|
I'd also like to add that I've got a townread on bugs even before reaching half of his filter, so I'll join him in calling the people suspecting him a bunch of dumbasses.
|
On December 13 2012 07:25 jaybrundage wrote:
Im not gonna answer you if you refuse to quote and show me what your talking about.
It's ok, you're gonna get it in the butt tomorrow for doing this.
|
On December 13 2012 07:26 Vivax wrote:
I'd also like to add that I've got a townread on bugs even before reaching half of his filter, so I'll join him in calling the people suspecting him a bunch of dumbasses.
That seemed to work pretty well for you yesterday /w Adam
|
jay, i know what he asked you and i dont even care about this conversation
|
On December 13 2012 07:28 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2012 07:25 jaybrundage wrote:
Im not gonna answer you if you refuse to quote and show me what your talking about. It's ok, you're gonna get it in the butt tomorrow for doing this.
Oh no your threating me after refusing to quote im soooo scared
|
at least one of you needs to stop being a jackass and just back down. the way both of you are arguing isn't doing anyone any good
|
On December 13 2012 07:10 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2012 07:06 Vivax wrote:
Yes I totally think we should be defining the standard measure of activeness in this game.
Even worse than policy discussion. Le sigh. WBG claimed he was more active than virtually everyone in the thread in his defense. I pointed out this is clearly not the case.Inquiring into misrepresentation is useless because?
You didn't show anything, you just asserted it.
There are only 3 players in this game with more posts than me: marv, debears, and thrawn. The vast majority of all three of their posts are one liners or at the very least very very short.
This line of questioning is fairly pointless though, given that I don't think activity is alignment indicative for me.
|
not to mention filter size is a pretty shitty measure of activity to begin with.
|
On December 13 2012 07:34 jaybrundage wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2012 07:28 Vivax wrote:On December 13 2012 07:25 jaybrundage wrote:
Im not gonna answer you if you refuse to quote and show me what your talking about. It's ok, you're gonna get it in the butt tomorrow for doing this. Oh no your threating me after refusing to quote im soooo scared
Jay just answer the question. It sounds like you're trying to pick a fight for the hell of it, and it's doing no one any good.
|
Bugs, I feel this needs some clarification:
On December 12 2012 18:18 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 18:01 Hapahauli wrote:On December 12 2012 17:57 wherebugsgo wrote:
my play is clean, so I'm scum...the fuck?
I could play like a retard, but no one likes when I do that. "Clean" in the sense that you're not taking any risks. You're not going out of your way to comment on multiple players or make additional reads - you stick to a case on a player who looks like a lynch-bait candidate throughout D1. The reality is that I hold vets to a higher standard. Your play doesn't read like a wild and engaged townie - it looks like scum trying to blend in. If you're town, it's on you to prove it in the next few days. How have I blended in when I made probably the strongest counter case to Adam? I didn't have to do that. If I was scum and wanted to blend in I could've just bandwagoned on what was clearly the easiest lynch of the day and taken massive town cred by bussing Adam. Instead I chose to pose an alternative because I actually took a stance on someone other than Adam. Everyone found him scummy. I found someone else scummier. And, in fact, Tunkeg's play is still quite erratic. Secondly, the thing I absolutely hate about this type of jubjub logic is that it only makes sense when you don't think. Why are people attacking me? Because I was the only notable person who didn't hardline against Adam. This is confirmation bias. We saw a scum flip, and now everyone thinks that anyone who was late to the wagon or considered killing other people is scum. Sure, that's normal when there's resistance, but when there was never any resistance to begin with usually it's the people who sheep without reason who are the scum bussing. I.E. VE. I actually had concrete reasons to be voting Adam and I was one of the first players to make my opinion on him clear. The fact that I ultimately chose not to vote him is actually not scummy, because trust me, I'm pretty fucking lazy as scum. So, think about it for a second. You think I'm scum and you apparently hold me to a higher standard than other players. So, what exactly have I done that is not up to your standards? I'm not taking risks? You don't need to take risks to play town! In fact, taking risks is full on retarded as town. I don't think anyone on this forum understands how I operate as scum, seeing as everyone and their mother accuses me of wildly different things as both alignments. I'm notoriously "hard to read" because my play doesn't boil down to "lazy as scum and active as town" unlike the vast majority of other players.
I understand that it's bad play to simply try to find scum by making these easy "he didn't want to vote Adam" associations. Too many people (including myself) have such behavior that can easily and mistakenly be associated to be made out as scum. My deal with you is a bit different. My main problem was how you casually included Adam as a possible "lynch possibility", when in your previous posts you don't show that you really thought Adam was a good lynch.
For instance, regarding the bolded part. You said two things here:
- You had concrete reasons to vote Adam.
- You were the first one to make your opinion on him clear.
Now, as I see it, the first thing is wrong, and the second one is really my issue with you.
