|
On January 04 2013 17:01 yamato77 wrote:
Well like I said, the first post in Parallel was from Mementoss and I immediately did not like it. It was really setup focused and said a lot of nothing. He turned out to be scum. My opinion on the matter overall is that focus on the setup is a scummy trait.
Thaaaaank you. So in light of this, what do you make of Rise's stuff then? He's been pretty openly trying to play the setup-speculation game early on, and I'm surprised you haven't commented on it at all given your stance here.
Your post this game had a similar feel to me, and as others have said contrived posts are not something to be liked. However, I knew your experience in IRC and thought I made a meaningful connection to why you made the post. My conclusion was not that you were scummy, it is that you're townie.
You say it in a long winded way, but basically you want town to act rationally because you want to lynch people who hammer a townie with little explanation, because that is a scummy play. Again, I draw conclusions to IRC where people hammered townies all the time and the hammerer was lynched really often, but they were often town as well. You want to eliminate this problem, to separate the townies lynching an honest scum read from the scum lynching a townie.
Cool. So do you agree/disagree with my stance on things?
|
11589 Posts
I agree, the hammer vote should definitely be looked at. With that in mind, I'm not sure why CC says this:
On January 04 2013 11:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 11:42 jaybrundage wrote:On January 04 2013 11:01 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Jay
Any other thoughts on what Rise and I have discussed over the first pages of the thread? Day length, hammer votes, or anything really. We should lynch someone when we feel confident they are mafia. We should always be aware of the hammer vote. People should be responsible for there hammer vote. We shouldn't rush a lynch cause we lost discussions to read people with. Policy Lynches rarely work so we should refrain from doing them. Pretty straight forward imo. So the hammer vote takes full responsibility for the lynch? Everyone who votes is responsible, not just the hammering guy.
Why does CC not want us to put emphasis on the hammer vote? It is prime opportunity for differentiating scum from town yet he thinks it isn't?
|
On January 04 2013 17:10 yamato77 wrote:I agree, the hammer vote should definitely be looked at. With that in mind, I'm not sure why CC says this: Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 11:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On January 04 2013 11:42 jaybrundage wrote:On January 04 2013 11:01 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Jay
Any other thoughts on what Rise and I have discussed over the first pages of the thread? Day length, hammer votes, or anything really. We should lynch someone when we feel confident they are mafia. We should always be aware of the hammer vote. People should be responsible for there hammer vote. We shouldn't rush a lynch cause we lost discussions to read people with. Policy Lynches rarely work so we should refrain from doing them. Pretty straight forward imo. So the hammer vote takes full responsibility for the lynch? Everyone who votes is responsible, not just the hammering guy. Why does CC not want us to put emphasis on the hammer vote? It is prime opportunity for differentiating scum from town yet he thinks it isn't?
Regarding the bolded, in what way would you say it is a "prime opportunity [to] differentiate" alignments? Give me some examples.
Also, I think you're just shoving words in CC's mouth. He's saying that we shouldn't shift disproportionate responsibility on the person who hammers on a lynch, and I don't see what's wrong about that statement.
|
11589 Posts
And as for Rise, I'm not sure I can draw any conclusions from. He's playing foil to you, to what end I do not yet know.
|
11589 Posts
On January 04 2013 17:16 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 17:10 yamato77 wrote:I agree, the hammer vote should definitely be looked at. With that in mind, I'm not sure why CC says this: On January 04 2013 11:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On January 04 2013 11:42 jaybrundage wrote:On January 04 2013 11:01 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Jay
Any other thoughts on what Rise and I have discussed over the first pages of the thread? Day length, hammer votes, or anything really. We should lynch someone when we feel confident they are mafia. We should always be aware of the hammer vote. People should be responsible for there hammer vote. We shouldn't rush a lynch cause we lost discussions to read people with. Policy Lynches rarely work so we should refrain from doing them. Pretty straight forward imo. So the hammer vote takes full responsibility for the lynch? Everyone who votes is responsible, not just the hammering guy. Why does CC not want us to put emphasis on the hammer vote? It is prime opportunity for differentiating scum from town yet he thinks it isn't? Regarding the bolded, in what way would you say it is a "prime opportunity [to] differentiate" alignments? Give me some examples. Also, I think you're just shoving words in CC's mouth. He's saying that we shouldn't shift disproportionate responsibility on the person who hammers on a lynch, and I don't see what's wrong about that statement.
What is disproportionate responsibility? I think there's plenty of reason to give the hammer more look than other votes. It is the act of making the decision to lynch someone, it makes the player into the executioner. The use of the hammer vote is perhaps the most important thing in this game.
