sylverfyre wrote: Stuff to consider for tomorrow: Clarity was awfully eager to go along with Cheese's claim. Debears called for a roleclaim before everyone jumped on cheesecake. It seemed pretty clear that Sylver thought I was scum. Why didn't he vote me? Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:03 sylverfyre wrote: On November 05 2012 10:02 debears wrote: Didn't you say you found me more scummy than CC? Yes, I jumped on you pretty early after your call for claim. And I still think you're bad. But everyone else is tunneling cheese so hard and there's negative time left now. When I asked why he wasn't voting me, he comes up with some bullshit excuse. The voting was close. He could've easily made it a likely lynch for his top scumread. Instead, he gives terribad reasoning for not voting his top scumread and keeps the vote on someone who we know is town. Why? Town - I have no fucking idea Scum - Get rid of a townie, while being able to keep suspicion on an active, dangerous townie (me). If a scum gets me lynched when I was his scumread all day, he has to find a new target. However, by lynching CC, it allows him to stay focused on me and twist everything I say Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 12:05 sylverfyre wrote: So. Cheesecake does his flavor-roleclaim. Who follows? Clarity's the first to really manipulate people into looking at him favorably. (when he had looked bad all game) FOS: Clarity Debears is involved as well, but he doesn't make much of it for a bit - he sits back and lets it play out. He's not for or against it. It's not until Rad warns about dropping blue targets that debears backs off. FOS Debears. Strong Town read on Rad. Oh look, another scumteam theory involving me. He sure loves changing me into every scumteam theory he has. Very funny how he didn't vote his obvious top scumread, as shown by his multiple scum theories, tunneling on me, and his pre lynch statements Also, look at his activity before the lynch. He disappears until less than an hour before lynch in the middle of the claim ordeal Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 09:02 sylverfyre wrote: + Show Spoiler + On November 05 2012 08:23 debears wrote: @Alsn Could you look over Sylver's filter? I see a few worrisome things 1) In an active game, he has been fairly inactive - only 2 pages in the filter. In other words, he isn't invested in the game/the lynch discussion 2) He still hasn't addressed my response to his case Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:08 sylverfyre wrote: Debears, much of your 'unique reasoning' was full of holes. Anyone can make a case built on scraps, but your cases haven't held together in my eyes. Thus, I think you did it in order to hide the fact that you wanted to point fingers in the same direction as someone else and hide your OMGUSing. 3) His reasoning for voting me was bad 4) His latest troll post Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 06:03 sylverfyre wrote: oOo Rad, it's a list. Some people think those are scummy to post! Da0ud is quiet, but he speaks up and contributes when he's around. I can't really call that scummy. I definitely don't think it's worth lynching him over it. 5) He's not here before lynch 6) His reasons for suspicion are pretty ambiguous against me/Djo when there has been plenty said of us Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. 7) He defends Clarity by throwing out random suspicions on Djo/me/dau0d Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 00:38 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being crucified for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) I wish he hadn't left so abruptly though. Da0ud seems in the same boat. He's on the quiet side, and now he's waiting before making another move. 8) He reposts pretty much the same thing an hour later Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 01:40 sylverfyre wrote: Djo is still making little sense with his plurality lynch strategy. After saying straight up that it's too late to discuss lynch strategy. I feel like people might be reading into stuff too much on clarity, after forcing a lot of stuff out of him and then rejecting it as a "List" - you're basically cutting him off and being like "your idea is bad don't share that" and then are mystified when he gets quiet. Furthermore, he was active during the part of the day that debears was arguing rather constantly about his "Fluff Percentage" (and appears to even have gotten sidetracked by skimming through and pulling a number out, presumably hoping to get debears to drop the pointless argument) Successfully waste someone's time -> call them scum for not contributing enough? I am really not sure how I feel about that. He's got a 4 page filter which doesn't read as fluffy to me (I admit I'm just skimming right now) Shit, he's not even the only one who iterated through the people he had questions for - so why is he