|
On December 20 2012 02:17 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 02:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:42 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 01:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:10 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 00:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad's dumbness strikes again!
What a bullshit reason to vote someone. to get this straight, you agree with my analysis on your "trap" and the nature of your trap being retarded as you explained what you're doing while doing it which generally speaking is a bad thing when trying to get true reactions. You however think that it makes you blatantly town and everyone should agree on you being town because of that and the fact that you bursted like a baloon, desperatly trying to explain what you're up to when being poked at ever so slightly? You know, instead of just going along with your trap/reaction-fishing to get what you (apparently) intended to get (hint: it's reactions). nope, you're just dumb. I haven't "desperately" tried to explain anything. Also to the couple people who were crying about "dumb doesn't equal scum!" you're right, it just means Toad is dumb. I never said that's why I think he's scum. Nice try, though. If it's not desperate: On December 19 2012 21:37 wherebugsgo wrote:
At this point in the game it's not the figuring out of alignments that's the problem. It's publicizing reads that I don't have an interest in publicizing.
I have no reason to make public reads that are better off being developed in private. Tainting reads by giving your targets forewarning that they're being watched carefully is generally (I've found) a good way to ruin them, at least on day 1.
That's why I like to observe, for the most part, or at least cause some reactions, without putting forth all of my motives. why did you post it to begin with? I'm seeing a WBG getting in the thread, planting a rnd vote to get reactions while explaining that he's into laying traps and getting reactions. Those 2 things don't go along that nicely so I'd say you posted it because you thought you should for whatever reason. Why did you post it if it wasn't desperation? the fuck? Why would I need to be desperate in order to tell someone why I'm not going to answer his questions? because saying that totally cripples / backfires on your general idea how to play this game d1? If you intended to post that there was no reasoning for reaction fishing earlier on, which is fine because you might have concluded that it failed and just ignored it but you kept going on about it over here: which makes no sense. You're either sabbotaging your own play or you're posting useless stuff that looks like you're doing something. I don't see you do either of those 2 as town.
none of what you're saying makes a shred of sense.
So, I'm going to ignore you, seeing as I think morbidius is far more likely scum than you.
|
On December 20 2012 02:20 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 02:17 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 02:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:42 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 01:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:10 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 00:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad's dumbness strikes again!
What a bullshit reason to vote someone. to get this straight, you agree with my analysis on your "trap" and the nature of your trap being retarded as you explained what you're doing while doing it which generally speaking is a bad thing when trying to get true reactions. You however think that it makes you blatantly town and everyone should agree on you being town because of that and the fact that you bursted like a baloon, desperatly trying to explain what you're up to when being poked at ever so slightly? You know, instead of just going along with your trap/reaction-fishing to get what you (apparently) intended to get (hint: it's reactions). nope, you're just dumb. I haven't "desperately" tried to explain anything. Also to the couple people who were crying about "dumb doesn't equal scum!" you're right, it just means Toad is dumb. I never said that's why I think he's scum. Nice try, though. If it's not desperate: On December 19 2012 21:37 wherebugsgo wrote:
At this point in the game it's not the figuring out of alignments that's the problem. It's publicizing reads that I don't have an interest in publicizing.
I have no reason to make public reads that are better off being developed in private. Tainting reads by giving your targets forewarning that they're being watched carefully is generally (I've found) a good way to ruin them, at least on day 1.
That's why I like to observe, for the most part, or at least cause some reactions, without putting forth all of my motives. why did you post it to begin with? I'm seeing a WBG getting in the thread, planting a rnd vote to get reactions while explaining that he's into laying traps and getting reactions. Those 2 things don't go along that nicely so I'd say you posted it because you thought you should for whatever reason. Why did you post it if it wasn't desperation? the fuck? Why would I need to be desperate in order to tell someone why I'm not going to answer his questions? because saying that totally cripples / backfires on your general idea how to play this game d1? If you intended to post that there was no reasoning for reaction fishing earlier on, which is fine because you might have concluded that it failed and just ignored it but you kept going on about it over here: On December 20 2012 00:11 wherebugsgo wrote:
So Toad where is your vote? which makes no sense. You're either sabbotaging your own play or you're posting useless stuff that looks like you're doing something. I don't see you do either of those 2 as town. none of what you're saying makes a shred of sense. So, I'm going to ignore you, seeing as I think morbidius is far more likely scum than you.