You said so yourself and now you seem to disagree with me? Why?
|
On January 04 2013 17:32 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2013 17:16 Hapahauli wrote:On January 04 2013 17:10 yamato77 wrote:I agree, the hammer vote should definitely be looked at. With that in mind, I'm not sure why CC says this: On January 04 2013 11:51 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On January 04 2013 11:42 jaybrundage wrote:On January 04 2013 11:01 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Jay
Any other thoughts on what Rise and I have discussed over the first pages of the thread? Day length, hammer votes, or anything really. We should lynch someone when we feel confident they are mafia. We should always be aware of the hammer vote. People should be responsible for there hammer vote. We shouldn't rush a lynch cause we lost discussions to read people with. Policy Lynches rarely work so we should refrain from doing them. Pretty straight forward imo. So the hammer vote takes full responsibility for the lynch? Everyone who votes is responsible, not just the hammering guy. Why does CC not want us to put emphasis on the hammer vote? It is prime opportunity for differentiating scum from town yet he thinks it isn't? Regarding the bolded, in what way would you say it is a "prime opportunity [to] differentiate" alignments? Give me some examples. Also, I think you're just shoving words in CC's mouth. He's saying that we shouldn't shift disproportionate responsibility on the person who hammers on a lynch, and I don't see what's wrong about that statement. What is disproportionate responsibility? I think there's plenty of reason to give the hammer more look than other votes. It is the act of making the decision to lynch someone, it makes the player into the executioner. The use of the hammer vote is perhaps the most important thing in this game. You said so yourself and now you seem to disagree with me? Why?
In one sense yes, and another sense no.
If someone makes an idiotic hammer vote, I will put that player under a lot of scrutiny. However, a normal, responsible hammer vote is just the same as all the other votes on a wagon in my view.
|
So basically, my post deals with the former (idiotic hammer votes). Mr.CC's post in my view deals with the latter (normal hammer votes). And I have zero objections with Mr.CC's view.
|
11589 Posts
I don't see the distinction you make as meaningful but if you want to see it that way go ahead.
|
On January 04 2013 16:35 Hapahauli wrote:
@ DP
You around? Talk to me about this Yamato stuff. It seems super forced, has really strange logic, and I think it's scummy.
I was out all day. It was hot so I went to the beach with some friends. Sorry. back now and catching up.
|
hmmm. That was an interesting back and forth between the both of you. I think something is there. But I am not sure what quite yet. I'm going to look through it with a clearer head in the morning.
|
At work fellas, will be able to post at around 7:30 est. Initial. thoughts: while i dont like the setup gaming, i think it's a fairly null tell. Hopefully the discussion switches from hammer votes when peeps get here. peace y'all
|
Inactivity is pretty fucking horrible in this setup guys. This is especially the case when there are a couple of things that we should be discussing:
1) Shaio's post about RiseAgain's "overagressiveness"
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391112¤tpage=5#84
2) Yamato's strange town-read on myself:
On January 04 2013 17:01 yamato77 wrote:
Well like I said, the first post in Parallel was from Mementoss and I immediately did not like it. It was really setup focused and said a lot of nothing. He turned out to be scum. My opinion on the matter overall is that focus on the setup is a scummy trait.
Your post this game had a similar feel to me, and as others have said contrived posts are not something to be liked. However, I knew your experience in IRC and thought I made a meaningful connection to why you made the post. My conclusion was not that you were scummy, it is that you're townie.
You say it in a long winded way, but basically you want town to act rationally because you want to lynch people who hammer a townie with little explanation, because that is a scummy play. Again, I draw conclusions to IRC where people hammered townies all the time and the hammerer was lynched really often, but they were often town as well. You want to eliminate this problem, to separate the townies lynching an honest scum read from the scum lynching a townie.
|
well. I expected to wake up to a hell of a lot more posts than two.
Ugh. There is nothing really to go off yet. All this arguing over set-up only servers to obfuscate reads on things.
Hapa.
You keep asking about our views on Riseagain and the 'aggressiveness' he showed. How does him being aggressive make him scum?
How does yamato attempting to show his thought process and his follow up from your pressure of him read to you?
|
On January 05 2013 05:53 DarthPunk wrote:
well. I expected to wake up to a hell of a lot more posts than two.
Ugh. There is nothing really to go off yet. All this arguing over set-up only servers to obfuscate reads on things.
Hapa.
You keep asking about our views on Riseagain and the 'aggressiveness' he showed. How does him being aggressive make him scum?
How does yamato attempting to show his thought process and his follow up from your pressure of him read to you?
Regarding Rise - aggression isn't a scummy trait by any means. However, it reads like Rise is trying to pick a fight for the sake of it rather than anything else. That's potentially scummy.
Because it's a strange town-read, and I'm trying to figure out if it's artificial or not. The guy finds setup-speculation scummy in general, then 180's on it because of my tendencies in IRC mafia? It's nonsensical.
So what do you think about all this then?
|
I don;t like either of the 'cases' to be perfectly honest.
Rise is completely null to me. And to be honest you are the one picking a fight with rise. There should be one read due to Rises' aggression and that is null. I thought that you were simply following up on him in order to push the town to be active. However you trying to drum up support for a bandwagon based of something that any player of your calibre should KNOW is a null tell is not 'potentially scummy' it IS scummy. and it has me worried.
Since when do you call things 'potentially scummy' anyway??? sounds really fucking off to be honest.
