|
Actually
##vote wherebugsgo
I really don't see mafia NOT telling someone who's not a vet (assuming team mafia is not vet only :p) to vote bugs for his vote. Neither do I think that not a single mafia thought voting bugs might be a good way to place a vote after his vote.
There, now you've got your reaction bugs.
|
On December 20 2012 00:33 sciberbia wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:42 Toadesstern wrote:
He's basicly telling us to lynch the guy because he's doing something stupid with the reasoning that he once did the very same thing AS TOWN.
Given his history he at least should be the guy telling people something the lines of "okay, this guy is retarded but sometimes townies are retarded. I did the same mistake in a recent game" given how people apparently love to defend other people... well or at least not bring it up the way he did. Instead he's insta-voting him with a flawed logic when he should be well aware of all that. @ToadYou are misunderstanding what debears said. In Mario Mini, s&b was the guy that claimed VT, and debears was the guy that called him out on it (as town). So in the quote that Palmar drew attention to, debears was saying that he, debears, has "fallen into the Kenpachi trap" before as town. Debears never claimed VT on D1. [...]
Oh. Thanks that makes some sense I guess.
|
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).
|
On December 20 2012 01:08 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 01:00 iamperfection wrote:On December 20 2012 00:56 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad's dumbness strikes again!
What a bullshit reason to vote someone. does it make him scum. For someone screaming bullshit you seem to have been full of it yourself going through your filter. i have no idea what to think of you. Iamp I find it odd that toad tried to misrepresent what I said in terms of mario mini and the kenpachi rule. Its obvious he assumed that I once did it, yet he never even checked the game that I mentioned. Now, whether he's dumb eniugh as scum to do that is the question
I don't read old games. Ever. I didn't try to misrepresent what you said, I misunderstood what you said because of your bitter poor wording and took it for what it was. Go ahead and read what you posted:
On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't think so, Morbidius. It looked pretty clear what he was trying to say to me.
Debears, did you just fall for a Kenpachi trap? I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1
Do you really think it was obvious that you were referring to "falling into a Kenpachi trap" and not referring to "doing the same thing" when sayine I've done the same thing before ?
Especially considering the 2nd phrase going on about it, makes it look like you're still talking about the same topic.
|
On December 20 2012 01:36 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +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?
|
On December 20 2012 02:10 wherebugsgo wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
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.
|
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.
|
On December 20 2012 07:15 debears wrote:
Ah wtf its in the quotes
So you don't use meta? If so do you have multiple other games where you say this?
I do use meta, pretty much actually, I just don't read old games I weren't part of because I think you've got the be in the situation first hand to understand it and how it came to it.
Additionally if I start reading old games for someone I have to do it for everyone. I don't really feel like reading 30 games....
Yeah got a bunch of games stateing that, go ahead and search them^^
|
On December 20 2012 08:38 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 07:35 Toadesstern wrote:On December 20 2012 07:15 debears wrote:
Ah wtf its in the quotes
So you don't use meta? If so do you have multiple other games where you say this?
I do use meta, pretty much actually, I just don't read old games I weren't part of because I think you've got the be in the situation first hand to understand it and how it came to it. Additionally if I start reading old games for someone I have to do it for everyone. I don't really feel like reading 30 games.... Yeah got a bunch of games stateing that, go ahead and search them^^ Ok. This is just fucking unreasonable 1) You were pretty happy to jump on me early when you didn't read my game 2) You say you use meta "pretty much" 3) You didn't bother to quickly check the game I listed in the thread to check my reaction (in other words USING META) 4) When I request a couple of quotes from your previous games you say that I can go search them. That is bullshit. Total bullshit. I ask you for something fucking specific that you should easily be able to point out. This isn't something that's easy to ctrl f through filters. What's your reasoning for being uncompliant when you should have a pretty good idea where to find something like that from your previous games I'm looking, and if I don't find anything, I'm screaming your name from the mountains until you are lynched. ##Unvote
##Vote Toad
what about it is unreasonable. I just said I don't go through old games at all. And you asked me to. I just said I don't do it...
If anything searching this kind of thing would be unreasonable lol.
About what you said:
1) I didn't jump on you. I said that you said A is something scummy while admitting that you did A yourself as town before. That's something really scummy and you did not make it clear at all that you were talking about something else
2) Yes I do, I use meta from games I played in only.
3) As mentioned, I don't do that.
4) As mentioned, I don't do that and I don't know in which of my 30 or something like that games I said something like that or on what page. As you said it's really not easy to find something like that :p
Here's my approach on meta as an easy to understand flowchart:
Was I in the game myself?
