|
On January 04 2013 12:32 OmniEulogy wrote:
How do you feel about Mocsta leading discussion and his vote on Cora? How do you feel Cora responded to the vote. How has he given himself any credibility as town afterwards. (Cora please feel free to answer this one as well)
I think Cora responded pretty appropriately with regards to the sudden vote against him early on. It's fair play to base some accusations off previous behaviours, but I think Mocsta was definitely getting ahead of himself doing it when Cora had barely posted anything yet.
|
(1) Which you rather choose to lynch. An active participant with a scummy vibe; or a participant who is low count poster, but each post contains a vote for someone?
(2) StriX post style reminds me a bit of "Threesr". How do you think StriX should be approached to develop his story further? Please lead the discussion.
1) Your question is a very vague situation, which has the potential to be interpreted multiple ways. It needs further definition. Does the low count poster provide reasoning to each vote? Is he bandwagoning with each vote? What is the active participant doing that gives off a scummy vibe? The question you gave doesn't have an answer that cannot be interpreted many ways by different people.
2) Strix is a highly analytical player, but he is the type who prefers the 'grand reveal' style of play. He analyses posts well, and can make a compelling case - however this is all done with the rest in the dark until the time he posts. Having experience playing with him outside of TL, that is the way I have seen him play. One thing that differentiates him from threesr though is the fact he doesn't flame everyone and call them bad. Calls himself god sometimes, but no flames.
|
On January 04 2013 14:16 OmniEulogy wrote:
The non-commitment and fear of putting himself out there even after making a decent case makes him the scummiest player in the game at the moment in my eyes.
Is this in reference to me?
|
On January 04 2013 13:56 Mocsta wrote:
In essence, I DO have firm thoughts on what happened.
My revised questions to others reflects my opinion on the matter (in a subtle manner).
If we have the courtesy of answering your questions straight, could you do us a favour and answer our questions straight as well? Otherwise we're just feeding you information while we get nothing back - or it's left up to us to interpret. Not what you want, especially when it can be twisted so easily.
On January 04 2013 14:36 zarepath wrote:
Additionally, how is asking someone to participate more scummy? That is decidedly pro-town behavior
Half the points you made on me were about me trying to get people to participate. It was followed each time with "Possibly scummy." What?
On January 04 2013 14:19 zarepath wrote:
I still have an #FoS on Sylencia; he's answered my case at each point, but it doesn't change the tone and vibe of all of his posts put together for the first 24 hours.
You gave 5-6 points as to why I was potentially scummy - one of them included the fact that I 'didn't believe' in my own read, so I didn't vote Spag. Yet you do exactly the same thing and just give an FoS on me rather than voting me outright. Your tendency to act against what you say about others really grinds me, and it's a fairly clear tell when you've done it multiple times today.
##Vote zarepath
|
On January 04 2013 19:55 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 19:18 Sylencia wrote:Mocsta- If we have the courtesy of answering your questions straight, could you do us a favour and answer our questions straight as well? Otherwise we're just feeding you information while we get nothing back - or it's left up to us to interpret. Not what you want, especially when it can be twisted so easily. zarepath- You gave 5-6 points as to why I was potentially scummy - one of them included the fact that I 'didn't believe' in my own read, so I didn't vote Spag. Yet you do exactly the same thing and just give an FoS on me rather than voting me outright. Your tendency to act against what you say about others really grinds me, and it's a fairly clear tell when you've done it multiple times today. Because I would like you to owe me a favour... I am going to respond to your post now  As mentioned Mocsta Post I am heading out soon, my position hasnt changed from that post. Comments to me. + Show Spoiler +(1) Im disapointed you think the information is one-way. The information goes to all readers of the thread, this is an interesting perspective you have? (2) A lot of people in the thread are saying "I agree with Mocsta".. I think this implies I need to take a step back, and let people think for themselves. Do you not agree? Obviously not.. because the quote you put in your response, actually takes out the part I just said about taking a step back..... "See here for post" Once again.. interesting perspective Sylencia.... P.S. Feel free to twist my words the way you want It takes two to tango, and I am more than willing to accept your offer to dance  Comments to zarepath + Show Spoiler +
This is heading towards OMGUS very quickly.