First off, you did not have concrete reasons to vote Adam, or you didn't show them. The transition I'm most concerned off (which was my initial case against you) is how these two posts:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#481
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#484
Actually turn into you casually including his name:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#496
Nowhere else in your filter do you show concrete reasons to vote for Adam.
In addition, you say you were the first to make your opinion on Adam clear. This is true. You clearly stated earlier that you did not want to lynch him. This was evident in those two posts above, and in which I have already gone over in my case.
However, I can't figure out for the life of me what you suddenly added him as a top suspect on your list.
Now, in your response to it:
On December 12 2012 15:21 wherebugsgo wrote:
No Z-Boson, I'm not scum. That's fairly evident given the fact that I continually said Adam was my #2 read to Tunkeg. I just wanted to kill Tunkeg over Adam and I would say that again given how I perceived Palmar.
There were two reasons I was unsure of lynching Adam and none about Tunkeg. Reason 1 for Adam was that he pointed out something about miller claims that thrawn had said in a previous game. I didn't find that very scummy but it was a fairly minor point of consideration. The other thing was relatively unrelated to adam's behavior but rather how easy it was to lynch him, particularly given Palmar's really strange comments re: his priority of reads.
If Palmar really did make his video without knowing his alignment, then he would be pretty hard pressed to bus his teammate Adam if he ended up seeing he was scum after saying all that shit about his posts. That's one reason I'm wary of his other reads. If his other reads are shit, then chances are strong he's not town.
And it is clearly obvious Adam was bussed, seeing as there was almost no resistance to the lynch. Everyone wanted him to die except perhaps Clarity (and I'd consider him town)
You say that you repeatedly said why Adam was your top suspect. This is not what I'm putting in question. What I'm putting in question is that your posts prior to including Adam are not compatible with you actually adding him in your list.
This is the most part of why I think you are scum, because I think that you felt the need to casually include Adam in your suspect list because you knew he was scum.
|
On December 12 2012 13:50 jaybrundage wrote:Ze Case on DjodrefSo from the begginging Djo hasn't done much. He gave some filler posts about thrawn. Soft defended adam the entire game. Sheeped on me. Then Sheeped on Tunkeg. Tried to get a policy lynch on grush (joking always has a bit of truth to it) He attempted to explain his thought process with thrawn. He then started defending himself from Z-Bo. While still not wanting to lynch Adam wouldn't wanna kill his scum buddy. Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 01:21 Djodref wrote:On December 12 2012 01:02 Z-BosoN wrote:On December 12 2012 00:51 Djodref wrote:@ Z-Boson+ Show Spoiler [for reference] +On December 12 2012 00:28 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 10:44 Djodref wrote:@ Z-Boson1) First of all, you're wrong and you have failed to show what goal my actions would serve if I was scum. I'm going to help you to read my posts because you obviously didn't understand where I was going during the early game. On December 10 2012 09:37 Djodref wrote: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 2)My problem with debears early vote was not that it was a vote following a LAL policy but rather the seriousness of this vote. I've assumed that it was a vote for sparking discussion because this was the early game and the atmosphere was quite carefree at this time. Nevertheless, thrawn calling out debears on his vote against him would have been a good starting point for a real discussion but debears chose to post a video instead of this. The problem was not the video itself, but more what he did not do instead. Anyway, this was an early FoS, and also an attempt for me to spark some discussion.And when debears implied that his vote was not serious (which I knew because he didn't use the voting thread to vote thrawn), I wondered why debears would throw early mindless votes like this, and I wanted him to explain this as well. All in all, I think that he didn't really care about what he was doing, and I don't read anything of it. I don't like how debears is focused on Adam so I didn't remove my Fos on him so far. 3)Regarding thrawn, I wanted him to explain his move. I didn't see this coming from a mafia player, but still, I wanted him to explain his motivations for it. And then thrawn goes like 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 and then 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. which was pretty stubborn and stupid. I used a pressure vote (which didn't work) to get him talk, regardless of his alignment. And he deserved this pressure vote. When I unvoted him, I was expecting him to explain himself as putting himself in a position where he is going to get some pressure, especially mafia pressure. So, yeah, it matches its town mindset. And then, Clarity came in this thread with a case worth sheeping, so I sheeped. At the light of Clarity case, jay was more likely to be scum than debears. But now, as many people started to participate overnight, I'm going to update my reads. 1) Yes I have. I mentioned "scum getting lost in the sidetracks", because that's what's going on. You are trying to make it seem like you are contributing, when in fact, you are not. More on that later. 2) I don't buy this. You assumed that it was a vote intended to spark discussion, because it was in early game and had a "carefree" atmosphere, made by debears. You then pressure FOS debears to make sure he sparks discussion as his townie self. Then, he goes after adam, and you keep the FOS because you disagree with his case?? You can disagree with his case, just like you did somewhere, but that is only warranted of your suspicions is if you think it's fake comes from scum. Yet what do you do? You go on to drop debears entirely and go around asking questions about other aspects of the game without taking a proper stance yourself. 3) This still doesn't make sense. Why in gods name are you so interested in thrawn explaining himself, if you think he's town??. Why did you pressure vote him, whom you had a town read on, instead of going after debears, someone you've made quite clear you don't like the play this game?