->Yes? -> Use meta
-> No?
----> Were multiple people (3+) in this game in the old game as well?
--------> Yes and noone disagrees -> take what the guy says to have happened for granted.
--------> Yes and people disagree (about it happening) -> ignore the meta read
--------> No -> ignore the meta read.
Pretty straight forward.
|
On December 20 2012 09:13 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 03:55 Toadesstern wrote:On November 24 2012 03:31 Acrofales wrote:On November 24 2012 03:16 Z-BosoN wrote:On November 24 2012 03:05 Acrofales wrote:
Okay, I went through Sandro's filter, and other than his absence at some key moments I cannot find anything scummy. He seems to be playing pretty standard for him, calling people town with no reason given. However, I am looking forward to him waking up and starting to play again.
Another thing to keep in mind is that from a game-setup point of view it is very very risky to put people like Sandro+Syllo on opposite alignments. Not quite as bad as Coag+Jackal (and the only game I've played with both of them DrH stuck both of them on the scumteam), but not something you can do without making a very serious consideration, as they are well-known for having each other's number. I don't want to let this weigh too heavily, because meta-speculation about the host is really dodgy ground, but I felt it was worth mentioning.
Syllo+Sand: do you have a recent (last half a year or so) game where you were opposite alignments? 3rd party doesn't count. So I take it you are not so familiar with his meta? Because both Toad and Adam seemed to give him scum reads on meta. I'm also disturbed on how syllo is reluctant to give a read on him. I've asked him twice at this time, and he still doesn't take a solid position. There are two newbies using the logic "syllo won the event ergo sand is scum" and that's going unopposed. I don't get why he's not taking a position against sand. I second that a game in which syllo and sand played together as opposite alignments would be quite instructive. That way we can tell just how accurate these vet reads being made are and I'll be more comfortable regarding people's reads. For the record I'm opposed to a sand lynch at this time, until more people comment on the cases on him, at least. Right now there are much better lynches, more into that in a bit. Only remotely normal game I remember Sandroba being scum is Liar mafia. His meta was blatantly obvious there, because he just plain didn't care about the game. That is not the impression I am getting from him. I have played with town Sandroba a couple of times now, and am getting a similar feeling. The main difference is that he has gone awol for long stretches of time. I don't like that at all, but admit real world stuff does come up and interfere with playing sometimes. I am uncomfortable lynching Sandroba with the ONLY thing I can hold against him is that he was afk when it counted. Adam states Sandroba is playing like he "don't-give-a-shit", which I disagree with. @Adam: please explain yourself a bit better. What makes you have this read? Toad doesn't have a meta read on Sandro at all. He has a "Syllo is town, therefore Sandro must be scum" read based on the party leader elections, which is pants-on-head retarded. nope I had a meta read on Sandro up until yesterday. He was way to "friendly" when talking to syllo imo which again is a reason I liked syllos conversation with him. Town Sandro usually isn't open at all and tries to net people, by being sneaking and laying traps, so I didn't like what he was showing on d1. Problem about meta reads is you can't explain them because as someone else stated I don't think reading an old game is anything like playing it. You've got to be in the game yourself you're referring to imo. I'm saying "had" because what sandro said today, especially him being pissed makes me rethink things a bit... but I'd still say he's mafia considering that I'm not and syllo's probably not either. Yeah I'd say mafia had their eggs in the basked. Ok found the quote in chrono. Why in the fuck did you not just tell me you said it in chrono??? If you are town and you believe I am town, you are wasting my fucking time for no reason If you are town and you believe I am scum, you want to waste my time on a wild goose chase If you are scum, you are purposely wasting my time
Playing dota right now (for the last 4 hours...)
|
not that I would have answered otherwise
|
because I am playing dota and don't have time to look things up while alt-tabbing.
|
I never said it's because of the Kenpachi rule. You still haven't understood my misunderstanding. I thought you were referring to "claiming VT" when you said "I did that before".