Okay nice and slow:
- You like random-voting without any sort of reasoning d1 to reaction-fish in general
- You did it this game as well, voting me early on
- You go ahead and explain that you like doing stuff like that so that EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG knows that what you did is just reaction-fishing and nothing serious at all
You do realize that that makes no sense and backfiring, right?
You do realize that it makes me wonder why you reaction-fished in the first place if you're not even careing about the results because you're ruining them by explaining what you're up to so eagerly.
What part of the logic / question isn't making sense.
|
Yeah, if Parlar doesn't die today then the town should probably just forfeit.
|
Regarding eywa, I do find him pretty suspicious. First is obviously the roleplaying, and there are also a couple of posts I find questionable.
+ Show Spoiler +I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike.
I presume that this is an attempt to get us to no-lynch. (Correct me if I am wrong) I generally do not agree with a no-lynch as it is a waste of a day, but merely suggesting so obviously isnt scummy. What I do not like though is that he simply mentions it in passing, gets shot down by iamperfection and never mentions it again. If he believes that a no lynch would be beneficial for town, why doesnt he attempt to push for one but merely just bring it up once? Seems possible that he is trying to derail the thread into lynch vs no lynch but decides to just back out.
+ Show Spoiler +Well, I was pretty drunk last night as I was out late at the Tavern... As I wander home, I stumbled and fell... A strange figure walked out from the shadows, though I could not make out his face, I dare not show myself as he seemed rather keen on making sure no one was about. I think he might be planning something... I could only guess at this point, but the figure kind of seemed similar to that of debears, I can't say for sure.
My head is spinning a little bit now that I think of it, it was a little too much action for me last night. However, I did see sciberbia and iamperfection at the Tavern as well, so I doubt they have anything to do with it.
This post is also pretty problematic imo. I assume that he is saying that he feels that sciberbia & iamprefection are town and that dbears is scum. I dont understand why he would decide to post his reads randomly as town. As mentioned by toad, these reads serve no purpose without any reasoning behind them. Furthermore, it does not seem that he intends to push dbears at all - so why mention that he thinks dbears is scummy?
That said though, I kind of doubt that scum would have the balls to pull something like this as it draws alot of attention and it is somewhat likely that he would get lynched for it. Leaning scum slightly for now, will wait for his case on whoever.
Stutters is another person I find suspicious. I generally agree with Vivax's case on him. Also find his accusation onto Mordbidus kind of wierd, as it seemed pretty clear to me that it obviously wasnt a scumslip and thus not a legit accusation. Could be trying to pull attention of himself?
|
On December 20 2012 02:36 zelblade wrote:Regarding eywa, I do find him pretty suspicious. First is obviously the roleplaying, and there are also a couple of posts I find questionable. + Show Spoiler +I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. I presume that this is an attempt to get us to no-lynch. (Correct me if I am wrong) I generally do not agree with a no-lynch as it is a waste of a day, but merely suggesting so obviously isnt scummy. What I do not like though is that he simply mentions it in passing, gets shot down by iamperfection and never mentions it again. If he believes that a no lynch would be beneficial for town, why doesnt he attempt to push for one but merely just bring it up once? Seems possible that he is trying to derail the thread into lynch vs no lynch but decides to just back out. + Show Spoiler +Well, I was pretty drunk last night as I was out late at the Tavern... As I wander home, I stumbled and fell... A strange figure walked out from the shadows, though I could not make out his face, I dare not show myself as he seemed rather keen on making sure no one was about. I think he might be planning something... I could only guess at this point, but the figure kind of seemed similar to that of debears, I can't say for sure.
