EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXII - Page 20
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
Either way, not really worth talking about. I want syl and jiod to get in here. Still confused as fuck by axle's posting style. | ||
|
Arnarnion
Canada39 Posts
On December 04 2012 14:24 Kickstart wrote: For example I FoSd Yamato because I don't like much his actions up to this point. It was mostly that what he was doing didn't sit well with me therefor I pointed out what I didn't like and asked others about it. Just the fact that to me he seemed really incessant with his policy talks and then just immediately threw a vote on someone when they didn't answer him. My reaction was just a gut reaction but to figure out if I think it is scummy or not I need to look through his dialogue and try and figure out his intentions, but I wanted to see what others thought about it if anything. It looks here as if he's saying "I'm suspicious and I will, at some point, look at Oats for actual evidence, but until then can you guys come up with a reason for why he might be scum?" It might just be lazy town actions, but I feel like if Kick was actually suspicious of Oat's actions he should actually try to pursue that suspicion. Asking towns feelings about something before offering your own concrete opinion seems pretty scummy to me | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
Oats is voting for Kick to make him explain his shoddy reasoning behind throwing suspicion on me, something I agree with. Then you attack Oats based largely on the fact that you don't like the vote. Why would town CC attack Oats for pressuring kick unless he didn't agree with this logic? Stop trying to change the subject. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On December 05 2012 02:34 yamato77 wrote: No, it is worth talking about because you have yet to adequately explain yourself. Oats is voting for Kick to make him explain his shoddy reasoning behind throwing suspicion on me, something I agree with. Then you attack Oats based largely on the fact that you don't like the vote. Why would town CC attack Oats for pressuring kick unless he didn't agree with this logic? Stop trying to change the subject. Where was I attacking Oats? I just said I didn't like that line of reasoning. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On December 05 2012 02:50 yamato77 wrote: Stop dodging my question. If you don't agree with Oats' vote, as you claim, you need a better reason than your nitpick of kick's posting not being alignment indicative. It's a pressure play. Of course you can't indicate alignment from so little but you have to do something to draw more information out. That's what questions are for. You get the information, then make a case, then vote. Questions are pressure. I'm only saying I didn't like the vote because the reasons are weak. I don't agree with Oat's logic because he just said that the vote was bad, that lurker lynching is a scum trait, and that he was looking for town support (which I can see). The first two points aren't "scummy" as he claims, the last point kind of is but it could go either way. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
Unless, that is, you know kick isn't scum. | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
This is a pointless discussion. The points Oats gives for voting are not good. The fact that he did vote for him is fine as a pressure play. I just pointed out that some of the points weren't that valid if he truly though Kickstart was scum. | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
I do, however, see the scum motivation. Scum CC would see this as an opportunity to look like he's putting pressure on people while drawing little real attention to himself because he never offers his own opinion. It is pulling teeth to get you to give any information, why? If you are town you would cooperate. | ||
|
Arnarnion
Canada39 Posts
| ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On December 05 2012 03:17 yamato77 wrote: Yes, I know all that and I don't see the point in doing it if you are town. You are looking for scum, not criticising other players for their arguments. You admitted that kick could be seen as suspicious so why wouldn't you just let kick respond to Oats instead of harping on him pointlessly? I do, however, see the scum motivation. Scum CC would see this as an opportunity to look like he's putting pressure on people while drawing little real attention to himself because he never offers his own opinion. It is pulling teeth to get you to give any information, why? If you are town you would cooperate. Pulling teeth? You don't want any information from me, just this useless fluff about why I thought Oat's reasons for the vote were invalid which I already gave you. If I was town I would cooperate... cooperate with what? I put my opinion out there, and you're turning it into something that's not cooperating with town functionality. It's my opinion and I put it out there - deal with it. So I should just sit back and agree that Kickstart is scummy because of these reasons? Does that really help town functionality? Sorry, I don't think he is that scummy. I'm not cooperating with the popular idea because I don't see a reason to. Cooperating with people who could be scum trying to push a mislynch, no less. @Oats On December 05 2012 00:30 Oatsmaster wrote: No, I wasnt providing advice on how he could look