Also, to those who aren't feeling Djo, notice his complete lack of scumhunting in this game. Here's a summary of his entire play this game: - The whole debars/thrawn extravaganza I've already gone over which makes no sense.
- Probing WBG's weird logic on palmar.
- Giving munk-E a questionable town read
- Flock of non-conclusive questioning and a ton of fluff.
And that's IT. Zero stances, zero cases. It's scum feigning contribution. 1)So, basically, you are saying that I couldn't keep my story straight. And that shows that I'm scum. I would say that I've been inconsistent as townies can be inconsistent. Basically, my FoS on debears was not a very serious one (like all early FoS are) and I didn't feel like I had to follow it up when thrawn put himself at the center of the attention. 2) I was disagreeing with debears view on Adam and I still disagree with it because I think he is exaggerating some points. But debears has done nothing to deserve a vote. So I don't see why I should have not the right to use my vote on thrawn to pressure him. And yeah, I was leaning town on thrawn when I voted him but I needed his explanations for his miller claim to assess my read on him. 3)Putting pressure on thrawn was fulfilling two goals. The first one was to help me to assess my town read on him when he was going to reveal us his "plan". It was kind of obvious he was going to say something like this but I was interested to know how he was going to present things, and he did say almost exactly what I expected. The second goal was to show him that he was putting himself in a bad situation and that he should better explain himself asap so that the thread could move on to another subject because all this situation was a bit stupid and not helping us to have constructive discussions. 1) Scummies are more likely to be inconsistent than townies, so it's a small tell, but still a tell. What bugs me is the logic you had regarding debars/thrawn I've already went over.
2) Wait a minute. Bolded part. Whatever happened to: On December 11 2012 13:01 Djodref wrote:
I've watched Palmar's video and I've changed my mind a little bit about your interactions with Adam. As a result, I would lean town on you and slightly scum on Adam but I'm not yet sold on him being scum.
The latest "scumslip" is not a scumslip in my opinion because it would have been one if he was totally sure that you were scum, which doesn't look to be the case.
The fact that he dropped you is reasonable but it's not very indicative of his alignment because it was the best thing to do as scum and as town. I'm waiting to see where he is going to go with Vivax but I think that jay is more likely to be scum than him at this point.
Still not keeping your story straight. You say you lean him being town, now you lean him being scum. Worst of all, where is the reasoning, where is the justification for this??
3) It's counter-productive. You are wasting time reassessing a "town-read" you had, and you STILL are flimsy and not moving on: On December 11 2012 13:12 Djodref wrote:On December 11 2012 12:54 thrawn2112 wrote:debears could you respond to the question I asked you at the bottom of page 22? It's in the last post on the page sorta near the bottom of my post. Djo: bleh I've probably waited too long to ask this, but I'd like you to go back to this post. When did you write it in relation to the post you made right before it? Was it one right after the other, did you make them simultaneously, did you write the 2nd one first but post the 1st one 1st, etc. please be as specific as possible @ thrawnThe two posts you are talking about were independent if you are talking about these. On December 10 2012 15:31 Djodref wrote:On December 10 2012 14:52 debears wrote: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
I like Clarity's points on jay, and clarity seems to satisfactorily have jay covered. I'm gonna work on Adam/whoever I feel like So, I guess you are satisfied with your vote on Adam right now. According to me, Adam has been pretty clear on his stance on thrawn and I disagree with you about him: I don't see anything to blame him for right now. I'll let you do what you feel like but I'll voice my concerns if you seem mistaken. For example, right now, I feel like you should better vote for jay instead of Adam. On December 10 2012 15:34 Djodref wrote:On December 10 2012 14:53 thrawn2112 wrote: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 @ thrawnIn fact, this is exactly the explanation I was waiting for you. I remembered this post from our previous Looney game when you were going to be mislynched at MYLO. On October 20 2012 09:13 thrawn2112 wrote:
