|
On January 13 2013 20:34 OmniEulogy wrote:
@Mocsta I think if you look at it from somebodies point of view who hasn't played with you, allowing a random person to take total control of town is terrifying. I've had slight problems with you doing it in both of the games we've played together but not large enough to complain because generally it moves discussion forward and eventually I get a town read on you.
With this in mind I can see Oats being extremely suspicious of you and trying to remove your credibility by making a case on you to be scum trying to take control of town in a newbie game where people are generally more docile so you can get away with it much easier. Although I think Oats was overly aggressive I can see a town AND scum motive behind it. I wouldn't assume he was just trying to derail the conversation. He could have been genuinely worried about letting you take control so early and having most people take your word as gospel truth. I might not like how he did it but I just think we should keep this in mind.
Understood. That was a well-reasoned post Omni. I hope people read then if they are umming and ahhing about this situation.
I just want to say, I did not think initially he was trying to derail the thread. At first I thought he was concerned about someone being proactive (as you said)... a towny trait for sure.
What I want to ask you:
@OmniEulogy
(This should be a quick answer, his filter isn't THAT large)
You said you see Oats over aggression as both town and scum motives.
Oats initial posts before I called him out.. in general, did you find them more town or scum aligned?
Do you find his subsequent posts (after I called him out) more town or scum aligned?
|
On January 13 2013 22:02 zebezt wrote:
Mocsta: You said you were going to play this game differently than your previous one. How exactly?
Good question.
I have 3 goals for this game.
(1) Reduce tunneling / confirmation bias - i.e. try to be more open to reason regarding posters motivations
(2) Stop assuming association cases; target one mafia and focus on that guy till cleared innocent or proven guilty.
(3) Try and engage lurkers. Im still working out the best way to do this. I had a strategy last game that didn't work. This game i hope that asking them direct questions will elicit a response.
Thats how I plan to play differently.
I think (2) is going good so far. (3) hopefully my next post will address. and as for (1).. please pass on some constructive feedback. Do you think I was confirmation biased in regards to Oatsmaster, or do you think I raise valid points of concern?
|
Questions to All Persons
Intent:
Discussion is quite slow at the moment. I have addressed questions to each participant to promote further conversation, whether directly to myself, or to others.
Please take the time and respond to these accordingly.
If you have qualms replying to my content, please notify myself and the rest of town, why you deem this unnecessary.
- Mandalor
+ Show Spoiler +On January 13 2013 04:38 Mandalor wrote:
2) That said, after observing the past two newbie games, I feel that the quiet guys are more likely to be scum. We'll have to pressure them to help us. I am yet to see a very outspoken scum player orchestrating town play in a newbie game. We should keep an eye open for players with low post count and most importantly a low amount of quality posts, wishy-washy reads ("maybe, perhaps, in theory he could maybe be scum") and zero own cases. (1) The methods you have identified for scum hunting, clearly indicate yourself as playing a scum game (low posts / low quality). I appreciate people are busy on the weekend, I ask that you start questioning participants during the Europe shift who *YOU* think are flying under the radar. On January 13 2013 04:38 Mandalor wrote:
1) No, not a fan of policy lynching....
I would only favor a lurker lynch if we can not come up with a good case. (2) So far, I would classify you as a lurker ( 1 post). If town can not agree to a good case, you are in agreement to lynch a lurker. Why should you not be chosen?
Added now that you have posted your list of questions. (3) Im having trouble following your logic, please explain in more detail (a) On January 13 2013 23:30 Mandalor wrote:
. I don't think being the first to attack one of the most vocal players is typical scum behavior. (b) On January 13 2013 23:30 Mandalor wrote:
... and quiet is not automatically = scum,
I read this as.. if you lurk, you are not automatically scum (could be justification for your contributions day 1) Then you say.. if you attack a vocal player you are not scum... .. So if that is the case.. what makes scum behaviour? All you have addressed is what is NOT scum. Why are you looking for onlytypical behaviour, that seems half-arsed to me. Assuming scum won't target an active player is a weak heuristic; and Im surprised you advocate this. WhyWell, do you disagree that it would be an advantageous strategy? The way to kill the hydra is to remove the head, not the body after all. I look forward to your thoughts on this.