My head is spinning a little bit now that I think of it, it was a little too much action for me last night. However, I did see sciberbia and iamperfection at the Tavern as well, so I doubt they have anything to do with it. This post is also pretty problematic imo. I assume that he is saying that he feels that sciberbia & iamprefection are town and that dbears is scum. I dont understand why he would decide to post his reads randomly as town. As mentioned by toad, these reads serve no purpose without any reasoning behind them. Furthermore, it does not seem that he intends to push dbears at all - so why mention that he thinks dbears is scummy? That said though, I kind of doubt that scum would have the balls to pull something like this as it draws alot of attention and it is somewhat likely that he would get lynched for it. Leaning scum slightly for now, will wait for his case on whoever. Stutters is another person I find suspicious. I generally agree with Vivax's case on him. Also find his accusation onto Mordbidus kind of wierd, as it seemed pretty clear to me that it obviously wasnt a scumslip and thus not a legit accusation. Could be trying to pull attention of himself?
Big post of blah blah blah without addressing the biggest and most inclusive case that is posted... I'll spell it out for you guys, This guy is also scum.
|
On December 20 2012 02:36 zelblade wrote:Regarding eywa, I do find him pretty suspicious. First is obviously the roleplaying, and there are also a couple of posts I find questionable. + Show Spoiler +I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. I presume that this is an attempt to get us to no-lynch. (Correct me if I am wrong) I generally do not agree with a no-lynch as it is a waste of a day, but merely suggesting so obviously isnt scummy. What I do not like though is that he simply mentions it in passing, gets shot down by iamperfection and never mentions it again. If he believes that a no lynch would be beneficial for town, why doesnt he attempt to push for one but merely just bring it up once? Seems possible that he is trying to derail the thread into lynch vs no lynch but decides to just back out. + Show Spoiler +Well, I was pretty drunk last night as I was out late at the Tavern... As I wander home, I stumbled and fell... A strange figure walked out from the shadows, though I could not make out his face, I dare not show myself as he seemed rather keen on making sure no one was about. I think he might be planning something... I could only guess at this point, but the figure kind of seemed similar to that of debears, I can't say for sure.
My head is spinning a little bit now that I think of it, it was a little too much action for me last night. However, I did see sciberbia and iamperfection at the Tavern as well, so I doubt they have anything to do with it. This post is also pretty problematic imo. I assume that he is saying that he feels that sciberbia & iamprefection are town and that dbears is scum. I dont understand why he would decide to post his reads randomly as town. As mentioned by toad, these reads serve no purpose without any reasoning behind them. Furthermore, it does not seem that he intends to push dbears at all - so why mention that he thinks dbears is scummy? That said though, I kind of doubt that scum would have the balls to pull something like this as it draws alot of attention and it is somewhat likely that he would get lynched for it. Leaning scum slightly for now, will wait for his case on whoever. Stutters is another person I find suspicious. I generally agree with Vivax's case on him. Also find his accusation onto Mordbidus kind of wierd, as it seemed pretty clear to me that it obviously wasnt a scumslip and thus not a legit accusation. Could be trying to pull attention of himself?
how can you say your suspicios of eywa and not comment on his palmar case
also i like eywa now he is playing better looks town now pretty strong town maybe even my strongest town read.
##unvote
|
Did anyone even bother reading my post about stutters? -.-
You guys creating a mess with your massive quotations, use spoilers for big ones pls.
Also notice how he's gone underground since then.
|
On December 20 2012 02:27 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 02:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 02:17 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 02:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:42 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 01:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:10 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 00:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad's dumbness strikes again!
What a bullshit reason to vote someone. to get this straight, you agree with my analysis on your "trap" and the nature of your trap being retarded as you explained what you're doing while doing it which generally speaking is a bad thing when trying to get true reactions. You however think that it makes you blatantly town and everyone should agree on you being town because of that and the fact that you bursted like a baloon, desperatly trying to explain what you're up to when being poked at ever so slightly? You know, instead of just going along with your trap/reaction-fishing to get what you (apparently) intended to get (hint: it's reactions). nope, you're just dumb. I haven't "desperately" tried to explain anything. Also to the couple people who were crying about "dumb doesn't equal scum!" you're right, it just means Toad is dumb. I never said that's why I think he's scum. Nice try, though. If it's not desperate: On December 19 2012 21:37 wherebugsgo wrote:
At this point in the game it's not the figuring out of alignments that's the problem. It's publicizing reads that I don't have an interest in publicizing.