Cuz I'm not scum u silly. Don't worry I love being mislynched. It's the part of the game where in the past ive figured out who is scum. So, did you manage to get any clue of who could be scum after analysing the way they treated your fakeclaim ? Regarding the post you linked, it was the conclusion I came to when I was asking myself why you were being stubborn and not wanting to explain your motivations for your fakeclaim. After my pressure vote on you, I was wondering why a town thrawn would put himself in such a situation and I remembered this post you made about how you liked to be pushed as a mislynched. So, I was ready to post it before your explanation because it was what I was expecting from you. But it was not prepared, just I knew where to find this stuff. It is a strange question. Could I ask you what you are going to do with this info ? What do you expect to hear? Are you still trying to confirm thrawn as town? Thrawn has been questioned twice already regarding this and the most he said was "bugs came out looking worse". This is another example of you fooling around trying to look like you are contributing, imo. 1)Okay, I'm just saying that it was the early game and that I didn't follow up my FoS on debears so much because it was not a very serious one. 2) I have Adam as slightly scum. Debears is convinced that Adam is scum. I would lynch Tunkeg and jay before Adam today, I would say that grush might even be a better lynch choice than Adam. This is where I disagree with debears. Basically, I'm not sure that Adam is scum because some points brought against him seem to be exaggerated in my opinion. I would prefer to let him live today so I can have a better read on him when the game goes on. 3)The conversation that you quoted has been initiated by thrawn and I was answering him. His first question was weird and I wanted to know why he asked me it in the first place, it turned out that he was still unsure of my thought process. I hope that things are clear between him and me now. This conversation was productive in my opinion. I'm not 100% sure that thrawn is town at the moment and it helped me to confirm my view on him. What would be the benefit of a scum Djodref to ask this ? Here he says hes willing to lynch Adam but in the same sentence discredits it. This is important tho. He states he wouldnt mind lynching Adam BUT THEN COMPLETLY FAILS TO DELIEVER when we need him.Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 01:45 Djodref wrote:On December 12 2012 01:25 Vivax wrote:
Fucking hell Djodref, stop writing a river, noone's voting for you.
Instead, tell us about your reads. Who is scum and who is town in your opinion? I think that Tunkeg is mafia, less sure about jay now. I wouldn't mind to lynch Adam but I'm not sure that he would turn out to be mafia. It pains me to see that all these players are not active right now because I cannot get better reads on them. I think that Clarity and thrawn are town, less sure about debears or marv but I have them as town as well for the moment. I have Munk-E has a very slight town read because he went directly after wbg when entering the thread but I thought he was a newbie at that time. I would like Z-Bo to move on so I can see what he thinks of other players than Tunkeg and me. For the rest of the players, I'm not familiar with them so they are in a grey area. Attemps a half joke on lynch grush who while hasnt done much has had decent reads imo Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 01:48 Djodref wrote:EBWOP: I wouldn't mind to lynch grush as well by the way  Tries a desperate attempt to save his scumbuddy adamShow nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:06 Djodref wrote:
Anyone up for a counter bandwagon on jay ?
##Unvote
##Vote Jay He says he will vote for adam. But never follows thru!!!!!He is half claiming to be on the adam lynch but never wants to go with it. Saying he will vote or doesnt mind lynching adam when his actions differ completely. He had no intention to lynch adam his scum buddy Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 08:12 Djodref wrote:I'll vote Adam if I need to but I really don't think it's the best lynch for today... I've seen successful late (like 5 min before deadline) counter bangwagon in Mario Mini Mafia so it's never too late And when going for me shows no results he goes for Tunkeg. Another pathetic attempt to divert the adam lynchShow nested quote +On December 12 2012 09:23 Djodref wrote:
And, seriously guys, you still prefer to lynch Adam to jay after Adam's latest post ?
Counter wagon ! GO GO GO !
##Unvote
##Vote jay
I think Djodref is scum. Thoughts? [/b][/b]
I think these are decent observations but all of the things Djo has done can be explained from a town perspective.
For example, the uncertainty on Adam-townies tend to be uncertain. Also his responses in context to the thread make sense from the perspective that he simply didn't pay attention to Adam. Who knows-these are good things to consider but none of these things can be swung one way or another without knowing specifically how djo plays as scum and town. I'm not familiar enough with his play and his past games are pretty fucking extensive given how much he posts. I've just not had the time to get a proper meta read on him. I'll try to at some point, but I have very little motivation for that, given the fact that I find him pretty townie.
There is also almost no way I'd consider lynching him tomorrow bar something drastic happening, since there are at least 3 players (Tunkeg, BL, VE) that I think deserve attention.
|
United Kingdom36158 Posts
bugs, can you explain your thinking in the passage i quoted earlier?
also, could you tell me when or if at all during Day 1 you got a townread on Palmar?
|
On December 13 2012 07:39 Z-BosoN wrote:Bugs, I feel this needs some clarification: Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 18:18 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 12 2012 18:01 Hapahauli wrote:On December 12 2012 17:57 wherebugsgo wrote:
my play is clean, so I'm scum...the fuck?