- shz
+ Show Spoiler +On January 13 2013 14:16 shz wrote:
It's cool that you try a different style and all, but please help us and play with helping town. If you don't have time or want to keep this style up, you are not helpfull at all and are better off dead.
#Vote: bringaniga
Please answer me and defend yourself.
(1) Are you advocating this lynch because you find him annoying as town, or because you have a genuine scum read on him? If you think his motivations are town, is this not lazy voting? If you think he is scum, can you please share your reasoning. (2) What do you make of the play from Glurio. I ask because you are both from Germany, I assume you will have the best chance to communicate with him. I think we need more from him, I ask that you please lead the discussion.
- laguerta
+ Show Spoiler +(1) You still have two outstanding questions that Oatsmaster asked. These are fair questions that I would like to see answers to as well. On January 13 2013 22:44 Oatsmaster wrote:
...
What are your current scum reads?
What do you think about the shitflinging between me and Mocsta? I ask that you please address these questions before Day1 concludes.
- Oatsmaster
+ Show Spoiler +(Please take my questions inquisitively, I am not accusing you of anything here: I merely want to find your motivations. You did a 180' vote shift on me, and then consolidated your vote on a bringaniga (the only other candidate with a vote than yourself). (1) Why have you chosen bringaniga out of all the others who have barely contributed? You yourself mentioned On January 13 2013 19:21 Oatsmaster wrote:
..
If there is no scum read i'd go for the most scummy lurker though.
..
So is bringaniga your best scum read, or are you just randomly choosing him as your lurker vote?
- Sn0_Man
+ Show Spoiler +After I asked you to post with more consideration and less hostility, the post count has dropped off a cliff face. You said you wouldnt lynch a lurker over a scummy player; yet you are currently classified to me as a lurker.
I would like to see more from you.
(1)
Can you please identify someone you think is lurking, and establish a read on them.
(2)
Can you please walk me through your thoughts on the interactions in Day1 between Oatsmaster and myself. Do you think either of us showed town motivations, do you think either of us expressed scum motivations in our play?
- OmniEulogy
+ Show Spoiler +
You already said you would be gone. So I would appreciate your feedback when you are back (fingers crossed before Night 1).
(1) Do you think it is acceptable practice to leave the way you did? Why throw a vote on Acid instead of vote "No Lynch"? if everyone policy votes Acid, you would be the catalyst; is that acceptable town behaviour?
(2) You have shared your opinions on myself, oatsmaster and bringaniga. The other guy who seems to be have some post count is Shz. Where do you stand with him currently? Town/Null ; or scummy and needs to be questioned further?
- Trotske
+ Show Spoiler +
(1) You started off strongly, and then the contributions dropped. Assuming you have kept up with the read; which lurker do you think needs to be questioned further? I ask that you please lead these discussions with your preferred lurker; if you are uncertain; glurio may be a good choice.
- Acid!
+ Show Spoiler +(1) Short and sweet: post god damn it! Just anything to know you are alive!
- zebezt
+ Show Spoiler +(1) What is your take on Mandalor after his absence into question time? (2) On January 13 2013 23:39 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 13 2013 22:02 zebezt wrote:
Mocsta: You said you were going to play this game differently than your previous one. How exactly?
Good question. I have 3 goals for this game. (1) Reduce tunneling / confirmation bias - i.e. try to be more open to reason regarding posters motivations ... .. (1).. please pass on some constructive feedback. Do you think I was confirmation biased in regards to Oatsmaster, or do you think I raise valid points of concern? Can you please address this.
- glurio
+ Show Spoiler +(1) We need more from you. What do you think of OmniEulogy and his decision to vote Acid. Lurker wise, the main difference between you and Acid is that you had 1 post.
Please note, OmniEulogy gave his vote reasoning due to absence, not policy lynch.
- zarepath
+ Show Spoiler +I need more from you. You started off strong; and started to fade. Please don't tell me your computer was confiscated again :0
(1) Who is your current scum read, I ask that you please lead the discussion with them.
- bringaniga
+ Show Spoiler +
I need more from you. I haven't seen any post of value yet; other than holding a carrot in front of town. Im not buying it. Start contributing, or I will have to give your vote consideration over the other lurkers.