more town, I was giving a suggestion on more effective/accurate ways to win the game as town. If he is scum, it doesnt matter. I am concerned that he is scum. HOWEVER, it doesnt really affect much BECAUSE if you know that someone is scum, you just ignore them. Currently I have a slight town read on yamato, however he seems to be acting differently as opposed to last game. Probably because he wants to improve like me, but you never know. 30 minutes later... On December 05 2012 01:05 Oatsmaster wrote: Im leaning town on CC, he seems his normal logical self. Im null on Axle, his questions are odd but maybe thats just his playstyle. Im leaning slightly scum on yamato and kickstart Kickstart goes into a discussion on whether lynching lurkers is good which is unnecessary at the start of the game because who knows, we might not have lurkers. Then he jokes around for a while and suddenly FoS yamato on badgering Axle. Like what kind of reasoning is that? Yamato + Show Spoiler + On December 04 2012 23:42 yamato77 wrote: My strategy this game is far more aggressive than it was the previous game at the beginning. If I am town, my main objective day 1, especially early, is to provoke discussion and responses. The more information I can garner from people, the stronger my reads on them can become. Up to that point, only Axle had seemed to willingly ignore me so I went after him. People that don't want to give up information are either scum or blue, because they both have something to hide. I suppose I assumed that Axle was doing this intentionally but it seems like he was ignoring me rather absentmindedly. What my focus now has become is why you have started to throw suspicion around on players who are looking into people's play early. A lot of your posting this game has been about "this looks suspicious" or something of that nature. Everything can "look suspicious" from a town POV, but you feel the need to say it a lot. Why? he only questioned axle then Unvoted him for unclear reasons.. Why? | ||
|
Mr. Cheesecake
United States3756 Posts
On December 05 2012 03:22 Arnarnion wrote: CC, do YOU have any reads on Kick? Have you seen any behavior on his part that would suggest town over scum or vice versa? You attack Oat's opinion on Kick, but what is yours? In general, his posting seems to be a bit clunky. His stance on the discussion of policy lynching is odd, but I don't see much scum motivation for it, as it just draws attention. Same goes for his FoS of Yamato. Probably just a pressure move -- I don't much care for Yamato badgering axle myself. Pretty null so far. And again, I'm not ATTACKING Oat's opinion, I'm just pointing out that those aren't generally scum traits... On December 05 2012 03:23 yamato77 wrote: Also funny is that you call this discussion pointless when your criticism of Oats was even more so. How was it pointless? I pointed out that his scumread may have been false, because those reasons weren't that good... you on the other hand are just dragging it out like it's something big. | ||
|
sour_eraser
Canada932 Posts
Last game, we lynched lurkers and it didnt go too well, vets posted and said that its unlikely that a scum is a lurker and STILL Kickstart posts this. It reads as very wishy, washy allowing him to keep all his options open. Lynching a lurker is good for scum because it doesnt really show strong opinions either way because its a lurker, coinflippy. Gotta leave in 40 minutes But in my opinion,Oats trying to vote Kickstart with the reason given does not look like a proper evidence to me. This game is different from other games with different players so each person will have different playstyles. Just because lynching lurkers did not go well last game means it won't go well this game as well. Also he seems to be trigger happy about immediately voting again Kickstart. I mean shouldn't you have some opinions from other townies before trying initiate a vote? That's what I would do if I was to start a vote | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
On December 05 2012 03:28 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Pulling teeth? You don't want any information from me, just this useless fluff about why I thought Oat's reasons for the vote were invalid which I already gave you. If I was town I would cooperate... cooperate with what? I put my opinion out there, and you're turning it into something that's not cooperating with town functionality. It's my opinion and I put it out there - deal with it. So I should just sit back and agree that Kickstart is scummy because of these reasons? Does that really help town functionality? Sorry, I don't think he is that scummy. I'm not cooperating with the popular idea because I don't see a reason to. Cooperating with people who could be scum trying to push a mislynch, no less. I want to know your motivations for doing it. As I've said twice before, I don't think town CC would criticize a player for putting pressure on a player you DID admit had the possibility of being scummy. I do think scum CC would do this. You have also failed to give any real read on kickstart. You've talked about Oats' points but never really made your own as to whether he is or isn't. "Sitting back" and "agreeing that Kickstart as scummy" are not the same thing. You could have refrained from commenting on Oats' case but you chose to nitpick it instead. Why would town CC nitpick a town-favored play? | ||
|
yamato77
11589 Posts
| ||
| ||