I could play like a retard, but no one likes when I do that. "Clean" in the sense that you're not taking any risks. You're not going out of your way to comment on multiple players or make additional reads - you stick to a case on a player who looks like a lynch-bait candidate throughout D1. The reality is that I hold vets to a higher standard. Your play doesn't read like a wild and engaged townie - it looks like scum trying to blend in. If you're town, it's on you to prove it in the next few days. How have I blended in when I made probably the strongest counter case to Adam? I didn't have to do that. If I was scum and wanted to blend in I could've just bandwagoned on what was clearly the easiest lynch of the day and taken massive town cred by bussing Adam. Instead I chose to pose an alternative because I actually took a stance on someone other than Adam. Everyone found him scummy. I found someone else scummier. And, in fact, Tunkeg's play is still quite erratic. Secondly, the thing I absolutely hate about this type of jubjub logic is that it only makes sense when you don't think. Why are people attacking me? Because I was the only notable person who didn't hardline against Adam. This is confirmation bias. We saw a scum flip, and now everyone thinks that anyone who was late to the wagon or considered killing other people is scum. Sure, that's normal when there's resistance, but when there was never any resistance to begin with usually it's the people who sheep without reason who are the scum bussing. I.E. VE. I actually had concrete reasons to be voting Adam and I was one of the first players to make my opinion on him clear. The fact that I ultimately chose not to vote him is actually not scummy, because trust me, I'm pretty fucking lazy as scum. So, think about it for a second. You think I'm scum and you apparently hold me to a higher standard than other players. So, what exactly have I done that is not up to your standards? I'm not taking risks? You don't need to take risks to play town! In fact, taking risks is full on retarded as town. I don't think anyone on this forum understands how I operate as scum, seeing as everyone and their mother accuses me of wildly different things as both alignments. I'm notoriously "hard to read" because my play doesn't boil down to "lazy as scum and active as town" unlike the vast majority of other players. I understand that it's bad play to simply try to find scum by making these easy "he didn't want to vote Adam" associations. Too many people (including myself) have such behavior that can easily and mistakenly be associated to be made out as scum. My deal with you is a bit different. My main problem was how you casually included Adam as a possible "lynch possibility", when in your previous posts you don't show that you really thought Adam was a good lynch. For instance, regarding the bolded part. You said two things here: - You had concrete reasons to vote Adam.
- You were the first one to make your opinion on him clear.
Now, as I see it, the first thing is wrong, and the second one is really my issue with you. First off, you did not have concrete reasons to vote Adam, or you didn't show them. The transition I'm most concerned off (which was my initial case against you) is how these two posts: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#481http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#484Actually turn into you casually including his name: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=384953¤tpage=25#496Nowhere else in your filter do you show concrete reasons to vote for Adam. In addition, you say you were the first to make your opinion on Adam clear. This is true. You clearly stated earlier that you did not want to lynch him. This was evident in those two posts above, and in which I have already gone over in my case. However, I can't figure out for the life of me what you suddenly added him as a top suspect on your list. Now, in your response to it: Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 15:21 wherebugsgo wrote:
No Z-Boson, I'm not scum. That's fairly evident given the fact that I continually said Adam was my #2 read to Tunkeg. I just wanted to kill Tunkeg over Adam and I would say that again given how I perceived Palmar.
There were two reasons I was unsure of lynching Adam and none about Tunkeg. Reason 1 for Adam was that he pointed out something about miller claims that thrawn had said in a previous game. I didn't find that very scummy but it was a fairly minor point of consideration. The other thing was relatively unrelated to adam's behavior but rather how easy it was to lynch him, particularly given Palmar's really strange comments re: his priority of reads.
If Palmar really did make his video without knowing his alignment, then he would be pretty hard pressed to bus his teammate Adam if he ended up seeing he was scum after saying all that shit about his posts. That's one reason I'm wary of his other reads. If his other reads are shit, then chances are strong he's not town.
And it is clearly obvious Adam was bussed, seeing as there was almost no resistance to the lynch. Everyone wanted him to die except perhaps Clarity (and I'd consider him town) You say that you repeatedly said why Adam was your top suspect. This is not what I'm putting in question. What I'm putting in question is that your posts prior to including Adam are not compatible with you actually adding him in your list. This is the most part of why I think you are scum, because I think that you felt the need to casually include Adam in your suspect list because you knew he was scum.
jesus fucking christ how many times do I have to repeat myself?
GO BACK AND READ MY FUCKING POSTS.
I fucking explain my meta read on Adam at least once in my conversation with marvellosity that I can recall, and this post reeks of you not reading my posts.
|
On December 13 2012 07:44 marvellosity wrote:
bugs, can you explain your thinking in the passage i quoted earlier?
also, could you tell me when or if at all during Day 1 you got a townread on Palmar?
requote it, too many people asking me shit.
I was leaning town initially after I saw he agreed with me on Adam (and watching parts of his video) but after I asked him about his opinions on Tunkeg and whatnot I found it really strange how he prioritized his reads. My read of him kind of pinballed between somewhat town and somewhat scum because I couldn't reconcile why I would have the same read as him on one of my stronger scumreads but completely different reads on almost everyone else.