(1) Can you address the question(s) I have directed your way.
(2) Your post style is unique, but it appears you are keeping up with the thread; who is your current scum read, regardless of scum hunting technique. Name someone, and lead the discussion.
[/QUOTE]
|
On January 13 2013 23:30 Mandalor wrote:I'm going to write down my thoughts on a couple of people. I don't have any strong reads on anybody so far, but this may be useful for some of you. + Show Spoiler +MocstaAfter observing the last two newbie games, I am a little afraid of a scum mocsta. In fact, in Newbie XXXIII I had a strong scum read on him - mostly because, while he contributed a lot, his posts consisted of mostly questions to others. He wrote down very few own reads. His meta so far looks like his XXXIV game, which is a little odd because he said he'd switch things up a little before the game started. He might try to copy his last meta to look town. So far, however, I get a town vibe from his play, but I'll be looking at him more closely. OatsVery agressive stance towards Mocsta. While I disagree with his read on Mocsta, he looks like a very agressive townie. I don't think being the first to attack one of the most vocal players is typical scum behavior. laguertaOne of my strongest scum reads so far, which doesn't say a lot. In my first post after the game started, I said I'd look for quiet players with very few quality posts for Day 1. And laguerta is a prime example for this. Just take a look at his filter. Sn0_ManWeird behavior so far. He was _very_ active before the game started and then vanished from the thread. Lots of questions about the SK and then he disappeared. He has some posts after the game started (and I know that this is my second post btw), but other than this post + Show Spoiler +On January 12 2013 14:22 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm not denying, discussion is good/important and if nobody starts it scum autowin. However, if a scum can get control of town fast, they almost instawin. As a gambit, it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast.
Plus, the use of the word "us" is a pretty ingratiating town claim to make in your first post (if town thinks of mocsta as "us" then he is pretty happy). Either way, that post felt like the opening gambit of a scum whose plan was to utterly control town. Obviously there are other ways to read it, I'm not voting mocsta here (yet).
Additionally, the way the 2nd question is asked almost makes me think he is asking "Tell me your scumhunting plans so that I know what you are thinking about and what I can avoid".
My 2c not a whole lot of contribution. I would like to ask you to post more. I like the quoted post, but I'd love to hear more of you. So far: null read. TrotskeMy other top candidate for voting so far. No read from him at all other than his opinion on sn0_man's and Oatsmaster's behavior (which Mocsta asked him to provide). Please give us something to work with, otherwise I'll vote for either you or laguerta. ------- I know this is a newbie game and quiet is not automatically = scum, but you're making it easy for scum to lay low if you don't contribute. laguerta and Trotske, please take your time and give us some reads. Who are your top scum reads so far, and why?
Mandalor, thank you for taking the time to go through the filters and contribute your thoughts.
This is a good choice from a Day1 lurker.
I have some concerns with your post,
(1) Early-Game: It is not a good play to discuss town reads.
If you want some reasoning, here it is.
[Toadestern] See the thing is, ... it is INCREDIBLY hard to tell a townie who's posting a townread apart from a mafia who's posting a townread while both may look like something useful (it's not).
A townread is best kept to yourself, especially early on.
1. There's no reason to tell people what the key to making you think someone is town is.
2. There's no reason to tell mafia (if you're town) who you consider to be a likely townie is.
3. There's no reason to tell anybody why you think someone is town at all, unless said person is about to be lynched.
On top of that, it is incredibly easy for mafia to look like they're doing something by posting townreads. They know they're right on something, they don't have to make up bullshit, which they have to when they're doing scumreads unless they're bussing. They can get in the thread make 4 townreads about someone, mix in 2 mafiabuddies and tell people they're mafia as well and there's almost no way to distinguish that from a townie.
I mean there is, but it's just WAY hader than by looking at peoples mafiareads because again, mafia have to make up some bullshit when doing those, they got confirmation bias and already know they're wrong and all that is making it hard for mafias to talk about mafia-reads. Talking about townreads isn't for them, not at all.
This is where the problem lies.
You see, you have said, you think myself and Oats are town (very easy to do if you had scum knowledge).