And again, I'm playing dota. I've got 10-20 secs inbetween to post. Not thinking at all :p
|
about the WBG part. Nice job quoting the 3 posts that don't explain much while ignoring the other 10 explaining everything btw.
|
oh didn't know I have to explain things beforehand instead of explaining things as we go to make him talk and explain himself instead. Will write that one down.
|
Okay done playing dota. Will go to bed but I've got some time to explain a little before I go to sleep because you seem to misunderstand what I posted so far:
- I did not vote or consider you scummy for the Kenpachi rule at all. I voted you because you said "Telling people is a scummy thing! I totally did that once as town as well" which obviously doesn't make sense at all. When you said something along the lines of "I did that once before" I did not realize you were referring to the act of being *caught* by a Kenpachi-trap. I thought you were referring to the act of calling someone a VT as well and screwed up because you were town that game
- We had a bunch of people calling you weird around that time. No need to pressure vote when the point gets across without a vote. That's why I didn't vote you. Also because it's based on a screw up that could have (and it was...) poor wording of yours.
- My vote on WBG has NOTHING to do with his unwillingness to publicize all his reads. My vote on him has EVERYTHING to do with him laying a trap / reaction-fish while shouting "GUYS, don't tell anyone but what I just posted is just a trap, I'm only reactionfishing so don't worry if it looks weird". That defeats the purpose of his trap / reaction-fishing and is either incredibly defense / desperate if he really intended to reaction-fish (because he explained it although he should not have) or is sabbotaging his own "plan" because explaining people that you're laying traps / reaction-fishing is something that ruines the results.
- Generally speaking I'm more in favor of voting people I already played some games with. That's why my vote on WBG is so "fast" in comparison to the never-to-be vote on you.
- I didn't think you'd take the one you quoted from Chrono honestly. Yeah I remember that one but I was mafia that game. People usually don't give a shit about what people said while being mafia. Obviously if you know me you know that I'm an exception in that regard as I don't ever lie as mafia unless I have to (e.g. alignments, my own role) but I don't think you know me well enough to know that, so I thought I would have to search for another game and I didn't want to do that. And honestly I don't remember when I said something along those lines in a game the last time (except for Chrono). Those kind of statements are things you'll usually find pre-game, post-game or in a obs-QT because I don't like saying something as pointless as that in a game unless I have to because I'm asked about it.
- I'm someone who explains his thoughts as I go. That means my thought process is a combination of posts and I never reveal my entire reasoning for voting someone when voting someone. I want to discuss with people about it and that's usually better done the way I do it.
Has some downsides as people who aren't actively reading the thread keep on misinterpreting what I said because they take a single post of mine and look at it alone instead of looking at what actually happened in total.
That's a good way to figure out mafias as well if you ask me, just not for convincing people to vote the guy I am voting at all because as mentioned, people keep on not figuring out what I'm actually talking about half of the time. Or at least people are talking about useless stuff in my posts that are mere sidenotes to strenghten my point of view, reducing my argument to those sidenotes while ignoring my actual point I'm trying to make. Just like you just did with my explanation on WBG.
|
EBWOP: my most recent post was obviously directed at debears. should have f5'ed before posting.
|
On December 20 2012 11:45 debears wrote:Here let me try it this way toad + Show Spoiler +On December 20 2012 11:33 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2012 10:47 Toadesstern wrote:Okay done playing dota. Will go to bed but I've got some time to explain a little before I go to sleep because you seem to misunderstand what I posted so far: - I did not vote or consider you scummy for the Kenpachi rule at all. I voted you because you said "Telling people is a scummy thing! I totally did that once as town as well" which obviously doesn't make sense at all. When you said something along the lines of "I did that once before" I did not realize you were referring to the act of being *caught* by a Kenpachi-trap. I thought you were referring to the act of calling someone a VT as well and screwed up because you were town that game
- We had a bunch of people calling you weird around that time. No need to pressure vote when the point gets across without a vote. That's why I didn't vote you. Also because it's based on a screw up that could have (and it was...) poor wording of yours.
- My vote on WBG has NOTHING to do with his unwillingness to publicize all his reads. My vote on him has EVERYTHING to do with him laying a trap / reaction-fish while shouting "GUYS, don't tell anyone but what I just posted is just a trap, I'm only reactionfishing so don't worry if it looks weird". That defeats the purpose of his trap / reaction-fishing and is either incredibly defense / desperate if he really intended to reaction-fish (because he explained it although he should not have) or is sabbotaging his own "plan" because explaining people that you're laying traps / reaction-fishing is something that ruines the results.
- Generally speaking I'm more in favor of voting people I already played some games with. That's why my vote on WBG is so "fast" in comparison to the never-to-be vote on you.