I still can't reconcile that. I understand that I might be simply looking too far into it, but the fact that he wants to lynch me (and he has no reasons for it, just go look for yourself. I have nothing to respond to when Palmar accuses me because he hasn't accused me of anything other than being scum-there's no case) and the way in which he is doing it keeps giving me doubts that he was scum who was forced to bus Adam, and now with the cred he's gotten he might simply be trying to look for an easy mislynch on someone who wouldn't let him get away with bullshit.
It's fairly conspiracy-theorist but I really do believe that Palmar's alignment depends highly on the quality of his reads. Other than Adam I think the quality of his reads is utter shit.
|
@bugs
I've read them dude. Your meta explanation came at a later point in time, which is not what I'm referring to,
You gave reasoning for voting Adam MUCH later than when you included him in your list. I feel that you are trying to pass yourself off as having actually been clear on your stance on Adam all along, which is not the case.
|
On December 13 2012 07:51 Z-BosoN wrote:
@bugs
I've read them dude. Your meta explanation came at a later point in time, which is not what I'm referring to,
You gave reasoning for voting Adam MUCH later than when you included him in your list. I feel that you are trying to pass yourself off as having actually been clear on your stance on Adam all along, which is not the case.
It's not my problem you can't understand what #2 scumread means.
|
United Kingdom36158 Posts
|
On December 13 2012 07:54 marvellosity wrote:Post found here.
nothing much to explain here.
#2s are not meaningless. This d1 was unique in that I didn't think any townie was getting bandwagoned. Usually on d1 my top two targets are not up for lynch. (in fact it's rare if EITHER of my targets is up for lynch).
I wanted to get Tunkeg lynched but I had no major problems with killing Adam, just minor nitpicky points. If I thought Adam was town at any point I would've actively tried to stop the bandwagon on him. The bandwagon was pretty clear and obvious from the getgo, and I even encouraged it myself, given that I began pushing the notion that scum were being passive (among them, Adam and Tunkeg) after my very first read through of the (then-current) thread.
You're falling into the same trap that everyone else here is falling into-because Adam flipped scum you have this predisposition toward questioning any sort of doubt on the lynch. That kind of notion is retarded, given that doubt is an integral part of town play. Yeah, you can be supremely confident, but you'll end up looking like a moron and you'll bring down the entire town if you're wrong. That's why only players like Foolishness can get away with being completely confident, because they're wrong so surprisingly little. (hell, I look up to sandro and he always gets lateminute doubts himself)
As for this:
On December 12 2012 23:01 marvellosity wrote:So here I provide him with an example of Adam catching scum like a boss in WLIIA, and then Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 00:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 12 2012 00:10 marvellosity wrote:On December 12 2012 00:10 marvellosity wrote:On December 12 2012 00:08 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 12 2012 00:01 marvellosity wrote:On December 11 2012 23:56 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 11 2012 23:42 marvellosity wrote:On December 11 2012 23:34 wherebugsgo wrote:
alright, I'm going to ignore Palmar since he somehow finds both myself and Jay scummier than Tunkeg. The fact that he thinks that makes his opinions irrelevant.
Marv-are you still willing to kill Tunkeg? Convince me why I should kill Adam over Tunkeg, and I'll consider switching my vote. Given that they're both even right now I see no reason to switch. Aye. Question for you - how do you generally evaluate the play of Adam/Tunkeg? (not in this game) generally with Adam and Tunkeg if they shy away from discussion they're probably scum. A lot of the time I find that when they are town I notice when they're present and know their opinions, and when they are scum they don't say anything useful. Take Adam and LI for example. Adam was incredibly passive and I put him on my scumlist at some point because I kept thinking, damn, Adam isn't doing anything, but no one noticed him. (I also didn't bring attention to him because I was more concerned with VE and that stupid Toad + VE shit but this is irrelevant to my point) Adam I know for a fact is complacent and passive as scum, and that's how his play here is. I don't feel like he has made any strong posts and he doesn't seem to have anything to contribute either. Tunkeg tends to draw attention to himself as town (usually unintentionally) by putting forth his opinions or reads or doing things that people don't like for whatever reason. I know I myself have chewed him out for doing things like that. I don't recall ever playing with him when he was scum, but I imagine that his scum play is similar to most other players lately; just really complacent and passive. Tunkeg's play has been more useless than complacent. What I was actually getting at with my question is that in general terms I view Adam's ability to contribute productively as significantly higher than Tunkeg's. Would you agree with this? And if so, do you see where I'm going? no, I don't agree with that. Maybe that's because I don't find anything that either player has done to be particularly memorable from a town perspective. If you're right then yes, I'd see why Adam would make a better lynch. Fucked that one up Take a gander at Whose Line where Adam caught two scum in the first cycle or so is what I meant to say At the very least Adam has some sort of scumread.Tunkeg doesn't even have that. Basically in the first post bugs is saying "if you're right about Adam being useful, he's a better lynch". I provide an example of him being useful, which is then ignored with the deflection bolded there. Was I not right then?? Or?? Did he look?