Then you call out two lurkers as your top scum read. (very easy to do whether you have scum knowledge or not).
The problem I have is.. you identify me and Oats as town, but then.. don't give your opinion on what played on. The comments you make, are pretty much out there to be copy/pasted from a filter read. Good scum hunting requires original thought.
So far what you have shared is contributions anyone can DO with 20minutes; yet when it comes to the real meat and potatoes, the real content is lacking.
You follow by commenting on my "confirmation bias" with Oats, but do not indicate your opinion on Oats. You don't even give detailed reason why you are saying it is confirmation bias. In fact, i would content your reasoning is drowned in confirmation bias.
Do you truly think the heuristic On January 13 2013 23:44 Mandalor wrote:
Scum likes to make buddies with the most vocal players, not attack them right away. is taking a rational approach and considering all options.. if you are town (so far you are null to me) you need to be more open minded to possibilities in my opinion!
Lastly, you finish off by saying its "OMGUS" when we both clearly did not say we were voting each other as OMGUS...
I know the above is a wall of text, but I would appreciate if you could take the time to address these concerns on top of the questions I outlined to you on the previous page.
|
On January 14 2013 00:05 Oatsmaster wrote:
Well the reason why I am voting bringaniga is because he is obviously active and reading the thread but he isnt contributing in a way that benefits town at all.
I do not want to lynch either glurio or Acid at this point because it does not generate discussion and without discussion, town has a really fucking difficult time finding scum.
+1 for this post Oats.
Thank you for respectfully answering my question. I will reciprocate with my thoughts on our previous matter.
Since your unvote on me, you have tried to scum hunt by ACTIVELY questioning other candidates. With the current climate, I think this is town motivated.
I really like your response here and reasoning for not following up on Acid/Glurio. I agree, for Day1 it feels wasted with the limited time we have left. I also think this is town motivated.
So....
##Unvote: Oatsmaster
If we were to dig this a bit deeper.. what is your take if Day 2, the situation with Glurio/Acid does not change.. Do you think the plan of attack is to eat the active guys up, or start lighting MORE fires under the lurkers?
(Im in favour of lighting more fires.. and will still try to do it Day 1 regardless)
|
Guys.. im going to bed.
See you in 8 hrs, hopefully we have a few more pages to read through by then!! Please keep up the discussions.
Now that I have unvoted, I am uncertain of where my vote should go. I will have a re-think when I wake up (4hrs before lynch).But below details my current thoughts before sleep (and its been a REALLY long day for me)
The majority of us have been fixated on looking for tells in active players (yes, this includes myself).. why.. because he have nothing to read in the lurkers posts so we just cannibalize each other.
History tells us, lynching active people Day 1 usually is town. I haven't managed to lynch scum Day1 yet, but, i haven't given up this game. I think our best way to succeed is go for the non-contributors. seriously.. 36hrs and minimal posts is NOT ACCEPTABLE.
Some of us are active in our own ways; but posting at least shows interest; which is more of a read than I can give for a hardcore lurker.
I think for the time being, my vote will go on ##Vote: Sn0_Man
Filter: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615&user=287497
Why?
- He posted a lot pre-game.. and now has barely contributed
- The posts he makes have no benefit to town play, and in my opinion try to derail the benefits of active discussion
- I asked him to get be more courteous in his posting, and he has since clammed up - conveniently.
- Last post
On January 12 2013 14:51 Sn0_Man wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 14:44 Trotske wrote:On January 12 2013 14:22 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm not denying, discussion is good/important and if nobody starts it scum autowin. However, if a scum can get control of town fast, they almost instawin. As a gambit, it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast.
Plus, the use of the word "us" is a pretty ingratiating town claim to make in your first post (if town thinks of mocsta as "us" then he is pretty happy). Either way, that post felt like the opening gambit of a scum whose plan was to utterly control town. Obviously there are other ways to read it, I'm not voting mocsta here (yet).
Additionally, the way the 2nd question is asked almost makes me think he is asking "Tell me your scumhunting plans so that I know what you are thinking about and what I can avoid".
My 2c How would you have started the town conversation and not fallen into the points you make I would have made a post similar to his. Not sure, never played mafia before. I didn't have much interest in leading but if nobody did I'd have figured out something to start discussion.