the only one being called out for it? o.O I realize he didn't follow through with pressure on his cases (in fact, I pretty much missed the question he asked me until I got around to it by scumhunting at Djo's prod.) His latest posts really make me think he isn't pulling off some active lurking strategies. BTW, game 1 he had page and a half when he got modkilled. At the same time this game, he has almost twice that. I really can't call that "more passive" even though he's not coming out swinging this game. What do you think Alsn? 1, 2) Maybe count the number of sentences instead of the number of posts. I'm spending a lot of time on my posts, and if that makes me scummy then I just don't know what to say. 3) My original reason for voting you was to pressure you. As with many early pressure FOS/Votes, I kinda pulled a reason out of thin air because I don't know much. Then I got more reasons, and used them, when you OMGUS retort on me and so forth. 4) My troll post is a veiled criticism of people earlier saying "Lists are bad" 5) I'm here. Watching MLG Finals and handling some IRL obligations, but I'm here. 6) My reasons to suspect you are not ambiguous. I just don't know which of you to suspect. 7) I defend clarity... by throwing out suspicions on the same people I have been suspecting all game. If I suspect you, why the hell would I trust your opinion lynch targets and think that people should follow them? 8) Holy shit, I didn't realize I did that. Why was that post in two browser tabs :/ O_O I literally thought that was an incomplete post and kept writing on it. Massive mistake, I'm sorry. No. I didn't have a you/djo scumteam theory. I had a you OR djo scumteam. I didn't think it was both of you. Eh. you are speaking the truth on the djo/me scumteam part. I thought you did considering how often you mentioned us two acting together On November 04 2012 07:46 sylverfyre wrote: Well let's see. There was a 2 person bandwagon on me, awfully early after my first post. Debears and Djod. I find it interesting. By accusing me, he quickly jumped to the defense of debears. Why? On November 05 2012 01:43 sylverfyre wrote: You know what, debears and Djodref are teaming up on someone again. I find it difficult to swallow that the two of them are independently finding the same people scummy. I think one of the two is scum, and I don't know which one. Worth noting that this is the second time that debears has followed up Djo on an attack (though the first time, it was also in defense of himself. This time, there's no such defense. Saying we aren't independently finding someone scummy would mean we are collaborating, in other words, a scumteam. Perhaps I just misinterpreted it. What do you have to say about not voting your top scumread? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
What do you think of the mini case I recently made on Sylver for not voting his top scumread? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 17:28 da0ud wrote: If a lynch for D2 : I am currently running for yourself (see my case) and Clarity (he knew that non-VT would have the VT role). I did like Clarity's defense overnight, he sounded pretty honest to me. He has addressed calmly all the points against him. Just this slip is too much. He could be blue though, but I would not think he would have been that condescending if blue. I still keep Debears somewhere there on top of the list, but he has been consistent in driving town forward. Yet there is a lot of fluff, useless posts ("ugh mispost", etc.). If he is scum we should be able to find some clues with more pieces of information on people's alignment in the near future. I have a gut feeling on Rad. I will try to put a case on him during D2. If i cannot make a proper case with valid arguments against him, I will let you know why I find him to lay more townie then. @Everyone Can we stop with the whole fluff nonsense? If you bother to actually read my fucking filter, there are plenty of good posts. This whole fluff argument is lingering wayyyyyyyyyy too long @Djo Here was my inital reaction to Clarity's reactions to the CC claim On November 05 2012 08:56 debears wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did @Clarity On November 05 2012 08:58 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 08:56 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did I didn't want to assume things. I didn't know that either but I had considered it much earlier. I noticed the OP is different from my PM role. Alright there are some assumptions we need to make here 1) you're VT - You do not know anyone else gets VT role pm. You then ask marv. Marv clarify's everyone does have it. You don't share it with everyone to prevent VT claim or stop useless VT claims 2) You're a blue - You know you got the VT claim, but you're claiming VT right now. You knew VT's did not know anyone else had role pm by talking to marv. You did not share with the town crucial information to prevent stupid/fake VT claims 3) You're mafia - You knew you have VT role pm, you aren't suprised by the claim flavor. You didn't tell the town crucial information because you're mafia. Which makes sense? Point 3 | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
