|
Doesn't even matter why he does it as long as he does it, clarity. If you asked me to dig up my meta for you, I'll gently tell you to gtfo and read it for yourself, it's out there. However, I don't even want to get lost into details, I don't trust his style and that's all.
I don't feel like lynching Tunkeg for one post. To me it looks like he's lazy. If he doesn't post more until the end of day 1 I'll think about changing opinion.
|
I don't understand why you're trying to rally people to sheep you right now, when we're still in the first half of D1. I'm glad you started making scumreads rather than soft defending a bunch of people though. Could you expand on Zbo?
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On December 11 2012 06:33 Clarity_nl wrote: I don't understand why you're trying to rally people to sheep you right now, when we're still in the first half of D1. I'm glad you started making scumreads rather than soft defending a bunch of people though. Could you expand on Zbo?
As a general rule I kinda like pushing my preferred candidate, dear.
Z-Bo because he came into the thread late, and then spent a few posts nitpicking at both the 80% figure and the presumed number of scum. It's an irrelevant way to enter the thread and spend your time. His posts just aren't constructive.
|
Allright, Djodref is most likely scum.
The main issue I have with him is his stance regarding his suspicions. They don't make the slightest of sense to someone who is actually scumhunting.
Lets us look at his first post. I'm gonna be analyzing two things. 1. Suspicion on debears and 2. suspicion on thrawn
On December 10 2012 09:37 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 09:22 debears wrote: ##Vote thrawn
I reject your reality and substitute my own Hello everybody ! @thrawn Did you seriously not read that millers are not self aware ? @debears Are you seriously willing to enforce a "Lynch all Liars" policy ? My first reaction to thrawn post was "yeah, obvious scum" then I thought that he might not have been serious at all. A one liner for a miller claim doesn't look real, regardless of his alignment. The way he answered "nvm, then" shows that he is carefree about it. Debears, you are jumpy as both alignments, but I wouldn't expect your town self to post a video instead of engaging the discussion to get this game rolling. FoS debears
He immediately feels surprised about thrawn's claim, and questions him about it.
Now, look at all this interesting in his part towards debears. He does the following:
- Expresses disagreement in debears' LAL policy vote. Note that he himself called it a policy vote. This will become important later.
- Despite feigning interest in thrawn's weird claim, he says that it doesn't really make him scum, due to his "carefree" natura about that.
- Debears posted a video instead of engaging the discussion. Thus, FOS debears.
So, that leaves us at: 1. thrawn - surprising claim, but he's not necessarily scum. 2. debears - bad LAL policy. Video instead of discussion. FOS.
Next post:
On December 10 2012 09:53 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 09:43 thrawn2112 wrote:On December 10 2012 09:37 Djodref wrote: @thrawn
Did you seriously not read that millers are not self aware ? I dont see what the point of this question is, if I'm town then I obviously can't give a real answer. Not true, if it was a probe post and you did it as town, then you can give a real answer like "I totally read that miller are not self-aware, but I wanted to use this fakeclaim as a probe to see how people would react to it" My problem is that I'm faced with the following choice right now - I have to assume that you did the thing above
- I have to lynch you because you are a lying scum
So, I'll go with the first choice for the moment and ask you how you were expecting people to react to this fakeclaim. All in all, what was your motivation for this post ?
Here he proceeds in assuring that he'd rather go with a bluffing town thrawn rather than a scum one. Even so, he questions thrawn's motivation.
Here's where it starts to get icky. Debears answers Djo, and here's his reply:
On December 10 2012 09:56 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 09:45 debears wrote:On December 10 2012 09:36 thrawn2112 wrote: o shit... ty debears
been trying to remember the console command cheat codes to jedi outcast... you just reminded me that the no clip cheat = thereisnospoon
off to play jedi outcast, bbl Haha <3 And Djo, how serious do you think that vote was? And why exactly could you not see townie me posting a video? Did you read paranoia? I don't know how serious this vote was and this is what I want you to answer me, not throwing questions against questions. Given your behavior (video + this post), I would say not serious. The problem is not posting a video, my problem is that you are not engaging the discussion with thrawn after you vote him.