He is under pressure from Trotske.. and reacts by throwing in the NEWBIE claim. This is historically a scum slip in particular for newbies..
Why?..
Because its an attempt to divert pressure by being overly defensive. The intention to claim newbie is so you think.. ohh, this guy isnt any decent, I will back off.
|
Guys im back.. Happy to see at least 2 pages of filter.. but overall.. conversation was down to what it should have been! Guys we need to step up.. im talking to you lurkers!!
I have had a change in heart.
##UNVOTE:Sn0_Man
##Vote: Mandalor
This guy is spouting so much crap its not funny.
+ Show Spoiler +On January 14 2013 05:33 Mandalor wrote:
I also felt weird about Mocsta's play. He likes to ask lots of questions, which is good (don't get me wrong), but that's pretty much all he did in XXXIII for quite a while
I need more posts of him and I want him to write down his reads so far. I have given my reads in spades.. he doubts my contributions, but look at his half-attempts as I list below. (My reads are via the qusetions I choose to pressure with) and the cases I choose to make. I do not put my vote lightly ever.
On January 14 2013 00:14 Mandalor wrote:
I advocate going for the easy targets first. We might have a really good scum player in the game, but most of them will show characteristic scum traits and I feel like that's what we should focus on for now.
On January 14 2013 00:50 Mandalor wrote:
Easy targets are more likely to flip scum. Everybody, except Sylencia, last game showed those traits. There is no reason for me to think that all scum players in this game are geniusses.
This is all rubbish... this game has approximately 6 or 7 lurkers... that means if all 3 mafia are there... you have 3/7 chance to lynch mafia, and 4/7 chance to lynch scum.... if 6 players is 50/50.. why take this risk (unless you dont care because your two listed are town!)
On January 14 2013 01:10 Mandalor wrote:
But I'm thinking town is going to lynch Trotske or laguerta? Noone ever mentioned any suspicions on them except for me afaik.
]
So because you raise 2 lurkers.. town should lynch them.. What type of thought process is this.. SCum hunting is more than picking 2 names out of a hat.. you need to question them.. Try and prove them innocent (there is a higher likelihood any player is town).. if the act funny.. push them harder (like I am about to do to you)
On January 14 2013 05:12 Mandalor wrote:
So, basically apart from trolling, you want to lynch a lurker which gives us 0 information. I'm not a huge fan of lynching annoying people to get rid of them, but you make a damn good case for it.
##Vote: bringaniga
Shape up and I'll change my vote.
Finishes by Giving up on his 2 reads he pushed so far and joining the bandwagon.. what type of serious town play is this . it reads all to me as a guy who doesnt care who the vote goes on.
- Lurks and then writes a post of reads, including two obvious town reads (which I pointed out as easy)
- Then pressures two lurkers, which is so easy to do as well
- Keeps sayign he knows my Meta.. if he did he would know. Newbie 33 (which he keeps quoting) I died Night 1 from Night Kill.. but acts as if I was around all game.. so is intentionally giving off the impression he knows me, when he doesn't
- Has he genuinely pressured his reads? All he said was (I need to hear more from you).. how is that pressuring your scum read.. compare that to me and oatsmaster.. we both thought each other was scum.. then compare to how mandalor questions his scum
- Questions me about then about why Original Content is useful for scum hunting (why would town ask this? Shouldnt a town player looking for answers say.. HEY! I need to contribute not just copy/paste)
- Says I don't post my reads.. just ask questions... my read was Oatsmaster.. how much more than that do you need? Did I not chase that hard enough for your liking?
- Hes looking for an EASY option to lynch.. yet how is he really pushing it? other than saying.. hey.. thats my top scum read
- He changes his read on Trotske.. but the post style was identical.. Why the sudden flip in alignment? (I think because he never cared who the "EASY' TARGETS were)
- Gives up on his top scum reads (he listed 3... Trot, lagu, Sn0)... and concludes the Day by joining a bandwagon... CLASSIC MAFIA.... i dont care who I vote for...
Yes I voted for Sn0_Man.. and I still don't like him... but... I thought as town we were meant to vote not for a lurker.. [b]but for our best scum read.