One more thing on Sylver: After reading through his filter, during the claim time, there's one thing really apparent: he did not care that cheese was getting lynched. He hardly talked about whether we should believe cheese or not. His whole time was spent painting targets on the back of me and clarity | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 23:26 Clarity_nl wrote: I never claimed VT, I never claimed anything. On November 05 2012 08:58 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 08:56 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did I didn't want to assume things. I didn't know that either but I had considered it much earlier. I noticed the OP is different from my PM role. Now, you're lieing. That's a claim | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 23:29 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 23:27 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 23:26 Clarity_nl wrote: I never claimed VT, I never claimed anything. On November 05 2012 08:58 Clarity_nl wrote: On November 05 2012 08:56 debears wrote: On November 05 2012 08:32 Clarity_nl wrote: I can do that too. I don't wanna pay for no porn man. I don't think that saying that proves anything, can't make an assumption based on the host's behavior. Cheese why did you claim VT? Why would you think that doesn't prove anything. I didn't know everyone got the VT role pm? This sounds like you knew that everyone did I didn't want to assume things. I didn't know that either but I had considered it much earlier. I noticed the OP is different from my PM role. Now, you're lieing. That's a claim It's safe to assume that since Townie isn't Townie, other roles have different names too, right? Alright there are some assumptions we need to make here 1) you're VT - You do not know anyone else gets VT role pm. You then ask marv. Marv clarify's everyone does have it. You don't share it with everyone to prevent VT claim or stop useless VT claims 2) You're a blue - You know you got the VT claim, but you're claiming VT right now. You knew VT's did not know anyone else had role pm by talking to marv. You did not share with the town crucial information to prevent stupid/fake VT claims 3) You're mafia - You knew you have VT role pm, you aren't suprised by the claim flavor. You didn't tell the town crucial information because you're mafia. If you were blue, you would have shared the info thru marv | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I just thought over things. I'm dropping any pressure against you until i do more research | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 05 2012 23:45 Clarity_nl wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 23:45 debears wrote: @clarity I just thought over things. I'm dropping any pressure against you until i do more research I don't think forcing me to roleclaim during N1 is a good idea. Yeah i got the memo. It came late though | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 06 2012 04:45 Obzy wrote: It does. I have a problem with mafia, in that I'm bad at detecting liars lol. I like assuming that everybody is being honest and telling the truth, and in a proper game, that's not possible. Your responses to me are answering my questions, which just makes me wonder if I'm asking the right questions, or if you're innocent and it's just shining through or something lol. The way you reacted to Cheese's statement feels.. legitimate? Upon rereading. What do you think of Sylver? If you're still around. For that matter, what does everyone think of Sylver? Sylver is scummy as shit. He's flown under the radar. We should stop pushing clarity for now | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
There can be nothing good to come of pushing clarity right now. Think of the pros and cons | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 06 2012 08:29 sylverfyre wrote: Scumslips in everyone of my posts? Exaggerate much? Also, telling the blues how to play is fishy. Mind telling me who you're talking about here? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
When have you seriously been a candidate for lynch? How active have you been? In terms of lynch, you were never under real threat. In terms of activity, i believe you are among the bottom two/three (u, dau0d, and obsy) | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I'm going to make a more organized case on Sylver based on his d1 and n1 actions so far. I want you to honestly tell me if you find clarity still scummier than him then. ok? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Anyways GG guys. Gl town! As tucan sam says "Follow your nose!" | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Gg guys I'm late to the party | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
| ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 04:04 Alsn wrote: Anyone have any tips for just how I'm supposed to filter all my reads? I tend to always wind up at "null"(not really the right word, undecided is more like it) or slight reads in either direction because I seem to sum up all of a players actions and then conclude "well, both scummy and townie at times! I obviously can't be too confident about either direction!". alsn, you're strength is late game analysis by far. What I would recommend is being more aggressive d1 (of course you were a cop so its understandable this game). Get the answers you want. That's how I best get my reads. Also, you need to remove posts that indicative scum or town equally (or pretty close to equal). Also, when you combine posts, look at if one post strengthens the scumminess of the other) For example, with syler. In his first post he praised town for activity, then later on accuses me and djo of "posting too much". Alone, you could say a townie could say that. But together, they don't make any sense. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I feel there were a few mistakes this game in terms of how people appraoch reads 1) Fluff - A few guys kept screaming "fluff!" at my filter, yet failed to realize the content that was in there. Even if there a bit of fluff in a filter, a townie can just scroll through it to look at the long posts. Remember, look for content first. If there is no content, then look at the amount of fluff 2) Bullying - I feel that guys like (Rad and Clarity I believe) cited bullying as a scum tell. First, don't take someone using strong wording (unless its like "you absolutely suck and should quit playing mafia") as scummy. Look at their reasoning for using that wording. Also, if it's true, then how is it bullying? Don't get too emotional when playing mafia 3) Outing Blues - The problem with this is that, most of the time, mafia will hide among the semi-lurkers, where blues hide. Also, don't rely too heavily on blues. We didn't win this game because of blues. We won it because everyone that was townie looked townie (or townier than the scum). Outing mafia, out of the cost of outing a blue or two, isn't necessarily a bad thing. There are usually a similar amount of mafia and blues. There are usually around 3 townies to 1 mafia. If you can out one mafia per blue, you usually win the game. | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
I figured I'd help Hapa and Marv out with this. Not amazing stuff on my part but a few thoughts. Scum 1) Sylver - The most consistent problem for you was that your posts were not from a townie mindset most of the time. Here's the case I was making before I died. Take a look at the reasoning and you should be able to see what I mean + Show Spoiler + Alright, so, for this case on Sylver, which I believe is a very strong one, I want to point out that I haven't gone over Clarity's actions d1 and n1 so far. That is because I believe that Sylver has scumtells(not scumslips). 1) His voting before the lynch and his reasoning During the claim confusion, Sylver stated multiple times that he thought I was scum. when asked, he said that I was his top scum read, yet he didn't vote me. Why? On November 05 2012 10:03 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:02 debears wrote: Didn't you say you found me more scummy than CC? Yes, I jumped on you pretty early after your call for claim. And I still think you're bad. But everyone else is tunneling cheese so hard and there's negative time left now. On November 05 2012 10:40 sylverfyre wrote: Show nested quote + On November 05 2012 10:23 Djodref wrote: On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. If that is not a big scumtell Huh? I didn't think ANYONE would follow me. And cheese voting debears basically cemented nobody following a debears lynch, regardless of what cheese true alignment was. I was starting to consider if it was wrong is all. You seriously need to stop trying to pull up one sentence, take it out of context, and call it a scumtell. You did it last game to me too. Maybe something about my writing style? I don't know. Alright, so because he thought CC was scum, he didn't vote me, his top scumread. What I would like to point out is that he thought I would be scum no matter what CC flipped, yet he had his doubts about CC About me: On November 05 2012 09:10 sylverfyre wrote: Scumteam Cheese Debears? Trying to call out for all VT to roleclaim... ANY kind of mass roleclaim on day 1... no. Just no. No no no no. No way is that something a townie would ask for. On November 05 2012 09:25 sylverfyre wrote: Well, as I said, I'm willing to vote cheese too. I think it's cheesecake debears, and that debears might be trying to get out of this by bussing CC. ##Unvote ##Vote Cheese