Yeah it was a WTF post from yamato initially. But his explanation, willingness to be open and transparent, and the fact that his original WTF post turned out to be an exercise in an open thought process give me a town read on yamato at this juncture.
And once again I am wondering how the fuck a town hapa is not reaching the same conclusions as myself and is pushing the wagons of two people who are null at worst.
|
YES, TUNNEL ME! Finally someone takes a stance on something.
As for why I'm tunneling, I have two options:
1) I can sit here and derp around waiting for someone to do something. Clearly this is not happening this game.
2) I can try to make conversation on something I find off in the thread to get things going.
I always lean towards option 2. This is why I pursue things early and aggressively early in the game. They may or may not stick (i.e. my case on you in Witchcraft Mini), but it's an important part of the process.
|
And once again I am wondering how the fuck a town hapa is not reaching the same conclusions as myself and is pushing the wagons of two people who are null at worst.
This deserves special mention, because it's night and day from your early-game in Witchcraft Mini. You were willing to jump on people for random, inconsequential things in order to create discussion. This statement is the exact opposite - you're finding things null and keeping an arms-length separation from the thread. What's up DP?
Also, you called me "town hapa." Hehe.
|
On January 05 2013 06:22 Hapahauli wrote:
YES, TUNNEL ME! Finally someone takes a stance on something.
As for why I'm tunneling, I have two options:
1) I can sit here and derp around waiting for someone to do something. Clearly this is not happening this game.
2) I can try to make conversation on something I find off in the thread to get things going.
I always lean towards option 2. This is why I pursue things early and aggressively early in the game. They may or may not stick (i.e. my case on you in Witchcraft Mini), but it's an important part of the process.
well I would hardly call that post tunnelling. In fact that reaction is just plain weird.
So what you are saying is that you are deliberately acting scummier than usual but that this is what you do every game?
The thing that is hurting this game the most right now is lurking. So why are you not saying anything about lurking? In fact the only time you have 'pressured' people is when another player first comments on them. Shiao Pi with Riseagain and myself with Yamato.
That is quite distinct to what you did in witchcraft for example, which was push people on your own regardless of the positions of others, make a strong case and ask people to judge that on it's merits.
|
On January 05 2013 06:36 DarthPunk wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 06:22 Hapahauli wrote:
YES, TUNNEL ME! Finally someone takes a stance on something.
As for why I'm tunneling, I have two options:
1) I can sit here and derp around waiting for someone to do something. Clearly this is not happening this game.
2) I can try to make conversation on something I find off in the thread to get things going.
I always lean towards option 2. This is why I pursue things early and aggressively early in the game. They may or may not stick (i.e. my case on you in Witchcraft Mini), but it's an important part of the process. well I would hardly call that post tunnelling. In fact that reaction is just plain weird. So what you are saying is that you are deliberately acting scummier than usual but that this is what you do every game?
Oh that's full of shit and you know it. How am I acting scummier? As far as I'm concerned, I'm the only one here actively trying to start discussion.
And what part of my reaction is "weird?" You're dropping words without any reasoning to back it up.
The thing that is hurting this game the most right now is lurking. So why are you not saying anything about lurking? In fact the only time you have 'pressured' people is when another player first comments on them. Shiao Pi with Riseagain and myself with Yamato.
That's a fantastic idea DarthPunk - let's tunnel people that haven't posted anything less than 24 hours into the game. That will do something useful for discussion.
That is quite distinct to what you did in witchcraft for example, which was push people on your own regardless of the positions of others, make a strong case and ask people to judge that on it's merits.
The bolded is exactly what I'm doing this game.
And the fact that you think I'm scummy because I haven't made a case less than 24 hours into the game with 4 pages of game filter is a level of absurdity I can't begin to comprehend.
|
On January 05 2013 06:29 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +And once again I am wondering how the fuck a town hapa is not reaching the same conclusions as myself and is pushing the wagons of two people who are null at worst. This deserves special mention, because it's night and day from your early-game in Witchcraft Mini. You were willing to jump on people for random, inconsequential things in order to create discussion. This statement is the exact opposite - you're finding things null and keeping an arms-length separation from the thread. What's up DP? Also, you called me "town hapa." Hehe.
You know as well as I do that the way I phrased that was not calling you town but in fact suggesting that I could not reconcile your play this game with your town play. So I don't even see the point of that statement.
You are talking about djo from last game correct? well firstly that was not pressure voting or attempting to increase activity. That was me thinking Djo was scummy as shit. Lo and behold. he flipped scum bro.
The other pressure votes from that game were clearly labelled as such and were consistent with the policy of voting for a lurker until they contributed. This policy was clearly expressed beforehand.
So quit trying to OMGUS me with a shitty meta case. Which you KNOW to be untrue.
Day one of witchcraft I derailed the wagon on jixian as I thought he was newbie town/scummy town. from our IRC conversations you know very well my positions on wagons such as these. Based on my positions on Jixian and Eywa.
Sup Hapa?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
