|
|
I haven't read his filters in full detail, so won't comment on that.. I mereso ask, are there not other players who have exhibited the same behaviour? Why zebezt vs them? That is all.
[Im trying to constructively address your reasoning]
|
OK.. I will have a look through my filter and see if I any town or scum motivations.
Do you not find it odd, lurkers have been able to come here and just bandwagon someone freely? What do you make of those intentions? (if you want me to highlight an individual.. there are a few.. but I think it is ?Glurio? that springs to mind
|
Well.. if you wanted to swap.. im not comfortable with zebezt
I read his filter, and OK, he is not the most "direct" scum hunter, but we already have Oatsmaster for that role.. I see him as a townie.. and its got nothign to do with him agreeing with some of my concerns. In fact, he actually questioned me regarding a few.
Also.. he didnt share TOWN reads (like some individuals) he shared SCUM reads... remember.. its alot harder for scum to present scum reads as they are openly lying... Town or scum can produce a town read and feel true to themselves.
So far, the play from Sn0_man hasnt done anything to suggest zebezt was wrong in naming him as a scum read. If I am confirmation biased with this assessment, let me know? Because I have done my best to take a step back here and consider the information.
|
On January 14 2013 12:33 glurio wrote: I came in really late in the first day, a lot of arguments were already made, in this situation its highly unlikely to make a completely new argument for someone who was overlooked. And i do believe there is never a reason to lie as a town player. WTF... you have been lurking this whole time.
and now I name you,. you post...
|
zarepath.. i dont think Oatsmaster is a valid target.
he is aggressive yes.. and persistant yes... but if he was mafia. i think hes just sticking his neck out too far.. not a good play for Day 1.
Even though he didnt say it.. i think Acid post suggested him to look into zebezt..
But yes.. it is concerning there has been no contention to La Guerta.
@all What do you make of Glurio suddenly making an appearance when called into question? Is this scum trying to justify his vote?
On January 14 2013 12:35 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 12:33 glurio wrote: I came in really late in the first day, a lot of arguments were already made, in this situation its highly unlikely to make a completely new argument for someone who was overlooked. And i do believe there is never a reason to lie as a town player. WTF... you have been lurking this whole time. and now I name you,. you post...
|
On January 14 2013 12:41 Acid~ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 11:27 Mocsta wrote: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. Yeah, yeah, yeah... I don't care how respectfully it's presented, the fact is that you only pointed fingers at people after they started pointing fingers at you, you did this with both Sn0_Man and Oats, now you're doing it with me. Show nested quote +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. Well, your posts do have some substance, but not nearly enough for their size and number. We don't need to be privy to your every thought. A lot of times, you're repeating yourself or paraphrasing someone else, or just talking into the wind - saying we need to do this and that, should do this, but not doing it yourself. Show nested quote + (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.
I agree we are all accountable for our own actions and Oastmaster, while hot-headed, did not do anything really scummy. His only "crime" was to call you out on a few points that I would have made myself, had I been there. The post where you give him the FoS is cleverly written, you know you are dealing with an emotional player and the way you worded your suspicion seems to me as designed to provoke a reaction. Show nested quote +(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. What I am doing is the very definition of scum-hunting. 1. I am asking important questions from someone on whom I have doubts (you) in hopes that the discussion will reveal alignment. 2. I am actively campaigning for votes on my strongest scumread (Zebezt), who still has not answered my questions. There are no emotions here, just facts. Pray tell, exactly what should I be doing differently in order to expose scum? What you are doing, on the other hand, is pointing the finger at anyone who doesn't agree with you, which is emotional and the opposite of efficient scum-hunting. I haven't accused you. Yet.
All you keep saying is Im pointing fingers because you dont like that I found some posters overtly aggressive, and let them know that they may in fact be intimidating posters. Then, look at what your crux is; you are doing the EXACT same thing. You dont like my post style and are calling me out on it.
Apparently you are fact, and I am not. As I said before, your arguments are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst.
Look at how quick you were to admit there is substance behind my posts; regardless of whether you think every post is valid, I have managed to elicit responses from more people than you. What have you done for town, other than sling shit over an active poster.
You then sling more shit, saying I worded my suspicion funnily. How about instead of slinging shit, you take my post and break it down. I re-read it, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Its clear, concise and rational. Again more hypocritical behaviour.
If you want to aid the scum hunt, I suggest you start by removing the hypocrisy from your posts.
|
On January 14 2013 12:54 glurio wrote: It's stupid to lie as town, but the arguments (mafia doesnt defend, stupid newbie play) kinda swayed me. He might just be a bad town player.