On CC doubts: On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. Notice how, no matter what the flip for CC, I was scum. Why wouldn't he vote for the person he sure is scum? Not reading the thread at a crucial moment Here was another excuse for not voting me On November 05 2012 10:00 sylverfyre wrote: Where was my chance? O.o This post was referring when the bandwagon flipped on me pretty quickly, pulling me and CC close. What does this show? Sylver was not reading the thread at a moment of great confusion right before the lynch Who wants to sort out whether CC is town or not by reading the thread carefully? Town Who wants to act like they are paying attention but really aren't? Scum I want to point out the end voting for everyone to see how close it was between me and CC Mr. Cheesecake (6) - Alsn, Clarity_nl (0) - debears (3) - Djodref (0) - da0ud (0) - sylverfyre (0) - Had Sylver actually voted for his top scumread, the voting would have been 5-4 CC-me. Also, consider Clarity and Alsn had considered me scummy the whole d1. A lynch of me was a very real possibility. Why wouldn't Sylver jump on it since I'm his top scumread? Motivations 1) Town - There isn't 2) Scum - Lynch a townie (CC) in an easy, confusion lynch while being able to keep your top scumread alive, so that you can tunnel him the next day and not find a new target Spreading Suspicion during the Lynch A townie's top priority right before lynch is to determine whether or not the leading candidates are scum, unless they are absolutely scum, especially on d1. What did Sylver focus on during the lynch? Spreading suspicion on me and Clarity. He didn't even comment on CC's claim Look at his posts in order from here. Also, look at the time difference between his posts. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16802154 Almost all of his posts mentioned me or my actions in them. That's very weird. There's a 25 minute gap in there from his vote on CC to his next post. Isn't that weird right before lynch? What was he doing? Notice how all his posts are painting suspicion on me and Clarity at this time. He did not know what CC was, yet he seemed to not care to find out. A huge contradiction I want to point out 2 back to back posts that completely contradicted each other. On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: I'm not going to sheep a scum. This was a response to CC's vote here: On November 05 2012 10:01 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: ##Unvote ##Vote: Debears right there So he is certain CC is scum right? What did Sylver say in the exact same minute On November 05 2012 10:01 sylverfyre wrote: My chance following cheesecake voting debears? If cheese flips town, it's clarity or debears. Probably both. Wowowowowowowow. Scum alert here boys. He calls CC certain scum the second after this. Why would he all of a sudden put up a "if cc is town" scenario right before he calls CC certain scum? Because he knows CC is town and is acting like he thinks CC is scum. 2) Clarity - You got screwed over by the extra information the blues had. However, I feel you would have been caught eventually anyways. Your day 1 wasn't horrible, but it didn't establish townieness Instead of making posts with a bunch of reads, pick out two targets and dig up as much as you can on them. Move on if you don't find anything/you're being called out for being unreasonable. Town 1) Djo - MVP for sure. A few things though. 1. Try to be a little more level headed early day 1 (I suppose I'm guilty of the same thing). You're attack on Cheese made me suspicious of you a little bit (luckily your reads spot on with mine = town). 2. Try not to claim so early unless you need it to get the scum lynch 3. As jk, I don't think you should have pressured clarity so hard during the night if you truly believed he was scum, considering that you coulnd't protect yourself. Don't make yourself a target as that important of a role. Luckily, they killed me so you could claim. That said, nice reads (I believe both scum were in your d1 reads) 2) Alsn - Be more aggressive d1. Other than that, good game. You were logical, showed your analysis skills. Also, if I were you, with your analytical skills, I wouldn't give too much respect to the scum play of others (I recall day one you kept bringing up my scum meta). Have faith that you can read active players as the game goes on. It's your strength 3) Rad - Although I thought you were scummy early on, you made some posts (a meta post on me) that showed a townie mindset. At the very least, you made yourself less scummy than the scum, so you did your job 4) Obzy - Very impressive first game! You were the first town read I had, and that didn't change the whole game. Keep it up! 5) CC - You got screwed over, but it happens. Be more aggressive 6) Dau0d - You were showing a townie mindset when you were active. If you could have found more time to invest, I feel you would have been