|
On January 16 2013 22:18 Mocsta wrote:
@zebezt
I claimed the RB, because it is standard practice and I thought the information would be useful for town.
Because nobody else claimed an RB, I admit there was no gain in the end, but I still think it was worthwhile.
Either way, I never gave out this information to claim or insinuate I was town. Hence, this is why I think you are over-reading this reference.
The first time you claimed the RB I don't have any problems with.
It's when you bring it up in this post
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=36
that makes it seem as if you bring it up as something that makes you look less scummy? Or did you have another reason to bring it up there?
All in all that was not one of your best posts in terms of clarity.
|
Mocsta:
You mentioned this gambit thing before where mafia sacrifices a scum day 1 to create chaos for many days.
I just don't see how you would think that would work.
Say we would have lynched laguerta, how would that have led to chaos? It was hardly a controversial lynch at some point. It would basically have reset the game to day 1 with 1 scum less.
The only way scum can benefit from sacrificing one of their own on day 1 is if they push really hard for the lynch and thus create a lot of credibility for themselves. I haven't reread everything to see how the vote for Laguerta started up, but if you think he is scum, that is where you might find some, IF Laguerta actually is scum.
I think before ANY association case is to be made though, we'd have to see Laguerta's flip.
My vote is probably going to Laguerta's replacement if I can't find a better candidate later this evening.
|
Changes my mind. Prolly gonna vote mocsta. Will detail my case soon
|
##Vote: JacobStrangelove
(the artist formerly known as Laguerta)
I said I would vote Mocsta, but changed my mind. Will detail my case against him later.
BUT i realized if Mocsta was scum and Laguerta was not, it would make no sense for Mocsta to put himself in the spotlight by switching votes from Laguerta to Mandalor.
Laguerta gave himself up as a scum with his lie about the voting. It doesn't matter that he got replaced.
|
So, for the case against Mocsta:
here's the gist of it, my wife needs me so I don't have time for too much detail.
At first he seemed pretty townie to me. He was nice n friendly to all and posted a lot. A LOT.
The actual content in there is actually pretty useless though.
His case against Omni illustrates this VERY well.
A GIANT post. But he already says its an association case and that those suck... so what the hell?
but there are some gems in there...
he says he is 100% sure Laguerta is scum. Awesome scum slip. I'm voting Laguerta myself, but ONLY A SCUM can be 100% certain who is scum
he is 100% sure Laguerta is scum, but he isn't voting for Laguerta? WTF?
THIS MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL
I was already surprised at how upset he got over a small hint of suspicion I had towards him, as demonstrated by the incoherence of his follow up post.
+ Show Spoiler +On January 15 2013 16:40 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2013 16:24 zebezt wrote:
If I was scum I would try to get rid of the most influential townies. You fit this bill much more than Oats. The fact that you didn't get NK'ed makes you look suspicious Influential? I have been called for my play by almost everyone in this thread (lurkers and actives). I even said today I have to take a step back. Did you not read this from my prime interrogator. Show nested quote +On January 15 2013 15:57 shz wrote:
It's not like you weren't challenged in the last days. (1) Your are dodging others questions; people like Shz have already re-asked you the questions. I think even Mr. King of lurkers (Acid~) wasted one of his few posts to re-ask you questions. Your response: i thought I answered it all.. are you not reading the thread? (2) You then say I am influential.. as if the events of Night 1 didnt happen. Are you not reading the thread.. again? If you haven't, this is very reckless accusations to be making; something I would think only scum would be motivated to do..(3) I was RB'd.. its not clear whether town or scum.. but as noone else has stepped up to say they were RB'd. I am going to assume for the time being it was scum. (4) The difference between you & (Shz/Myself) is.. we were considering different options for why Oats was killed. You however just assume.. if I would do it.. scum would do it.... WHOAH wait a sec.. if you were scum then of course you could speak with confidence like that. This is a huge concern to me. Please explain how this is town motivated thing to say?
Why would he panic so much that he would write a post like this. Even he himself admitted this post sucked.
Anyway, I think he is scum. But first the former Laguerta must die
|
oh i forgot the bold thing on the vote
##Vote: JacobStrangelove
|
Acid:
look at this logically.
If Mocsta is scum are you are convinced (and I'm pretty sold on it too) than why would he switch votes from Laguerta to Mand.
The situation at this vote count
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=24#480
was such that Laguerta was to die. If Mocsta is scum and Laguerta is not, why would Mocsta switch? It only puts him in the center of attention, which is what scum usually does not want.
The situation where both are scum does not seem unreasonable.
Mocsta got on the Laguerta bus when Laguerta had a big vote lead already. Then when he saw a chance to free his fellow scum he did. The only choice he had was Mand, he had recently defended me and Oats of the people that had 2 votes as well.
The situation where Laguerta is scum and Mocsta is not would also be logical with this voting scenario.
Therefore Laguerta is a more sure scum than Mocsta.