(1) In general to both, I am not a fan of ##FoS... what does it actually achieve? (OoOoO I am shaking in my boots because of a FoS)
(2) I need to re-read your filter Sylencia.. but my opinion of zarepath is that he is not a threat. When I read his filter, I am currently interpretting his motives as town aligned. [Note.. I am not establishing him as a town read... this would go against what I was advising prior]
(3) I am not going bother commenting on this situation in general... I think there are higher priority targets for Day 1 lynch;
If you want to continue with zarepath as your vote, go ahead, its your decision.
I ask that you re-evaluate his filter, do you see town motivations? If so, I suggest you start thinking of an alternative person to scum hunt.
Regarding your posts, it's just the way you answered that question specifically though, where you decided to say you already had - but subtly, that I didn't like. Maybe I read the wrong post, looking for what you meant (the one with all the questions) but I didn't seem to quite understand your view on that issue.
In regards to taking a step back and letting others get stuff in, of course, go ahead, it was just the issue of not knowing where you stood there that agitated me.
For the issue with zarepath, I'll wait and see where it leads from here, but at the moment I'm sticking on my vote.
|
On January 04 2013 19:59 Spaghetticus wrote:
Is the following question allowed?
Do not respond until I have an answer from mod.
Jampi. You claim to have talked to a coach that was not quick to respond. Tell me when you posted and when the response came.
I am going to McDonalds to take advantage of their air-con, it is the hottest day ever recorded where I live, I have glanced over the thread up until now but have not taken notes. When I return I will make some more committed action. If this play is allowed it could be game breaking. If you are town you have nothing to fear so long as the mod allows a response.
IIRC from NMM XXXII, we were told not to talk about talking to coaches.
|
On January 04 2013 22:41 TeMiL wrote:
answering mocsta questions:
(1) So far your post count reads as useless fluff. Why should I not vote for you?
am a really newbie in this game, i you check others mafia games you wouldnt find me anywhere. if i get voted maybe i can loose any interest of this game but in the other case i will learn more and be more active.
Saying you are a newbie doesn't get far in this game. We are all newbies. It doesn't really help you if you (semi-)threaten us about your interest in the game if we vote you out first.
thanks :D actually i didnt lurker at all if u consider lurker a gamer that only entered 3 times. right now am reading everything and with my phone back ill be writing every minute 
A lurker is someone who is in the game, but isn't posting much. People want to have discussions with everyone, so if you aren't posting, people don't know what to think of you.
On January 04 2013 23:14 TeMiL wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 22:49 zarepath wrote:
TeMiL, what do you think about my earlier analysis of Sylencia? u have something agains australians or isjust causality to target him? looks like you now how to analyse a gamer. its a good brief of course and thanks to made me read it again.
Most of us (5 or 6) are Australians?
|
There's really no connection between country and players (roles).
(Mocsta, this really does remind me of Axle)
|
On January 05 2013 00:28 Spaghetticus wrote:
Mocsta, if you are still about, what do the numbers mean? How do you define 'in session'? And what is the other, bigger number? Could you please spell this out for me please?
Since he's in bed, I'll answer this first:
Big number next to your name: total posts
Small number (in session): amount of posts you made in between the two times he set.
Session 3
From: 04-Jan: 0930
To: 04-Jan: 2130
So you see there's the to and from, and so I posted 4 times between those two times.
|
Also, I will ##unvote for now, since it seems like I have been told to read Zare's filter more carefully, I might have been too rash.
|
I was born here and live here in Australia?
If this is leading anywhere, you need to tell us what it is now because otherwise it is just all fluff which is considered scummy (causes confusion and it makes things harder for people to read and understand)
|
My vote before I go to bed will be currently going to jampi. I'll be back before the deadline, so jampi, if you have a defense, feel free to post it.
On January 03 2013 22:46 jampidampi wrote:
As to why you shouldn't lynch the current me: I prefer only to post if it has a meaning. Answearing questing and asking them. Sharing my reads on someone. Unnecessary spam just clutters the thread and hides important post.
This is the reason you have given us for a lack of posts. It's one of your first posts, so it's actually more of a pre-emptive explanation of why you would be lurking. You have answered the questions presented, but you do not give us your insight unless asked. This gives me the impression you have to formulate thoughts before giving the answer. If you are a townie, there needs to be more spontaneous input when you observe something that strikes you as being off.