I have no reason to make public reads that are better off being developed in private. Tainting reads by giving your targets forewarning that they're being watched carefully is generally (I've found) a good way to ruin them, at least on day 1.
That's why I like to observe, for the most part, or at least cause some reactions, without putting forth all of my motives. why did you post it to begin with? I'm seeing a WBG getting in the thread, planting a rnd vote to get reactions while explaining that he's into laying traps and getting reactions. Those 2 things don't go along that nicely so I'd say you posted it because you thought you should for whatever reason. Why did you post it if it wasn't desperation? the fuck? Why would I need to be desperate in order to tell someone why I'm not going to answer his questions? because saying that totally cripples / backfires on your general idea how to play this game d1? If you intended to post that there was no reasoning for reaction fishing earlier on, which is fine because you might have concluded that it failed and just ignored it but you kept going on about it over here: On December 20 2012 00:11 wherebugsgo wrote:
So Toad where is your vote? which makes no sense. You're either sabbotaging your own play or you're posting useless stuff that looks like you're doing something. I don't see you do either of those 2 as town. none of what you're saying makes a shred of sense. So, I'm going to ignore you, seeing as I think morbidius is far more likely scum than you. Okay nice and slow: - You like random-voting without any sort of reasoning d1 to reaction-fish in general
- You did it this game as well, voting me early on
- You go ahead and explain that you like doing stuff like that so that EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG knows that what you did is just reaction-fishing and nothing serious at all
You do realize that that makes no sense and backfiring, right? You do realize that it makes me wonder why you reaction-fished in the first place if you're not even careing about the results because you're ruining them by explaining what you're up to so eagerly. What part of the logic / question isn't making sense.
herp derp it wasn't a random vote.
That in itself kills your whole theory.
|
On December 20 2012 03:01 Vivax wrote:
Did anyone even bother reading my post about stutters? -.-
You guys creating a mess with your massive quotations, use spoilers for big ones pls.
Also notice how he's gone underground since then.
Read it,
Seems reasonable, but it's not that strong of a case, there isn't a smooth flow in stutter's play so far so it's hard to tell especially with the very few posts. If he starts posting more, he could turn innocent, I agree however if he just lurks, he has to go at some point. Though, I think we have some good mafia reads which we should lynch before approaching stutters.
|
Ehh.. I didnt see that case -_-
I started making that post about 2.00 tl time, and the reason it took that long was because my friend started talking to me about some crap on skype halfway through. Generally dont refresh the page before posting so...
Besides that should have been clear with the last line stating that I would wait for his case on whoever -_-
I'll read it later, helping said friend do some stuff right now.
|
actually fuck morbidius, that last post by zelblade was much worse.
##unvote
##vote Zelblade
On December 20 2012 02:36 zelblade wrote:Regarding eywa, I do find him pretty suspicious. First is obviously the roleplaying, and there are also a couple of posts I find questionable.+ Show Spoiler +I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. I presume that this is an attempt to get us to no-lynch. (Correct me if I am wrong) I generally do not agree with a no-lynch as it is a waste of a day, but merely suggesting so obviously isnt scummy. What I do not like though is that he simply mentions it in passing, gets shot down by iamperfection and never mentions it again. If he believes that a no lynch would be beneficial for town, why doesnt he attempt to push for one but merely just bring it up once? Seems possible that he is trying to derail the thread into lynch vs no lynch but decides to just back out. + Show Spoiler +Well, I was pretty drunk last night as I was out late at the Tavern... As I wander home, I stumbled and fell... A strange figure walked out from the shadows, though I could not make out his face, I dare not show myself as he seemed rather keen on making sure no one was about. I think he might be planning something... I could only guess at this point, but the figure kind of seemed similar to that of debears, I can't say for sure.