If Laguerta flips scum we are then more sure about Mocsta and can vote him off the next day.
|
LOL@mocsta
says again he is sure on Laguerta and votes someone else
|
Hey guys, I'm off to bed.
I encourage everyone to vote either Mocsta or JacobStrangelove, I think the last one makes more sense logically, but right now they both seem scummy to me.
|
On January 17 2013 07:37 Trotske wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 07:34 zebezt wrote:
Hey guys, I'm off to bed.
I encourage everyone to vote either Mocsta or JacobStrangelove, I think the last one makes more sense logically, but right now they both seem scummy to me. How does that last one make more sense he will get modkilled if he doesn't vote in the next hour and a half. if you think mocsta is scummy vote for him.
I explained it just a few posts ago.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=38#748
There is a chance Jacob is still going to vote. I assume that if he signed up he will participate.
|
Hell yes!
this game is getting to me. I dreamt Jacob was lynched and he flipped town and everyone was pointing fingers at me.
Reality is a lot better.
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting.
|
On January 17 2013 17:10 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting. This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere.
It's dumb to be happy?
I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear.
It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up.
Evidence against Jacob
First there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIE
Second there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand.
There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY.
Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta.
Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM.
I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight.
|
On January 17 2013 17:49 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:On January 17 2013 17:10 shz wrote:On January 17 2013 15:56 zebezt wrote:
Now we can kill off Jacob and we will have only 1 scum left. This is awesome!
Gives us a lot of time for scum hunting. This is plain dumb. This attitude leads to nowhere. It's dumb to be happy? I'm not saying we should sit back and relax. But in my eyes the next lynch is 100% clear. It's sad for Jacob because he didnt get to play much, but Laguerta and mocsta set him up. Evidence against JacobFirst there is Laguerta saying he is not gonna "no vote" and then he "no vote"s. LIESecond there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand. There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY. Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta. Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM. I therefore strongly suggest that if we have a roleblocker he RB's Jacob tonight. Your attitude is bad. Don't just say "laguerta 100% kk go". No one will take it serious, and if you are wrong, that doesn't look good. I'm not sure yet how Mocsta tried to play. So you would say that he set this all up to help laugerta? Even if Mocsta couldn't have known that he is gonna lynched? Why help someone with saying "You are 100% scum", even if he didn't vote for him?
My attitude is just fine. I'm just wary of people of people that will try to confuse the situation and a scum will get away.
They almost succeeded last night.
I'm sure Jacob is scum.
I'm sure enough to bet my townie life on it.
Could you think of another reason why Mocsta would draw attention to himself by switching votes on day 1?
Could you think of another reason why Mocsta would not vote for someone he says he is 100% sure is scum? The fact that he didn't vote Jacob was one of the biggest tells that gave him away.
I'm being extra vocal about this since I think because I don't post as much as some, my opinion gets overlooked. I also risk getting nightkilled, so I wanna get my point across before that happens.
I'm not saying we can sit back. We can already start trying to find the third scum.
|
On January 17 2013 18:06 JacobStrangelove wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
Second there is is Mocsta's voting behaviour. During day 1 he is super late to get on the Laguerta voting train. When that train is looking like it's going to derail, Mocsta gives it the final push by jumping ship and voting Mand.
There is no reason for Mocsta to make this switch UNLESS HE IS PROTECTING HIS SCUM BUDDY.
Later on Mocsta claims he is 100% sure that Laguerta is scum. Yet he does not vote for him. Instead voting for somebody else. Not once, but TWICE. This looks to me like Mocsta is distancing himself from Laguerta, knowing his lie is out. However he tries to distract the vote away from Laguerta.
Ok I was theorising about this, and as I said before I know there was a double mis-lynch happening on day one. By changing he puts suspicion on me when the lynch goes bad and he probably assumed he would survive day 2 with me dying putting him in good stead. I don’t know why his voting was so funny however. Maybe he wanted to join someone elses train so he wouldn’t look so bad when I went down? Maybe he thought he could get me day 3? Or maybe he did it because hey why not? Omni isn’t here so I wonder why the vote initially was on him. It could be he wanted to get omni and then me because at that point I was likely to get modkilled? I don’t have a clue the problem is you are seeing black and white, the situation is almost never black and white it is a dynamic of really evil colours that sometimes combine for the heck of it. Show nested quote +On January 17 2013 17:24 zebezt wrote:
Any comparison with Temil is useless. This is more than enough PROOF THAT JACOB IS SCUM.
Would like to point out the comparison with TemiL is in my favour... I already pointed out that as far as bad lurker scum go there are several differences in behaviour.
In real life things are not black and white. In this game however, you are scum or you are not. Don't try to sidetrack by bringing up Omni.
Maybe he wanted to join someone elses train so he wouldn’t look so bad when I went down?
This makes no sense. He looked far worse switching to somebody last minute than if he would have kept his vote on you.
Also, "Hey why not" is not a good reason for a scum to make himself look suspicious. He was aware his switch would look suspicious.: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391615¤tpage=25#494
|
By the way,
the lynching of Mocsta was made possible by Sn0 and shz who switched to Mocsta relatively late. Trotske would have been voted off otherwise.