Can you tell me that the points im making are confirmation biased? Can you tell me that the points Im making do not suggest scum motivations? Any town player can make his points.. but.. why would they? Hes trying to looking like contributing.. but is he rerally contributing
Mocsta wrote:
##Vote: Mandalor
|
On January 14 2013 07:14 OmniEulogy wrote:
good case Mocsta. The mistake with the 7/7 chance to lynch scum made me laugh though. I know what you meant but why would we give up a 100% chance to lynch scum!!!
Anyway it's true that he has gone for easy lurker lynches and his vote on Bringaniga puts me off for reasons I've stated earlier. I thought Bringaniga was a town troll. not a scum one. I think scum would latch on to him because he's annoying and would make for a very easy lynch target and some people have done exactly that. He's basically jumping on a bunch of different wagons, his last one on Laguerta was imo alright, but I still would have liked to see him ask for why Laguerta voted like that and THEN put his vote on him after Laguerta could get in an answer. The way he looks right now is that as you said Mocsta he doesn't care about who gets lynched and keeps jumping targets. I can't tell if its confused townie or scum though. I'm looking through his filter in detail right now.
After reading through it I'm leaning towards confused townie. You are right that he isn't contributing very much, but I'd still put him ahead of Shz as far as helpfulness is concerned.
thanks for keeping to you word. That was good constructive feedback. I think your plan for town environment is going to work well.
Let me know where your vote is going after reading mandalor filter
|
On January 14 2013 07:36 OmniEulogy wrote:
Actually @Mandalor if you haven't gone to sleep yet would you mind explaining why you jumped from Bringaniga to Laguerta. I was close to doing it myself but decided to wait to see what kind of reply he would give me. Admittedly I don't like his answer to me but he also comes off as a bad townie in my eyes with his answers. He could also be an uncaring scum but I'd rather not WIFOM myself to death before we get information from our first lynch.
Let me do the same courtesy he showed to me.
On January 14 2013 00:29 Mandalor wrote:
(this is my 7th mafia game, however the first 6 were several years ago which is the reason I am allowed to play this one to get back on track).
He is far from a newbie.. you know what they say. you never forget how to ride a bike!
The way he is playing.. confused. look maybe, but i do not see it that way.. purely because he tried to hold his stance with Oatsmaster, and oatsmaster as we know gets pretty aggressive.
That he changes suddenly, i interpret as he saw an opportunity, went on it..I mean.. if we curious.. why not just question first.. instead he leads with a vote and minimal to no justification... thats not good town play, and its not confused town play either.
|
On January 14 2013 07:33 OmniEulogy wrote:
I think I'd like Shz to comment on my accusations and give us his reads on the situation and defend himself, if he doesn't I'm not sure if my vote will move or not but I get a confused townie vibe off mandalor. Do we know if this is his first mafia game? If it is I can easily see consistent patterns between how I thought during my first game and what he has been doing. However that doesn't take anything away from the fact that he hasn't contributed very much. More than a few people in this game though.
I dont think shz will be here to answer unfortunately...
unfortunate because I WANT the answers too, but I cant hold a 5am deadline against him ...We just may have to pursue this guy Night 1/Day2. and work with the best we have currently.
On January 12 2013 02:42 shz wrote:
Will the starting time be the same as lynch deadline? If so, I'll probably not going to make it most of the time. 5 am here.
|
noted with bringaniga i agree his play is annoying and unreadable. But Everyone is assuming due to emotion their opinion on him.
How about wait for the replacement and judge from there. I think for him that is the best course of action and will allowed a calculated and rational decision.
i agree the vote is too split. We need to consolidate. My best read is mandalor. And that is based on more than emotional reads. Its based on irrational behavior synymous with scum play.
i dont consider confused townie because he stuck to his guns with oats. Then caved when bringa was majority or in his words. Easy target.
So to me its a calculated play that is not town aligned.
|
Thanks forthe feedback mandalor.
Remember a townie knows he is innocent. Why do u think i can post on the fly.
Because im confident i am town and that my actions will speaker louder than my words.