My head is spinning a little bit now that I think of it, it was a little too much action for me last night. However, I did see sciberbia and iamperfection at the Tavern as well, so I doubt they have anything to do with it. This post is also pretty problematic imo. I assume that he is saying that he feels that sciberbia & iamprefection are town and that dbears is scum. I dont understand why he would decide to post his reads randomly as town. As mentioned by toad, these reads serve no purpose without any reasoning behind them. Furthermore, it does not seem that he intends to push dbears at all - so why mention that he thinks dbears is scummy? That said though, I kind of doubt that scum would have the balls to pull something like this as it draws alot of attention and it is somewhat likely that he would get lynched for it. Leaning scum slightly for now, will wait for his case on whoever.Stutters is another person I find suspicious. I generally agree with Vivax's case on him. Also find his accusation onto Mordbidus kind of wierd, as it seemed pretty clear to me that it obviously wasnt a scumslip and thus not a legit accusation. Could be trying to pull attention of himself?
bolded all the kinds of things bad scum (like zelblade) like saying. I specifically recall that zelblade is like this as scum.
In addition, note the complete lack of a vote, and, in general, spine.
|
On December 20 2012 03:11 wherebugsgo wrote:actually fuck morbidius, that last post by zelblade was much worse. ##unvote
##vote ZelbladeShow nested quote +On December 20 2012 02:36 zelblade wrote:Regarding eywa, I do find him pretty suspicious. First is obviously the roleplaying, and there are also a couple of posts I find questionable.+ Show Spoiler +I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike. I presume that this is an attempt to get us to no-lynch. (Correct me if I am wrong) I generally do not agree with a no-lynch as it is a waste of a day, but merely suggesting so obviously isnt scummy. What I do not like though is that he simply mentions it in passing, gets shot down by iamperfection and never mentions it again. If he believes that a no lynch would be beneficial for town, why doesnt he attempt to push for one but merely just bring it up once? Seems possible that he is trying to derail the thread into lynch vs no lynch but decides to just back out. + Show Spoiler +Well, I was pretty drunk last night as I was out late at the Tavern... As I wander home, I stumbled and fell... A strange figure walked out from the shadows, though I could not make out his face, I dare not show myself as he seemed rather keen on making sure no one was about. I think he might be planning something... I could only guess at this point, but the figure kind of seemed similar to that of debears, I can't say for sure.
My head is spinning a little bit now that I think of it, it was a little too much action for me last night. However, I did see sciberbia and iamperfection at the Tavern as well, so I doubt they have anything to do with it. This post is also pretty problematic imo. I assume that he is saying that he feels that sciberbia & iamprefection are town and that dbears is scum. I dont understand why he would decide to post his reads randomly as town. As mentioned by toad, these reads serve no purpose without any reasoning behind them. Furthermore, it does not seem that he intends to push dbears at all - so why mention that he thinks dbears is scummy? That said though, I kind of doubt that scum would have the balls to pull something like this as it draws alot of attention and it is somewhat likely that he would get lynched for it. Leaning scum slightly for now, will wait for his case on whoever.Stutters is another person I find suspicious. I generally agree with Vivax's case on him. Also find his accusation onto Mordbidus kind of wierd, as it seemed pretty clear to me that it obviously wasnt a scumslip and thus not a legit accusation. Could be trying to pull attention of himself? bolded all the kinds of things bad scum (like zelblade) like saying. I specifically recall that zelblade is like this as scum. In addition, note the complete lack of a vote, and, in general, spine.
can do an actual case if your going to throw an accusation like that around. You comment that you know his meta maybe you could give some actual examples.
|
On December 20 2012 03:07 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 02:27 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 02:20 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 02:17 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 02:10 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:42 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 01:36 wherebugsgo wrote:On December 20 2012 01:10 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 00:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad's dumbness strikes again!
What a bullshit reason to vote someone. to get this straight, you agree with my analysis on your "trap" and the nature of your trap being retarded as you explained what you're doing while doing it which generally speaking is a bad thing when trying to get true reactions. You however think that it makes you blatantly town and everyone should agree on you being town because of that and the fact that you bursted like a baloon, desperatly trying to explain what you're up to when being poked at ever so slightly? You know, instead of just going along with your trap/reaction-fishing to get what you (apparently) intended to get (hint: it's reactions). nope, you're just dumb. I haven't "desperately" tried to explain anything. Also to the couple people who were crying about "dumb doesn't equal scum!" you're right, it just means Toad is dumb. I never said that's why I think he's scum. Nice try, though. If it's not desperate: On December 19 2012 21:37 wherebugsgo wrote:
At this point in the game it's not the figuring out of alignments that's the problem. It's publicizing reads that I don't have an interest in publicizing.