- I didn't think you'd take the one you quoted from Chrono honestly. Yeah I remember that one but I was mafia that game. People usually don't give a shit about what people said while being mafia. Obviously if you know me you know that I'm an exception in that regard as I don't ever lie as mafia unless I have to (e.g. alignments, my own role) but I don't think you know me well enough to know that, so I thought I would have to search for another game and I didn't want to do that. And honestly I don't remember when I said something along those lines in a game the last time (except for Chrono). Those kind of statements are things you'll usually find pre-game, post-game or in a obs-QT because I don't like saying something as pointless as that in a game unless I have to because I'm asked about it.
- I'm someone who explains his thoughts as I go. That means my thought process is a combination of posts and I never reveal my entire reasoning for voting someone when voting someone. I want to discuss with people about it and that's usually better done the way I do it.
Has some downsides as people who aren't actively reading the thread keep on misinterpreting what I said because they take a single post of mine and look at it alone instead of looking at what actually happened in total.
That's a good way to figure out mafias as well if you ask me, just not for convincing people to vote the guy I am voting at all because as mentioned, people keep on not figuring out what I'm actually talking about half of the time. Or at least people are talking about useless stuff in my posts that are mere sidenotes to strenghten my point of view, reducing my argument to those sidenotes while ignoring my actual point I'm trying to make. Just like you just did with my explanation on WBG.
You never voted me..... 1) You never voted me. you're having an extremely tough time of keeping your story straight 2) You never mentioned that it was poor wording choice by you. You are making up this excuse in hindsight. If you thought it was a screw up in wording to begin with, why didn't you ask? Show nested quote +We had a bunch of people calling you weird around that time. No need to pressure vote when the point gets across without a vote. That's why I didn't vote you. Also because it's based on a screw up that could have (and it was...) poor wording of yours. You clearly attempted to establish that my actions were not coming from a townie mindset as shown by the following quotes + Show Spoiler +On December 19 2012 23:42 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:32 Palmar wrote:@sciberbia To add to your case, I had already noticed this post as you did: On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:
I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1 What sticks out to me here is the first part. The second part is obviously correct, but the first part is interesting, why is it included in this post? It's not necessary to drive the point across, it doesn't help debears press the issue, all there is to it is an attempt to convince that since this is what he does, we need not worry about him being mafia. I need to read more, but I think maybe we have a good option here for a lynch. yeah agree. Imo those 3 ones in conjunction are equally interessting, if not more so: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:On December 19 2012 09:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't think so, Morbidius. It looked pretty clear what he was trying to say to me.
Debears, did you just fall for a Kenpachi trap? I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1 Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:33 iamperfection wrote:On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:On December 19 2012 09:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't think so, Morbidius. It looked pretty clear what he was trying to say to me.
Debears, did you just fall for a Kenpachi trap? I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1 were you town or scum that game? He's basicly telling us to lynch the guy because he's doing something stupid with the reasoning that he once did the very same thing AS TOWN. Given his history he at least should be the guy telling people something the lines of "okay, this guy is retarded but sometimes townies are retarded. I did the same mistake in a recent game" given how people apparently love to defend other people... well or at least not bring it up the way he did. Instead he's insta-voting him with a flawed logic when he should be well aware of all that. On December 19 2012 23:57 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 23:50 iamperfection wrote:On December 19 2012 23:16 sciberbia wrote:Just woke up and reread everything. So far, I'm leaning scum on debears and iamperfection
debearsThe main thing I find suspicious about debears is that he twice seemed to be demanding explanation from other people, but then backed off rather easily when they failed to explain themselves. See spoiler for quotes + Show Spoiler +On December 19 2012 09:27 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:25 Vivax wrote:
Hi noobs,
I'm a Vanilla townie.
And I don't understand why yamato is so afraid of posting much. What. The. Fuck ##Vote Vivax On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't think so, Morbidius. It looked pretty clear what he was trying to say to me.
Debears, did you just fall for a Kenpachi trap? I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1 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? On December 19 2012 09:51 Vivax wrote:Maybe later  On December 19 2012 09:52 debears wrote:
Fair enough Debears immediately voted Vivax and made a followup question. I found it odd that he backed off so easily. He recently unvoted Vivax as well. This suggests to me that he wanted to appear to be asking important questions, but didn't want to draw too much attention to himself. Next is his little back-and-forth with iamperfection: + Show Spoiler +On December 19 2012 09:41 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:40 iamperfection wrote:you remember everything from that game? dont be retarded the reason you remember you claiming vt is because it was you Eh. True. I would just think that SnB screaming "Kenpachi rule!!!" would have come across your brain  Similar thing here. In the 1st quote, debears seems to be implying that iamperfection is scummy for maliciously not remembering Mario Mini. But in the 2nd quote, he backs off when iamperfection gives an obvious answer. Why bother to ask the question at all if you're going to be satisfied with "I just don't remember"?