much more townie | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 04:20 Rad wrote: Debears, I'm curious why you kept pushing the fluff percentage thing on me. I never told you I thought you had a lot of fluff, that was someone else (alsn I think?). My thing on that was questioning why you'd want anyone to waste time on it since at that point, no conclusion could be made one way or the other since it's just subjective. My reasoning was to get you to realize the amount of content in my filter | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 04:21 Clarity_nl wrote: You have to realize that the fluff argument/bullying, from my perspective, was to cause interference. Same goes for blue hunting. =] I can see why you would want to use it, but honestly you made yourself way more suspicious to me since that was the only reasoning you could find on me. Never make yourself that suspicious to the most active player at that time. Also, although your goal is interference, interference does little when you out yourself in the process. You still have to use good reasoning and a townie mindset as scum when making cases. The difference is pushing your agenda while doing that (which is incredibly hard later in the game) | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 04:29 Hapahauli wrote: 1) Is this player scumhunting? 2) Is this player acting townie? (Being open/honest/engaged/showing-effort) 3) Does this player have extra info? At least for me, when I start asking the general questions, it gives me a better way to sort out my reads on a player. All those "slightly scummy" actions are usually townie when you look at them in a broader context. Uhhhh... let me know if that made sense. Rambleramblerambleramble. Hapa, add one more to the list 4) Does this player care about who is getting lynched? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
Clarity_nl 11-03-2012 05:59 AM ET (US) I think this post will basically cover us for the day, also gives us an opportunity to jump on people's mistakes, but hopefully townies do that for us. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessag...¤tpage=16#303 Yep. Exactly everyone's point about a list of null reads lol..... | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
11-06-2012 05:03 AM ET (US) It's like I'm playing jenga and all the pieces will make the tower fall. So funny^^ | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 07:29 marvellosity wrote: call people bad more and tell them to sheep you marv ur bad. Let me coach :D Does that work? | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 09 2012 12:20 Hapahauli wrote: Show nested quote + On November 09 2012 11:10 sylverfyre wrote: I could see merit in day start games of playing the first day without checking your role pm and just assume you're a VT. Or at least play early day 1 like that, and check closer to lynch time? I think YourHarry tried this in one of the newbie games for the first few hours of his play, just so he was comfortable at the start of the game in the event he rolled scum. Beyond that, I don't think it's a very legitimate strategy - you lose a lot by not being able to communicate with your teammates, and in addition, you're prone to showing a very sudden mentality shift (before and after you check the role PM). Hmmmm. I'll keep this in mind the next time I play. Should I go for epic 30 pg filter and game without looking at role pm? Actually I just thought through this. If you're scum and you nail your two teammates, then when nks don't show up you will realize you are the last scum....making your previous edge worthless | ||
debears
United States2516 Posts
On November 10 2012 06:32 Clarity_nl wrote: Oh yeah, global servers and all, I just might =] Eh. I just don't see HotS being that good. I feel like they went completely in the wrong direction with it :/ I sure hope Bliz does make it amazing so I can get back to being super excited about sc2 again | ||
| ||
The PiG Daily
Best Games of SC
Rogue vs CreatorLIVE!
Rogue vs Reynor
Reynor vs Solar
PiGStarcraft981
[ Submit Event ] |
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games summit1g15451 shahzam1380 FrodaN1367 NuckleDu585 JimRising 555 StateSC2120 Maynarde88 Mew2King56 ViBE36 Organizations StarCraft 2 Other Games StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • Hupsaiya 65 StarCraft: Brood War• HeavenSC 54 • gosughost_ 23 • Kozan • Laughngamez YouTube • aXEnki • Poblha • intothetv • Gussbus • Migwel • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamez Trovo Dota 2 League of Legends Other Games |
Online Event
ESL Pro Tour
OSC
OSC
ESL Pro Tour
BSL
TerrOr vs Sziky
Nyoken vs Zhanhum
DaveTesta Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
[ Show More ] BSL
Bonyth vs StRyKeR
DragOn vs MiStrZZZ
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Open Cup
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
PassionCraft
ESL Pro Tour
ESL Pro Tour
|
|