Now, suddenly, the problem is not posting a video. The problem is not engaging the discussion with thrawn after debears voted him. This is all kinds of absurd.
First of all, he mentions that the problem has nothing to do with the video - which is crystal clear it does. Also, as you recall in the first post, Djo acknowledged it being a policy vote. Policy vote is exactly that: a policy vote, no questions asked. What kind of discussion is Djo expecting? This is exactly the kind of useless argument scum like focusing on. I can't for the life of me see what Djo was expecting with this question...
It gets better.
On December 10 2012 10:07 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 10:01 debears wrote:On December 10 2012 09:58 VisceraEyes wrote: Whatever happened to people going "LOL" after a video like in the olden days? Ikr Anyways Djo the video was a response to the question, but a fun way of doing it Have you not seen the Matrix? Did you not watch the video? Yes, I guess you were saying that your vote was not real with the video. What was your motivation with your first vote on thrawn ? What is your real take on thrawn fakeclaim ?
He's still on about how debears voted thrawn, when he had already recognized it as a policy lynch. This to me seems like fluff. Scum wanting to look like they are contributing.
So, right now, we have: 1. thrawn - surprising claim, but he's not necessarily scum. Actually it's more likely that he's town. 2. debears - bad LAL policy. Video instead of discussion. FOS. Doesn't engage in the discussion with thrawn after he votes. Now his reasons for voting thrawn are questionable.
Of course, the natural townie thing to do right now is...
On December 10 2012 10:35 Djodref wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 10:29 thrawn2112 wrote:All the people in the past, present, and future who ask why I lied about being miller..... can go and read this post. If they don't like it then they can just continue reading it because that's all I've got to say about it. I don't like it. I don't understand why you are being so stubborn... Let's see if it's really all you have to say about it. ##Vote thrawn
OF COURSE! Pressure vote someone you have a town read on, instead of someone you've been pressuring for the last two-three pages.
Then, after realizing that he was being completely balls-out useless with his pressure on thrawn, he decides it's time to drop it and sheep a Clarity case, which has NOTHING to do with absolutely ANYTHING he's been up to until that point in time:
On December 10 2012 14:46 Djodref wrote: @ debears
So, between Adam and Jay, which one of them should deserve your vote right now ? Because it looks like to me that the main reason for you to vote Adam is that he asked for your vote and voted against you.
I think Clarity made good points against Jay and I'm also leaning town on thrawn right now. I think I know the reason why he doesn't want to explain himself right now and I don't think that my pressure vote is going to work out.
@ jay
It looks like you are leaning scum on thrawn. Would you care to convince us that he is indeed scum and that we should vote him ? As you can see, the risk to start an early bandwagon on him is not so big.
##Vote jay
This is 100% not town mentality. If this isn't scum getting lost in the sidetracks, I don't know what is. What happened to the discussion? Whatever happened to debears? The only time he mentions debears again is in questioning him about Adam ( here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=12#237), and this is on a whole other dimension than on what he was pressuring debears about. Scum.
tl;dr Sheep: ##Vote Djodref
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
|
Z-Boson is quite confrontational in his posts. I don't think he's scum as of now, but I think he should post more.
I didn't like Tunkegs response, he could have spent time posting more against others instead of reacting to my post with one line. I'd join you in a Tunkeg vote, not in for Z-Boson though.
|
EBWOP: Just saw Bosons post, reading and updating opinion.
|
I'm sorry to point out the obvious, but....
On December 11 2012 06:33 Vivax wrote: Doesn't even matter why he does it as long as he does it, clarity. If you asked me to dig up my meta for you, I'll gently tell you to gtfo and read it for yourself, it's out there. However, I don't even want to get lost into details, I don't trust his style and that's all.
I don't feel like lynching Tunkeg for one post. To me it looks like he's lazy. If he doesn't post more until the end of day 1 I'll think about changing opinion.
On December 11 2012 06:52 Vivax wrote: Z-Boson is quite confrontational in his posts. I don't think he's scum as of now, but I think he should post more.
I didn't like Tunkegs response, he could have spent time posting more against others instead of reacting to my post with one line. I'd join you in a Tunkeg vote, not in for Z-Boson though.