I didn't have the time to look at what you linked, given that I was going to bed. I'm sure as hell not going to trust someone else on some assertion without checking it out myself. I've learned that after trusting other people's shitty meta reads. (and I encourage everyone else to do the same)
My response about Adam having a scumread was just my opinion on the situation, it wasn't actually a direct response to what you linked. I was just clarifying one of my doubts.
|
United Kingdom36158 Posts
On December 12 2012 10:59 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 03:45 VisceraEyes wrote:On December 11 2012 17:18 Tunkeg wrote:On December 11 2012 16:59 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 11 2012 16:06 Tunkeg wrote:
Lol WBG. In these games you are linking to, and others games like it, haven't you been the one complaining about me posting readposts like that? And also me posting "useless" questions?
And now you say the same play you labeled as bad and useless actually was scumhunting?
If you want me lynched for meta fine. But don't try to convince the thread you were a fan of my previos play. just because I think something is dumb doesn't mean I think it's scummy. I don't recall ever seriously calling you scum in those games. Not to mention, in AC I was scum. Nice fail response, scum. On December 11 2012 16:00 VisceraEyes wrote:I changed my mind. I think jaybrundage is scum. On December 10 2012 10:29 jaybrundage wrote:On December 10 2012 09:58 VisceraEyes wrote:
Whatever happened to people going "LOL" after a video like in the olden days? VE gimme your thoughts on thrash After his first post on thrawn in which he says he’s suspicious, he asks my opinion of the matter. I gave it, and that’s the last that was heard about it. Why did he want my input? He never referenced anything I said, or even acknowledged that I said it. I believe that he was just trying to get someone to agree with him regarding thrawn. On December 10 2012 10:37 jaybrundage wrote:On December 10 2012 10:33 thrawn2112 wrote:On December 10 2012 10:28 Adam4167 wrote:On December 10 2012 10:24 thrawn2112 wrote:On December 10 2012 10:19 Adam4167 wrote:
[quote]
I think you better try to explain what you were hoping to accomplish here.
[quote]
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. That's not even the issue. How am I putting anyone in a compromising decision about whether or not to believe the claim when millers aren't even self aware? I don't understand what accusation you're trying to make, it makes no sense in the context of what the OP has to say about millers. Dude... Its not whether we believe you. Your lying simple. Not a single persons believes your claim its about why are you lying. For no damn reason. And what purpose would town have to do that. It only makes sense from a mafia perspective It really makes me uncomfortable when someone else speaks for me, and in this post jaybrundage is telling thrawn that I don’t believe his claim. I didn’t believe his claim, but because I thought his claim was a joke considering that the OP is explicit in the fact that millers are not self-aware. Therefor, I thought his claim was funny. But I certainly didn’t think he was LYING about his claim with any malicious intent. It doesn’t make sense for me to think that he thought that I would believe that claim based on what the OP says. But jaybrundage is telling thrawn in no uncertain terms that I, VisceraEyes, think that he’s lying about his claim for no reason. And that’s not the case. He then goes on to say that “...It only makes sense from a mafia perspective.” But that’s not true either is it? If thrawn is to be believed, he did it as a joke and to “spark discussion” and “ignite conversation” and such. Which, if he’s town, is a reasonable (if misguided) motivation. On December 10 2012 11:03 jaybrundage wrote:On December 10 2012 10:56 Djodref wrote:On December 10 2012 10:44 debears wrote:On December 10 2012 10:07 Djodref wrote:On December 10 2012 10:01 debears wrote:
[quote]
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 ? To get the voting rally started of course. Break the ice sonAnd it's strange. It would make no sense from a town perspective. His PM can't tell him he's a miller, because they aren't self aware. So from town - he was joking and he knew millers weren't self aware. Just did it for shits and giggles scum - he claimed miller without checking first. I just don't see a scum being that reckless, but i'm sure if he's town he'll put in a productive day 1. Or, he could've knew someone would interpret him as a joking townie if he's scum. and the wifomwifomwfiom I'm the first to vote in the voting thread So you see thrawn as a joking town or a reckless scum (less likely) or scum using WIFOM. Okay... I personally can see a motivation for a town player to fakeclaim like this (serious motivation) that would make sense but I'm waiting for him to explain it first so I can check it matches my expectation or not. At the exception of thrawn, do you have any comment to make on other players in this early game ? Hey Djo can you do us all a favor and type in your vote here when you decide to vote for someone one in the voting thread. It would help out alot and i rather not have to check it till the end of the day. The thing that I don’t like about this post isn’t even that it’s self defeating in the fact that Djo had, in fact, voted in the game thread...which shows that he’s not only not reading the thread, but is closely watching the voting thread...the opposite of what he’d have you believe in the post quoted above. It’s not