This makes sn0 and shz look very townish to me
|
On January 17 2013 20:37 Spaghetticus wrote:
@Zebezt
Switching last minute is not as scummy as people think. There are plenty of town motives that explain such action. I have done it in every game I remember (all of them town). Your heuristic that most vote switches are scummy is incorrect.
I'm not saying it's 100% scum proof. But we aren't trying to proof that Mocsta is scum.
What I am saying is that is at least something that draws negative attention to yourself if your vote switch makes the killing blow to a townie.
Staying on his target would be more safe for Mocsta.
So there must have been a good reason for his switch. The only good reason is to protect a scum.
|
I'm sorry Acid,
regarding your point:
It seems farfetched to me, but is possible.
However if you also consider that Mocsta in D2 said he was 100% sure that Laguerta was scum, yet he would not vote for him, then it makes less sense.
The move you linked to was aimed at making the person doing look like town. When Mocsta named Laguerta scum but did not vote for him, this made Mocsta look scummy.
|
On January 18 2013 00:57 Acid~ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2013 00:36 zebezt wrote:
I'm sorry Acid,
regarding your point:
It seems farfetched to me, but is possible.
However if you also consider that Mocsta in D2 said he was 100% sure that Laguerta was scum, yet he would not vote for him, then it makes less sense.
The move you linked to was aimed at making the person doing look like town. When Mocsta named Laguerta scum but did not vote for him, this made Mocsta look scummy.
My reasoning is actually quite simple. It would be farfetched if everyone in this game was in fact a newbie and we did not have coaches. However, that isn't the case. Also, while I believe this was their plan at the start, I think they saw a juicier plan on day 2 which would both lynch a townie, discredit me and clear Mocsta by association. Aside from Sn0_Man who made his own case, the Trotske voters all cited my case against him as the reason for their vote. Yet, as you know, I did not vote for Trotske in my own case. I think that scum saw an opportunity there to make me appear scummy: I post a case but don't vote, others vote, Trotske flips town - who looks scummy now? Making me appear scummy discredits my case on Mocsta by association and it's Christmas in scumland with no one left to oppose Mocsta's endgame play. Simple, efficient. You know what *is* farfetched? The ridiculous notion that scum would double-bus on day 2 after orchestrating a double-mislynch on day 1. They had no reason to bus, let alone double-bus. Especially since I'm the one who pulled the trigger on Mocsta. If you say that scum double-bussed d2 then you need to make a solid case against me since I voted for Mocsta first and originated the case against Trotske.
I'm not quite sure I follow what you mean with double bus? Was that aimed at me? I have no beef with you. I just want Jacob voted off.
|
On January 18 2013 03:52 Sn0_Man wrote:
Pro tip: Jacob (or JSL, or whatever u wanna call him) is *not* scum. If he was scum he'd vote Trotske to save Mocsta. He was obviously around at lynch deadline.
I find it unlikely that much "busdriving" (aka scum leading a lynch vs scum) will occur when its quite clear mafia could have secured a mislynch D2 (with 3 horses at 2 votes each, mafia *have* to be able to get that mislynch). After that mislynch mafia need to confuse exactly 1 townie to win the game the next day so... Plus its a noob game.
I'm fairly certain that one of the guys on trotske is scum (voting with mocsta), and the other scum is either
A) the other guy on trotske (duh)
or
B) somebody not here at lynch deadline (OE, zebezt)
If I'm wrong, I feel like thrawn would have grounds to modkill scum for playing against win-con (unless the 2 remaining scum agreed with each other... even then I don't think bussing Mocsta is playing to your win con).
I am still convinced he is.
He probably thought Mocsta was safe because Trotske had a vote lead and even after you switched to Mocsta Trotske was still set to be lynched. Only at 1 minute before deadline did shz switch.
Voting no lynch was extra scummy imo. Trying not to make any enemies. Even now Jacob has not made a single good contribution.
I think the lie by Laguerta is not 100% damning because of the smurfing, but if he was just trolling, this was the unfunniest troll ever.
Mocsta's voting behaviour regarding Laguerta/Jacob still stands too.
I'm still open to other options, but there is nobody with more evidence stacked against them.
|
On January 18 2013 06:42 zarepath wrote:
I'm about to start my commute home and then dinner/family time, so I might not be around for the end of N2.
So if these are my last words: I think Spag is extremely suspicious. Look at all of his interactions with Mocsta (from both filters), and ask how they resonate. Then look at how he voted, and how he explained his vote. Also look at how Mocsta talked about Bringaniga (Spag's predecessor) on Day 1.
I look forward to how the role claim goes. I'll try to post right before the deadline. (I've been able to check in a little before the deadline most days.)
Noted. Spag has seemed the most suspicious to me after Jacob. I just haven't had the time yet to really read through his entire filter yet. So I'm not actually sure why I have this feeling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