What?
|
On December 11 2012 06:29 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 06:07 Z-BosoN wrote:On December 11 2012 05:54 debears wrote: HI marv!!!!!!! *waves*
@Z-Bo
Did you actually read what I said about Adam? Or did you just skim? My argument was not about "him not going balls deep"
It was about him implying thrawn was scum and then saying thrawn wasn't scum
Take another gander son Dude, wait to take the arrogant stance once you yourself have properly read what people have said. You said Adam implied thrawn was scum. Presumably when he said thrawn was "different" from his town meta. I said this isn't the case, because saying someone is playing different from their town meta doesn't necessarily mean they think they are scum. I used your meta as an example to this. Then you said he said thrawn wasn't scum. This is not true, he never said thrawn wasn't scum. Are you deliberately twisting words here? He did say it. Sure, I paraphrased it. Has the same meaning to me Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 10:28 Adam4167 wrote:On December 10 2012 10:24 thrawn2112 wrote:On December 10 2012 10:19 Adam4167 wrote:On December 10 2012 09:57 thrawn2112 wrote: any answer I could possibly give would just betray the actual purpose behind that post, making whatever I hoped to accomplish with that post no longer possible I think you better try to explain what you were hoping to accomplish here. On November 01 2012 08:25 thrawn2112 wrote: If a miller claims D1 I don't even know what my thought process would be for deciding if I believe them or not, so I'm hesitatingly saying that I disagree with the idea I find this post sits in a stark contrast to your current play, and this is from one of your recent town games (ACME). What's the stark contrast? I don't see how these things are even related. Are you trying to suggest I'm scum? because you went about it pretty subtly. Town you from ACME says that you disagree with the idea of millers claiming, and that you don't even know what your thought process would be for deciding if its real or not. Why are you trying to put everyone else in a similar position of confusion? If I wanted to call you scum, I would have. What I want to know is why you are doing what you are doing.
Well, that's saying that he's not willing to call him scum, as in he's not 100% scum. I feel that's kind of different of saying that he ISN'T scum ==> he's town. I don't feel like these are the same things but whatever.
What you think about djodref?
|
On December 11 2012 05:38 Vivax wrote:So I've been scratching my balls while reading the thread for the last 20 minutes, and when I saw jaybrundages posts, they started to hurt. ##Vote jaybrundageShow nested quote +On December 11 2012 04:23 Tunkeg wrote: Thrawn's "claim" is a joke claim. He did it in the very beginning, and quickly and without concern went back on it. I didn't like his response when called out on it. But when he in the end explained why he did as he did, it was an ok (no more, no less) explanation. So you are okay with this post? Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 09:57 thrawn2112 wrote: any answer I could possibly give would just betray the actual purpose behind that post, making whatever I hoped to accomplish with that post no longer possible To me it looks like you didn't study the matter enough. This explanation sucks hard. He's basically leaving the defense of himself to everybody else. He never said explicitly that he joked, he only said explicitly that he had intentions, fuck knows which. That being said, I suggest you go back and read the stuff before you make the same mistake I made with clarity.
Dude read the thread. Thrawn said what his motive was in this post when he finally responded to me. Its not difficult use a filter.
Stop trying to play with half the deck. If you wanna try to scum hunt great but at least read the thread first.
On December 10 2012 14:53 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2012 14:34 jaybrundage wrote:On December 10 2012 14:21 Clarity_nl wrote: So someone makes a big case on you and you react by saying "glad someone is reading my posts"?
It's not that you don't put your vote where your mouth is, it's the REASON you don't vote. You shouldn't care what's easy and what's not, all you need to care about is who is scum, and try to get your strongest scumread lynched.
I would love it if you linked some games in where you claimed this has happened to you. I would also love it if you walked us through a scum thrawn's reasoning for doing what he did. Lol is my reaction not what you expected Wait a second, the reason i didn't vote is because i don't feel i have too. A vote doesn't mean anything till the end of the cycle. I have been going after thrawn and trying to get him to respond to me. And get some kind of explanation from him. However he has yet to respond to me. THRAWN STOP GAWD DAMN IGNORING ME. And yes i do care if the lynch seems to easy. Because then from my experience, its likely a bus or a townie were killing. I'll try to find the games if i can. Its been almost a year tho. And i already gave you a scum reasoning to do what he did. On December 10 2012 10:23 jaybrundage wrote: Hey guys just finished work ten hour shift zzzz.