Your overly defensive and emotional case defense sits uncomfortably with me. i dont associate your reactions as a townie defense..it reads to me as a last resort post
does anyone else feel this way? I.e. Too defensive and emotional to be confident in his alignment?
|
Lol so u come in the thread after 40hrs of no post and start slinging shit.
Why dont u start to earn some town cred before questioning myself and zebezt.
U can start by addressing the questions i and others put forward to you in your prolonged absence.
U will then be in a position where i can respond to your qustions.
|
Or it suggests he reads active games like mafiaLV.. When kush randomly posted what 2 pages ago and bringa was modkilled i put 2 and 2 together.
Eitherway its a rule nit to talk about modkills i suggest we stop.
Just give the replacement a chance. If he is town we have another vote to consolidate with
|
Omni acid has since posted. Whats your take on him waltzing in and demanding answers instead of proving himself innocent?
|
Oats. I dont nderstand your question?
|
Guys.. I know this is bad timing.. but my boss just resigned...(effective immediately)
im not sure how much hand over meeting there will be,so cant guarantee I will be here over the next 4-8 hrs.
As it stands; Im still not convinced by Mantador so will leave my vote parked there.
|
Guys im back.. farkn hell, being promoted 
Umm.. look.. i had a read through just then and cant believe I missed out on La Guerta lying about the no lynch. I first thought it was just a scared newbie play, but that he answered before he was against it.. clear scared SCUM play.
Good work guys
##Unvote: Manlador (I still question aspects of your play.. but we cant let a participant lie openly, so will follow up with you Night 1/Day 2)
##Vote: La Guerta - Lying is not acceptable as a townie or SCUM. This in itself is grounds for lynch.
Acid, I had a think about my post to you. I admit it was venomous and not constructive.
You have to realise at the time, noone was consolidating votes, I think at least 5 people had votes on them and when you came in, it just made things even more confusing.
Now that I have had a breather (and a pay rise ), I am going to answer your questions in my following post.
I welcome all contributions, and certainly do not want to deter yours.
|
On January 14 2013 08:16 Acid~ wrote:
(1)
To answer the question about Policy-lynching lurkers: As far as I'm concerned you are all guilty until proven innocent and anything you don't say will be used against you, so you better start talking.
(2)
@Mocsta:
You say you want to foster a positive town atmosphere, but you instantly lash out at anyone showing signs of aggression, which is an essential town trait.
(3)
It is you who hindered discussion on day 1, by drowning inquisitive players in walls of text containing little to no substance.
(4)
A few posts after agreeing with zare/omni about the need to build strong cases and making attacks based on rationality, you goad Oats into an OMGUS vote, with no other claim than "other people agree with me that you're fostering a bad town atmosphere".
(5)
What I want from you: quotes from Oatsmaster showing how he intimidated people into not posting, since this is your claim. OR admit that you were biased against Oats and a victim of confirmation bias
Acid, I welcome your contributions. I know you posted at the 11th hour, but the thoughts and motivations read genuine and original. Town should welcome these type of posts in particular from low post count participants.
I am going to address the items you raised.
(1) Agree with this completely. Everyone needs to prove with their actions they are innocent. Actions speak louder than words. At the same time, this sentiment has already been shared (myself included) so whilst I value the stance, we will see if your actions reflect your stance overtime.
(2) Instantly lash out? My posts to Oatsmaster and Sn0_Man were written very respectfully. I think you are jumping to an unfounded conclusion. If I may remind you:
+ Show Spoiler [Calling out overt aggression] +On January 12 2013 16:38 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 14:22 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm not denying, discussion is good/important and if nobody starts it scum autowin. However, if a scum can get control of town fast, they almost instawin. As a gambit, it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast.
... @Sn0_ManI appreciate the sense of energy you are giving back to this thread, and I certainly do not want to deter that; town needs this energy. BUT.. you are almost sounding "paranoid" - I know this, because after my last game, many assumed I was "paranoid". I think we both want the same thing, a town environment where people can voice their opinion and join together for the scum hunt. When you say "it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast"; that alienates participants from wanting to contribute. You are actually creating an environment scum can thrive in with that attitude - even though I doubt that is your intention. I ask that you please think about the above. On January 13 2013 07:18 Mocsta wrote:
EBWOP
On January 13 2013 07:14 Mocsta wrote:
Wow. Thats it over the night shift.