You posted some of your town reads, but a lot of it was based on some meta-reads and the logic behind them was still a little flawed. (The reason why the QT was brought up as a potential scum play was because it feigns ignorance, not sure if this was explained.) (Mentioning your scum play from last game doesn't make you more town, it can also be used to distance yourself from your previous game, and thus give the illusion of playing more town)
After that, you start to zero in on Strix. Your suspicion only came to light once Mocsta had come and asked you about Strix. This strikes me as suspicious, because it really comes out of nowhere. This is why I would say if you were town, you would bring it up when you saw fit to. Ask questions about it earlier. Instead, there's a sudden accusation followed by a few points made about his posts.
In one of your points, you mention how he targets the biggest lurker we have in the group, even though he said in his policy statement he wants to LAL. If anything, that only reinforces the fact he was, at the time since he did end up retracting the vote, following what he said.
Your second last statement essentially says 'what I stated against you could be town or could be scum', essentially being on the fence about whether or not he is scum. If he flips, you have some insurance if he is town by saying 'looks like it was town motivated.'
Basically, your posts give the impression you're on the fence about whether he is scum or not, you say he is contributing nothing, but you do not provide cases for anyone else and choose to tunnel on Strix.
##Vote jampi
|
On January 05 2013 03:42 Spaghetticus wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 02:36 Spaghetticus wrote:
@Strix
You look like you’re half way between lurking and posting fluff posts. When I skim over your filter I see nothing that looks like contribution. I am almost certainly heavily biased. If you have the time you may want to prove me wrong by highlighting some actual content from your filter? I will absolutely demand it of you come night presuming we are both still kickin’. I understand if you have other more important content to post, it is nearing lynching time so time is of the essence. Either way I expect either new content OR a defense, preferably the former.
As above, but @Sylencia You're being just responsive enough to fly under the radar. I can't see much that you've contributed pertaining to the outcome of this game, you've responded when prompted which suggests that while you are wanting to appear active, you aren't actually doing any of the background research that leads to OC or cases. This is scummy. As I said to Strix, show me some original content you have contributed, or even better, present some you've been holding back.
Wait, I've been trying to present cases for my votes, and that's going under the radar?
|
On January 05 2013 09:12 cDgCorazon wrote:
Moc, why are you giving this to us an hour before the vote? Why not give this out after the lynch D1, instead of creating more confusion right around the deadline?
I'm not saying you are wrong (I need to read it over again, it's so long that it is making my head hurt), but why this timing?
To add on to this, since I suspected this move would be pulled, doesn't this go against what you said/agreed with?
On January 04 2013 22:54 Mocsta wrote:
Lastly, if you do build a case against anyone.. please take Sylencia advice, and try to post at least 4 hrs (preferably 8hrs) before lynch deadline. People should have an opportunity to defend themselves.
You've posted a big case, it's compelling on first read since I only skim read it first, but you're really not giving too much time for Omni to defend against all these points.
|
Omni: Associate after flips, not before.
My vote will not go to Omni, because this has happened too many times in the past, where things get brought up in the last hour, and everyone rushes to change - causing a bandwagon that makes it hard to tell what the hell happened. It would not change who would be lynched, but it is better to be left fully analysed after the lynch rather than before.
My vote will stay on jampi because 1) I want to reinforce that he cannot continue posting once per 12 hours (exaggeration, obviously) and expect to get away with it. 2) For future votes, at least this can be noted for the future if that is the case that is required.
Also, just on this point:
On January 05 2013 09:28 Spaghetticus wrote:
Please note that I believe StriX' most recent action is purely for survival. He perceives the stagnant state of the Jamp wagon, but sees new hope in the spontaneous Omni wagon.
It is his only option, because he cannot vote for himself if he wants to leave, and so the only action is to go to the person with the most votes. It isn't necessarily telling of anything, because everyone would do the same thing.
|
wants to live*, not want to leave.
|
|
|
@Spag if only one of me or Corazon voted for OE, it would be 4-4 with Strix reaching 4 first, meaning he gets voted.
|
Here is the main problem we are facing in day 2:
Temil is a loose cannon. I thought he would just bandwagon onto votes, but he doesn't read the cases anyone has made. This might be due to the second language barrier that prevents him from understanding everything properly, but we cannot expect a proper vote from him.
Question is: Do we have to cut him loose or do we have to pursue the matters that came up the last hour first?
|
That puts us in a fairly dangerous situation now. Finding scum on day 2 is going to be pretty vital if we want to avoid a LYLO situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