Reading up so far. It appears. That thrawn either made a pretty big scum slip. Or maybe he just made a big mistake as town.
There wasn't any point to claiming miller. As if anyone read the OP (as they should it) they would know millers arent self aware. So first your lying. I only seeing this make sense as scum. If you didnt know that miller was self aware. Then your thought process is that you self claim miller. A you can waste a DT check. Or make DT's ineffective against you.
As town i see no reason to lie about your role. Please give your reasoning. Because as far it doesn't make any sense.
Also I thought the point about debears. Posting a video to not enage in conversation was interesting. Not a scum tell or anything. But a video wont help us find scum some good solid conversation will. alright well I'm tired of the miller claim discussion so here's how it went down from my perspective. At first it was mainly a joke, but it was also intended to jump start discussion. + Show Spoiler +wow big surprise there right? Then people started taking it more seriously than I thought they would so I decided to be dickish about it in order to ignite further discussion. I actually don't mind being a potential mislynch, I think I'm better at discerning scum when they are trying to lynch me. I don't mind a bit of pressure during early D1 if it allows me to make better reads. Also.... anything is better than talking about lurker policy ffs
And Clarity regarding why I have shifted my stance on Thrawn I said it right here. I really couldn't wrap my head around a town. False claiming for no damn reason. I mean I know its day one and all. But I just thought it was stupid and why do it. If we had followed lynch all liars then he would of been dead. After i read other peoples thoughts about how they were much more inclined to believe it was a joke. It made me reevaluate my position and after (Finally) thrawn explained himself I think his explanation which I had trouble believing before was plausible.
On December 11 2012 04:43 jaybrundage wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 01:35 Clarity_nl wrote:On December 11 2012 01:32 jaybrundage wrote:On December 10 2012 23:52 Clarity_nl wrote:Hey marv, you've explain why we shouldn't vote a bunch of people (thrawn, jay, palmar) but do you have any reasons we should vote a someone? On December 10 2012 22:04 marvellosity wrote: On jay, I'm ok on how he explained his 'slips'. My only worry with jay is that he comes across as overly... compliant?:
"Glad someone is reading my posts. I felt like i wasnt get any feedback from them." "I do appreciate you giving your reasoning behind your claim. It helps me understand you a bit."
I don't particularly think much of it atm, was just weird when I was reading them. I would say it was indicative of the fact he didn't want to ruffle feathers, but he's not been afraid to put himself out there, so it isn't that. His response reminds me of my own scum game. I showed no emotion that game, I just tried to remain logical and not to ruffle anyone's feathers, thinking that if I kept that up eventually people would stay away from me because I answered every question and reasoned away any doubt. @ JayI read some of the stuff in your linked games, and yes you lyched town D1 but I never saw you say anything remotely close to "well I guess I should be more careful of early bandwagons". Not during any of the games and not in the pre-games or post-games either. The thing is, you say you don't want to jump on an "easy bandwagon" this game, but you do. All you don't do is you haven't voted for thrawn, but he's the only person you've put pressure on. So why mention it? It's an easy way out. It seems like common sense. If I get on easy bandwagons as town. Shouldn't i avoid em? Im not you I don't find it necessary or needed to call people dumb or idiots like some players here do. It is it that unexpected to show some respect to people : / I call people dumb or idiots? So other than Thrawn, who is an easy bandwagon to you so should be avoided, who stands out as scummy? I didnt mean you specifically but some people in TL mafia do. I actually am starting to lean more neutral on Thrawn. In my early mind set I just couldnt see someone misclaiming as a joke, or risk getting them selves lynched. Im a little worried about our lurkers. And i would prefer to see more posts out of ZBoston. Specifically ZBoston what do you think about Claritys case on me and some people soft defending me. Also MunkE has had like 3 posts since his /in and every single one of them is mostly about WBG statistic. Do we really have to nitpick over something like that. WBG was mostly trying to bait Palmar out. Lets hear your thoughts on some cases On Vivax its odd. He seems really interested in going after Thrawns claim and saying that Ve defended it as a joke. When its not a joke. Even when thrawn said his self it was just a joke. That he stubbornly. Refused to explain to generate discussion. I think he is concentrating on thrawns little joke to much to the exclusion of everything else. I can see him being scum. ##Vote Vivax(Because some people get SOOOOO antsy if you dont follow your argument with your vote.) I also want to see some more posts from our lurkers. Bluelightz and MunkE and Palmar.