Oats u sound like sno_man.
perhaps the aggresion u 2 have shown is why there is a lack of discussion.
I think u should read what i posted to him.
My questions are ice breakers and i have not a genuine comment from
*YOU*
to stimulate town conversation. In fact. You are deterring conversation.
@oatsmaster
Why should i NOT treat is the outcome of your agressive posts [stopping fluid and positive town conversation] as scummy motivations
Personally, I do not know how that is lashing out? I think its being respectful. If you want a reminder of the posts I responded to here you go + Show Spoiler [Aggressive Posts] +On January 12 2013 14:04 Sn0_Man wrote:
Mocsta
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
From what I have seen in my 2 games, it depends on the person. Some have lurked hardcore, some have given minimal contributions.
If we have a solid town atmosphere, and people can share opinions freely, I am sure we can reduce the influence!
2) With posts just like your one aboveOn January 13 2013 00:52 Oatsmaster wrote:
Mocsta stop being useless and repeating what other people have already said.
On January 13 2013 00:55 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 13:09 Mocsta wrote:
Hi All.
From other games, it seems the best 3 questions to ask are:
1) Stance on Lurkers: i.e. Do you policy lynch?
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
3) [fluff] DONT BUY A POOL. I wasted all my time today with pools and hate it !
I won't be around for the next 6 to 8 hrs (DAMN POOL!)
Question 1. How does a yes/no question start discussion? Thats right, it doesnt. Question 2. How is that relevant in a game of Newbies where everyone is just trying to provide an answer that may not be accurate. Question 3. Please dont mention pool. Again.
(3) How. My posts have plenty of substance. I have followed up my reads and tried to get others to contribute regularly. Where is your evidence to back up your assertion; this looks to me like flinging shit at the most active player Day 1.
And how am I drowning out discussion. I am Active, I am Open, and my play is Transparent. My game is completely ab-lib, and Im doing this all whilst figuring this game out.
Just because my filter is large does not prevent others from posters. I have been actively asking others to contribute, whilst giving my own input. This looks to me like trying to justify your own woeful activity this game. Remember, you are guilty till proven innocent.
(4)
When did I GOAD Oatsmaster into OMGUS. Provide evidence to back this up. I call him out of line, and then his beviour did not change. I cast my suspicion on him, and gave benefit of the doubt.. it would be poor townie play to instantly vote, we need to question our reads. .. Since when did casting suspicion count as "goading a reaction" .. its all part of scumhunting and Oatsmaster is accountable for his own actions.
(5) What is even the intention of this question. The fact is.. if people were intimidated they would not post. Oatsmaster himself identifies he is partially responsible the lack of a solid scum read (at the time)..On January 13 2013 20:59 Oatsmaster wrote:
The problem I have with Mocsta isnt that he is 'leading' town, Its that there are less than 12 hours left ( I like to repeat this) And no one has a solid scum read. And I dont think its my fault totally.
. I think if you interpret context at the time, the lack of scum read had to do with the minmal discussion (and you were a large culprit of the lack of contributions)
Hence; When I re-read your post I finish my impressions are as follows:
You have come into the thread after lurking the entire first day, and have thrown shit around and posted with strong emotions.
Regardless, I am still glad your are finally starting to do something, but, as I have broken down above, its not actually scum hunting.
So far all I have seen are arguments that are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst. Some of us would even suggest this is scummy behavior.
I am going to watch you keenly over your next few posts and determine whether you are scum or null.
|
I dont have a problem with Oatsmaster anymore.
He doesnt like my methods, and I dont like his methods.. BUT.. I can openly acknowledge he is scum hunting. That is definitely more than some of the 12 remaining people. So he is off my scum-dar.
But Sn0_Man... i just don't know what to make of this vote. It could be OMGUS; but then theres that timing and lack of contributions.. and even more so, lack of substance.
Compare his first post to Acids.. huge difference in quality..
I think lets stick with La Guerta.. he lied, and we shouldn't forget that. I think Sn0_Man is showing some pretty suspicious behaviour that we can look into Night 1/Day2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