iamperfectionI find iamperfection's start to the game a bit scummy. I think the main motivation behind scum posts at the start of D1 is to quickly be established as an "active poster" and not a lurker. iamperfection's posts are many in number, but a lot of them are pretty pointless and give me the feeling that he's posting just for the sake of posting: + Show Spoiler +On December 19 2012 09:30 iamperfection wrote:amuse me give a reason why. On December 19 2012 09:33 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:33 debears wrote:On December 19 2012 09:32 Mr. Wiggles wrote:
I don't think so, Morbidius. It looked pretty clear what he was trying to say to me.
Debears, did you just fall for a Kenpachi trap? I've done the same thing before. Claiming VT serves no useful purpose for town early d1 were you town or scum that game? On December 19 2012 09:38 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:36 yamato77 wrote:On December 19 2012 09:35 Stutters695 wrote:
Ebwop: thought so, internet sarcasm just isn't my thing.
Anyway miller talk is pointless. If someone else rolled miller they should claim and we lynch the scummier of the two, otherwise it's a non issue until later down the line. After a few flips discussion on setup would have more meaning but currently it's pointless.
Yamato if you're only making ten posts per cycle or whatever please try to make them higher quality/don't start that until we have stuff to discuss. People making dumb accusations. I have to post against them. This post will be the final one that I won't count against my arbitrary posting limit. hey i think your arbitrary post limit is stupid and you shouldn't do it. If your town i want to know what you think and if your scum well the walls will come crashing down eventually. So either way i don't want a posting restriction from you On December 19 2012 10:16 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:50 Eywa- wrote:
Hello everyone,
My name is Victor Valentine and I have just moved to this town from the great metropolis of New York City. I speak both English and French... I have gotten here through obtaining a job at the local power plant. I wish to have a beer down at the local tavern to get to know some people from this town. Let me know what you all think!
of what have fun with your role play stuff but from your post you have actually commented on absolutely nothing. So im thinking maybe scum what you think? On December 19 2012 10:27 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 10:26 Palmar wrote:On December 19 2012 09:11 yamato77 wrote:
I'm miller.
This post is not going to count against my post count because I'm forced to do this, I believe. wut? wut are you confused about? On December 19 2012 10:53 iamperfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 10:51 Morbidius wrote:On December 19 2012 10:32 iamperfection wrote:On December 19 2012 10:30 Palmar wrote:On December 19 2012 10:27 iamperfection wrote:On December 19 2012 10:26 Palmar wrote:On December 19 2012 09:11 yamato77 wrote:
I'm miller.
This post is not going to count against my post count because I'm forced to do this, I believe. wut? wut are you confused about? He seems to think he's forced to claim miller, and is talking about post count? he said before the game started he was imposing a post count restriction. I strongly suggest him to drop the post count restriction, it will only restrict our reads on him. Also this whole ''post count restriction'' is convenient if he got scum. there an echo in here?
I'd appreciate some thoughts on my points. Palmar, you can consider this your two people to analyze if you want. Apparently, you've already looked at debears, so do you agree or disagree with what I said? What do you think of debars votes on stutters? Im leaning town on debars because 1. A scum debars would know better than to come after me at all after mario mini 2.He was absolutely right on stutters just recapping the thread and not stating anything at all. His response was to apologize basically which i hate. also too toad and palmar who i have caught with my ninja f5 i think your totally misrepresenting what debars is saying considering his vote is on stutters. He is obviously trying to lynch him dawgs. so im thinking about a stutters lynch right now I get what you're saying though if you think I am misrepresenting what he said I want you to interpret what he said here: Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 09:27 debears wrote:On December 19 2012 09:25 Vivax wrote:
Hi noobs,
I'm a Vanilla townie.