|
Damn Vivax and the 20 minute switch to vote for tunkeg
|
I'll go read the thread and scratch my balls some more. I'm clearly missing too much stuff .
I still don't like your defensive style jaybro. Nothing personal.
Meanwhile, you can discuss how weird it is that I'm willing to lynch Tunkeg after his second post, Clarity looks willing to help in that, he's being like, my personal journalist.
|
On December 11 2012 07:08 Vivax wrote:I'll go read the thread and scratch my balls some more. I'm clearly missing too much stuff .
Look at me guys, I'm completely useless, don't rely on me.
On December 11 2012 07:08 Vivax wrote: I still don't like your defensive style jaybro. Nothing personal.
You don't like his style? Do you think he's scum?
On December 11 2012 07:08 Vivax wrote: Meanwhile, you can discuss how weird it is that I'm willing to lynch Tunkeg after his second post, Clarity looks willing to help in that, he's being like, my personal journalist.
That is weird. Weirder still is the fact that you mention it but don't expand on it. I don't like that you mention "I'm willing to lynch this other guy too!", as if it really doesn't matter to you who we lynch.
|
Uh, vivax, can you answer clarity? Can you give us your "updated opinion"? ...
|
@ Z-Boson
You raise some good points. I'd say your main argument is that he identifies that early vote by debears as a policy vote, but still asks about other motivations.
Then he drops from debears, goes for thrawn, the guy he leaned town on, just to switch to jay for suspecting thrawn. The same guy he voted for just before.
Yeah, I think he's scummy for these moves.
|
No, I won't answer clarity. He's just being annoying.
|
Well I'm glad you agree that Djo is scum, but you really don't make any sense.
On December 11 2012 06:53 Clarity_nl wrote:I'm sorry to point out the obvious, but.... Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 06:33 Vivax wrote: Doesn't even matter why he does it as long as he does it, clarity. If you asked me to dig up my meta for you, I'll gently tell you to gtfo and read it for yourself, it's out there. However, I don't even want to get lost into details, I don't trust his style and that's all.
I don't feel like lynching Tunkeg for one post. To me it looks like he's lazy. If he doesn't post more until the end of day 1 I'll think about changing opinion. Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 06:52 Vivax wrote: Z-Boson is quite confrontational in his posts. I don't think he's scum as of now, but I think he should post more.
I didn't like Tunkegs response, he could have spent time posting more against others instead of reacting to my post with one line. I'd join you in a Tunkeg vote, not in for Z-Boson though.
What?
What made you change your mind on Tunkeg? Why are you saying he's town in one post, then in another post casually saying you'd lynch him?
|
Well you didn't say he was town, but you get the drift. How does "Don't feel like lynching" go to "I'd join you in a tunkeg vote"?
|
He answered two hours after his last comment, just to defend himself with one line. His first post was made to fit in in some way, then he apparently spent hours lurking only to come out again when called out from me. Don't act as if I changed my mind out of nothing. I changed it cause of his post. Just cause clarity highlights one small part of it (the one where I express my willingness to vote) doesn't mean you shouldn't read the rest of it ,where I say that I didn't like Tunkegs response.
|
On December 11 2012 07:29 Z-BosoN wrote: Well you didn't say he was town, but you get the drift. How does "Don't feel like lynching" go to "I'd join you in a tunkeg vote"?
I might help you out here. He is voting me because I corrected his faulty post about me. He also want me to comment on "ALL" the posts that have been made about me, instead of me commenting on his. But tbh there isn't anything to comment on on the other posts, and I will correct errors when I see them.
|
|
|
|