I have no reason to make public reads that are better off being developed in private. Tainting reads by giving your targets forewarning that they're being watched carefully is generally (I've found) a good way to ruin them, at least on day 1.
That's why I like to observe, for the most part, or at least cause some reactions, without putting forth all of my motives. why did you post it to begin with? I'm seeing a WBG getting in the thread, planting a rnd vote to get reactions while explaining that he's into laying traps and getting reactions. Those 2 things don't go along that nicely so I'd say you posted it because you thought you should for whatever reason. Why did you post it if it wasn't desperation? the fuck? Why would I need to be desperate in order to tell someone why I'm not going to answer his questions? because saying that totally cripples / backfires on your general idea how to play this game d1? If you intended to post that there was no reasoning for reaction fishing earlier on, which is fine because you might have concluded that it failed and just ignored it but you kept going on about it over here: On December 20 2012 00:11 wherebugsgo wrote:
So Toad where is your vote? which makes no sense. You're either sabbotaging your own play or you're posting useless stuff that looks like you're doing something. I don't see you do either of those 2 as town. none of what you're saying makes a shred of sense. So, I'm going to ignore you, seeing as I think morbidius is far more likely scum than you. Okay nice and slow: - You like random-voting without any sort of reasoning d1 to reaction-fish in general
- You did it this game as well, voting me early on
- You go ahead and explain that you like doing stuff like that so that EVERYONE AND THEIR DOG knows that what you did is just reaction-fishing and nothing serious at all
You do realize that that makes no sense and backfiring, right? You do realize that it makes me wonder why you reaction-fished in the first place if you're not even careing about the results because you're ruining them by explaining what you're up to so eagerly. What part of the logic / question isn't making sense. herp derp it wasn't a random vote. That in itself kills your whole theory.
2 things:
1) If it wasn't random you truely believe that you caught a mafia d1 after he did a single post? Especially considering it's me and you usually keep on harping about how unreadable I am early on in games and how people should look at my voting patterns instead of what I write to figure me out? If that's the case and you strongly believe I'm mafia because of that first post, you probably should have left your vote on me, shouldn't you ?
2) Even if it wasn't random and let's say you truely got a mafiaread on me around that time for whatever reason, it still was reaction fishing the way you did it. The important part wasn't the fact that it was (or wasn't) a random-vote but a post that was meant to reaction-fish, like I mentioned at least 10 times now. You did that post and I assume you left out reasoning/explanation intentionally to see what people think about it/me and how they respond. The very trollish behavior also makes it look like you just wanted people to comment on it desperately, or make it look that way.
So no, even if it wasn't a random vote my theory isn't killed at all because it's about the reaction fishing that you pretend to be doing while you don't care at all about it because you're actively sabotaging any results you could get out of your posts by the other posts you did so far.
But fine. I'll ignore you for a while. Won't help anyone here if I keep on posting about you and noone else, there's more mafia to catch out there and clearly you're very passionate about it. The latter part isn't alignment indicating at all and therefore isn't changing my read on you one bit but you might have just screwed up big time, who knows. You're very much not perfect after all.
|
I really don't see how that makes me scum. I didnt actually place my vote on anyone because I wasn't very sure who I wanted to lynch yet and was going to wait for eywa's case before actually deciding. Also dont get the problem with the things you are bolding. What are you trying to point out? Me posting "safely"?
I find eywa's case on palmar to be fairly interesting actually. Palmar seemed to be fairly townish to me on my initial read due to a couple of reasons such as him pushing for a eywa lynch at that point, though the case does raise up some interesting points. Would like to hear palmar's response to it.
Its 3am here for me, and I am rather tired. Going to sleep now.
|
On December 20 2012 01:02 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 12:26 Stutters695 wrote:
@vivax why claim vt so early? What are you hoping to achieve for the town by doing that?