And I don't understand why yamato is so afraid of posting much. What. The. Fuck ##Vote Vivax The wording is either incredibly sincere which would make him an incredibly cynical (not cynical... I don't remember the correct word right now  ) considering that he did the very same thing or it makes him someone faking emotions for whatever reason. 3) That's odd, because your reasoning up to your vote had to do only with him not publicizing his reads, as shown by the quotes + Show Spoiler +On December 20 2012 00:13 Toadesstern wrote:
Hey Palmar. Do you think WBG would be so open about explaining what he's doing if he's really trying to do what he wants us to think he's doing? On December 20 2012 00:20 Toadesstern wrote:Might be on you sometime later. Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 16:11 wherebugsgo wrote:
Toad is scum, let's kill him, toad is scum, let's kill him, lalala la la laaaaaa
##vote Toadesstern
into Show nested quote +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. really doesn't work bugs. The only reason I didn't say it more clearly is because after all there might be someone stupid enough to go all batshit about your first vote. Noone did. You're still going with it? Why are you explaining what you're doing when your "plan" revolves around being a trap? Again, why are you still going with it? On December 20 2012 00:28 Toadesstern wrote:
Actually
##vote wherebugsgo
I really don't see mafia NOT telling someone who's not a vet (assuming team mafia is not vet only :p) to vote bugs for his vote. Neither do I think that not a single mafia thought voting bugs might be a good way to place a vote after his vote.
There, now you've got your reaction bugs. you're other reasoning came after. I will tackle that in a later post 4) That's incredibly stupid reasoning if you were town 5) I can't take your word for this one either way. You could be town being honest. You could be scum lying. My problem with this is I asked what other games you did it in. You failed to respond properly, and instead wasted my time 6) Making a post-vote reasoning post on you. A big problem of yours is saying that that was your reasoning for voting him, where your comments before that said otherwise. I really don't like your responses in 1-4. Your 5 and 6 are excuses of playstyle which I will have to examine further. I still think your scum Next part coming in a bit
About your 1)
Exactly what I said. I never voted you. Yet you make it look like I said otherwise by saying "I'm having a tought time keeping my story straight". Looky-Looky: That's why my vote on WBG is so "fast" in comparison to the never-to-be vote on you.
2) It was YOU poor wording that caused this. You still haven't understood what I wrote. Go back and read it. If what I thought you said would be true it would have been a mafia mindset. That's why I said it is. Once I realized that you just can't write properly I backed off and realized it was just a mistake, therefore there was no longer a mafia mindset because the meaning of your sentence changed drastically.
3) I'll just ignore this. That's how I play. If you check any of my games you'll see that I play that way every single time as it's more productive and usually people are able to see the grand scheme of things instead of tunneling like a mad man. There's obviously always that one crazy guy in every game.
4) No it's not. I hardly ever vote people I never played with on d1 and I prefere voting people I played with at least 3 games or something like that because I can judge them way better than a random newbie. Than again, might be weird to you because you haven't played as many games yet.... If I say "I'm only voting people I played at least 3 games with on d1" that means that I'm still left with AT LEAST half of the entire sign-ups and surely there should be mafia in there as well, mafia that are way easier to figure out for me.
5) So? You wanted to waste my time by asking me that stupid question when I made it very clear that I'm not willing to do that kind of thing, ever. Seems fair to me.
6) Guess you'll have to deal with that because as mentioned, that's how I and actually at least 70% of people (especially vets) on TL play. But go ahead, it's probably a mafia-treat to play like that if the majority of people does it like that (for a reason).
Seriously, if you hadn't taken your time to check on Chrono I'd be all over for OMGUS'ing and Tunneling me like a mad man.
On Lynching matters:
Right now I've got 2 basic scenarios in my head.
WBG is still the guy I'd like to lynch the most as my read on him is the strongest.
Zelblade is someone I could get behind based on meta. He's a guy who actively lurks on purpose as mafia as he thinks people ignore him for whatever reason and it usually is that way. He at least told me that that's his basic plan as mafia once in irc, he was mafia when he told me so and he did it that game, so yeah looks like he hasn't changed his old habbits of playing mafia to me. I'd say it's a weak meta read though as stuff like that always could just end up being real-life troubles of his and therefore got my preference on a WBG lynch.
Iamperfection looks promising if WBG is not mafia / is most likely town if WBG is mafia... which is the reason I said I've got 2 basic scenarios in my head. There's more to that but explaining that would be troublesome, complicated and probably derailing the thread so I'll leave it with that as he doesn't seem to be an option right now.
so yeah. I could get behind a Zelblade or WBG lynch today I guess. I know that wbg is proposing a Zelblade lynch and it's giving me troubles as well but I'll ignore it for now. It's most likely that one of my reads is wrong anyways, I'm not Jesus.
|
No strong read on wiggles yet. Same goes for you btw and I disagree with you when you said you're playing one of your more townish games.
Really don't know what to make of you two guys yet. That being said I don't see a reason why I should lynch into him when I'm not sure about him at all. He's a vet and if he's town he'll die himself just fine soon enough, which solves the problem as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2714
784
240
295
185
EPT