that. Look at what Djo is saying. He’s saying he believes thrawn was joking too, and is asking someone about their thoughts on anyone else. So he’s ignored my response regarding thrawn. Now he’s insidiously trying to discredit Djo (calling out his not-really-ninja vote in the voting thread) rather than respond to his post requesting discussion outside of thrawn. It all starts to stink like scum pushing an agenda to me. Especially considering, in spite of all of this... On December 11 2012 04:43 jaybrundage wrote: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.) ....HE TAKES IT ALL BACK ANYWAY! That's right, after the whole song and dance about being SOO FRUSTRATED with how he wasn't being paid attention to, and how his motivations only make sense from scum perspective, and in the face of people he has SPECIFICALLY asked their opinion of disagreeing with him, and EVERYTHING....he takes it all back anyway. Because thrawn said it was a joke and it was to generate discussion. Cool. Die. ##Unvote: Vivax
##Vote: jaybrundageI'm going to go reread Vivax now and see if I still think he's scum. This changes things, because I had intended to spend this time writing a case on Vivax...but after reading the votecount and realizing that this jayb wagon was for real, I thought I'd check into him first. I'm glad I did, but now jaybrundage is voting for Vivax as well. We'll see what a reread brings. This is a huge derail if I've ever seen one... VE you have nothing to comment on Tunkeg or anyone other than jay? On December 11 2012 16:24 jaybrundage wrote:
Hm so the "easy" bandwagon rolls. I finished watching palmars video ( YOU'RE video was educational to say the least) although YOUR in need of a better way to record video it got really pixely when you scrolled. ha ha suck my grammar.
In response to my badly thought out posts. I was trying to put pressure on thrawn to explain his reasoning. While my threats may not of been great I did eventually got thrawn to explain himself. Its odd people say that I was going back and forth with my view of thrawn. And honestly i didnt know what the hell he was. However i did think it was anti town. But enough of that. Tmw i will reread some of the cases and give my thoughts on which one i will support.
However if i do get lynched which seems likely i would ask people whats the next step when i flip town. But ill do my best to prevent that from happening. I'm curious, did you capitalize "you're" and "your" to demonstrate how much you don't understand how to use the two? :p + Show Spoiler +haha I just found that really funny for some reason So you want me to do dumb things is that what you are saying. I know you treat this game like a schooldebate, where winning the arguement is more important than actually being right. And I know you like to twist and turn stuff to make your arguements look good. But that don't fly with me, stick to facts (like: Tunkeg is not playing exactly like he did in this and this game), don't try to strengthen your arguements with lies (Like you now saying you think I was scumhunting in those games, when you clearly stated how useless it was back then). If you stick with what is true you should be able to lynch me if I were scum. If you start presenting lies and twisting words you might get me lynched even though I am town. This post right here is why I'm not interested in lynching Tunkeg today. wherebugsgo is very opinionated about the play of others, and isn't a bit shy about calling out their play if he sees it as "bad" or "dumb". This post by Tunkeg seems genuinely confused by Bugs' assertion that his play this game is unlike his play in other, town games because Bugs has, in the past, called his play "bad" and "dumb". It seems scum would be more pissed off at the contradiction than confused - that scum would incredulously OMGUS such an assertion because it's clearly in contrast with what he had said at the time. His reads post reads EXACTLY like the "town" example Bugs provided, aside from the whole giving up and "me flipping town will confirm Palmar as town" nonsense...which could be contrived or honest - but frankly I'm not in the business of figuring out which today because I don't think Tunkeg is a good lynch today. Tunkeg's filter isn't spectacular, but it's way better than like, Bluelightz for example...or grush. I'd be more interested in a grush or Bluelightz lynch than Tunkeg. Certainly jaybrundage and Adam. I'm not touching Tunkeg with a 10 foot pole today. And Bugs, THAT is a derail bish.  Now, onto Adam. I think VE is scum too. The most significant part of this post is the last line. Note how VE never comments on Adam in his posts except to say that he'd rather vote jay than Adam. The entire time, he's trying to derail. I recall calling out one of his posts as a derail, too. In addition he votes Adam without ever commenting on him. I find that especially strange given that town VE will comment on literally anything. He also seems concerned with my interactions with marv and finds marv scummy, which is either him just being dumb or trying to discredit him. No reason to find marv scummy ATM, so why would he say that? Anyway, I was unsure of VE before but the adam connection is fairly strong IMO.
What would you say the difference was between VE's Adam interactions (not mentioning him, finally voting him) and yours - constantly saying he was your 2nd read but sticking on Tunkeg all the way through?
|
Anyways, I've made my case and still feel strongly about it.
Gonna pursue other reads cause this isn't going anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