The question is what I was hoping to achieve with that before noticing that everyone except you knows this trick. The Kenpachi trap involves a wishy-washy reaction to a town claim being supposedly indicative of scum. I've actually never seen it work, but one can always try. I think that scum tends to focus on rather insignificant events to point out, trying to inject suspicion into the atmosphere, but then quickly retreating from the accusations when questioned. A guy doing that towards a miller claim in debears' last game got caught up in his hook and flipped red. In this game, I think that this behaviour fits, hmm, you. ##Vote Stutters695Oh and, before posting obvious fluff you should read the damn thread. Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 13:57 Stutters695 wrote:
*snip*
No one has asked Vivax why he posted it directly. + Show Spoiler +On December 19 2012 09:50 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:48 Vivax wrote:
Hey debby, I've just finished writing a huge post in another game.
Admit it, you just voted for me cause I called you noob. I don't remember that at all actually. And mind explaining what pro-town purpose your claim has? Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 13:57 Stutters695 wrote:
Let's talk about someone who hasn't been contributing through their posts though. Morbidius: If you think Yamato scumslipped, why haven't you said anything about it since calling it a scumslip? That's a pretty major accusation to throw out considering he's still the only miller. What changed, why aren't you pushing that at all? And this is you surprisingly losing interest in me when pressured. Looks like we've got an Adam 2.0 here.
So because I asked a question after you went to bed and didn't rehash it throughout the night until I got an answer I'm a dummy. If I post about you all night I'll be accused of posting fluff again and thus you'll think I'm scum. I hadn't forgotten about you, this is the first post I've gotten time to do since I just got off work. It seems to me like you want me to be scum more than you're trying to find scum.
|
Ebwop: a dummy = scummy, fucking Swype.
|
Well, I gotta give stutters some brownie points for not starting to fight back and forth for being accused. I think there's a good bet he's town, the case against him isn't strong.
|
On December 19 2012 21:03 Palmar wrote:
In return, I'm willing to extend the invitation for anyone in the thread to challenge me to analyse any player's alignment based on their posting so far. Obviously I cannot write a lengthy analysis on everyone in the game, so the first 2 suggested I will check out.
If your offer is still valid, I'd enjoy if you took a closer look at stutters (for my post) and sciberbia (for not showing up since he wrote his case), also, Bugs instareading sciberbia as town was quite suspicious play. He didn't even give a fuck about what he wrote.
And speaking of Bugs, I'm in for lynching him for shitting up the thread with his massive quotations and throwing around brainless votes. He's just causing confusion and refusing to cooperate.
Still, do me a favour and take a look at my case :>.
##Unvote
##Vote Wherebugsgo
|
##Unvote
##Vote Wherebugsgo
|
Eywa, I like you style, screw the haters. One question though:
You make this post:
On December 19 2012 23:51 Eywa- wrote:
I would like to examine the current situation and weigh in on mathematics. Generally speaking, there is a 75% or higher chance that if we kill someone on the first day that we will end up in a worse predicament than we currently are. I understand that our streets have been taken over by scum at night, but fear is not a reason to lose all our civil rights and obligations. As a productive member of society and an established citizen of this town, I plead that we take it easy today and allow our local police force to run their investigations before we strike.
Saying that you'd like us to consider going for a no-lynch on Day 1 and just waiting for Day 2, so that we can possibly get a check in, or at the very least have something to talk about.
Later, you come in with your analysis of Palmar, which is cool that you made it, but after re-reading, one thing that stuck out to me was that a majority of the posts and behaviour of Palmar that you draw on comes from before you made your no-lynch post. In-between your no-lynch post and your analysis, you were called out by a couple players for not commenting on the game (which I disagree with, but whatever). So, the analysis came after that. So, my question to you, is when did you become suspicious of Palmar? The timing of the post combined with the posts you draw from don't really fit when put into the context of your no-lynch post. You ask to no-lynch, then later you make a post saying Palmar is scum, which is fine, because you can change your mind, but your analysis is all based on stuff Palmar did before your no-lynch post, so if you found it to be so scummy, why didn't it strike you before? So, to me, it looks like you made your no-lynch post, got shut down, then went back and looked for someone to make a case on. What gives?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