##Unvote ##Vote: Mandalor
I'll go with my number one scum ready. He just got too emotional for my taste. Also you look scummy to me oats.
I ACTUALLY agree here!
|
##unvote:la guerta
##vote: mandalor
|
sorry had to rush the post out.. there was not enough distraction from la guerta.
must mean scum are happy for him.
mandalor was my big scum read from before, the only reason i swapped was the lie.
lets challenge la guerta for this information night 1.
|
|
Look.. obviously I rode the train and hammered the vote.
Ask what you need to ask.
Im going to take a walk, and clear my thoughts, and will respond to your questions when I get back.
|
ok im back.
(1) As I said before.. I realise its easy to blame me for the hammer vote; I even developed a case against Mandalor.
So ask what you need to ask. Point what fingers you need to point.
Just remember Night 1 is 20 hrs (not 24hrs).
I do not want this action to cloud our ability to constructively look at the what happened Day 1.
(2) @zarepath If you doubt my intentions, please have the courtesy and address some questions to me. You have identified 3 items that you think apply to me, can you please detail what the concerns are; and I will go about addressing them.
|
On January 14 2013 15:25 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote + he didnt share TOWN reads (like some individuals) he shared SCUM reads... remember.. its alot harder for scum to present scum reads as they are openly lying.
Except he sheeped you hardcore on those reads Mocsta.. Personally I don't read it that way.. but perhaps I am not in the best position to comment .. (conflict of interest)
In case you are interested in my comment to that its below + Show Spoiler +On January 13 2013 19:59 zebezt wrote:Good morning all. Seems there is finally some activity going on. Oats seems to be either playing scum or is acting like an idiot. Not easy to decide which it is. I think a scum would not stick his neck out this much so early on though. My top list of people to vote for is: 1: sn0_man 2: bringaniga 3: oats There is still very little activity by some people so of course I don't have all the info I want yet. My explanations: 1: Sn0_man was the first one to attack mocsta in a way that would lead to a bad town atmosphere. After oats took over this case he conveniently hung back though. A nice way to not draw attention to himself. He makes excuses for himself: Show nested quote +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. Being this apologetic, but not actually doing anything: pretty scummy. Another hint: Show nested quote +What is a common Townie/Blue/Mafia ratio? Something like 3/1/1? or 2.5/1.5/1? He does not seem interested in the town/scum ratio. Both of his options seem fix the scum/townie ration at 1:4. He would know this ratio if he is scum. As a townie there is no need to know the ratio's anyway. As a scum it is important to know how many blues you have to hunt for though. 2: bringaniga seems to be hiding behind his little act. No idea if he is scum, but he isn't helping. His professor doesn't turn up in google except for someone that lived a few centuries ago, making bringaniga a vampire?! 3: Oats' idiocy has been outlined by mocsta and omni already. Even for scum play it seems pretty bad though. Therefore he is not so high on my list. He has 2 reads shared with me (at that point in time....) Sn0_Man & Oatsmaster. In regards to Sn0_Man / Oatsmaster.. is it a crime he also thought you guys have a very aggressive tone. The problem with Sn0_Man was that when someone commented on him.. he instantly accused them of going into super defensive mode.. that type of instant pressure certianly can make individuals feel uncomfortable. Who wants to be singled out on the first page of the Day1 thread? Seriously? I see no issue with that. If anything, it sounds to me like you guys are accusing him of the same thing he is accusing you. - DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
- DIFFERENCE OF APPROACH.
In regards to Oats, he admits oats isnt high on the list. I think he felt the need to call out logic as flawed. So his 2 (actual reads) are Sno and bringa. Out of those 2.. Sn0 was the target we shared at that point in time. I don't see how this specifies scum behaviour?
|
Well let me have a look again with the new criteria.
I thought everything was based on the the scum name post (Acid attention seemed to focus on this?)
On January 14 2013 12:45 Acid~ wrote: but read Zebezt's filter again: he didn't share scum reads, he repeated/paraphrased someone else's read.
So far, i dont think that is accurate. But will re-evaluate with your suggestions.
|
On January 14 2013 15:48 Oatsmaster wrote: (1)My point is that the long reads post is really fucking easy to make as scum and it shouldnt give him a town read on its own. Firstly, I agree some aspects of the post are easy to write. But please remember for scum it is harder to give a genuine scum read than town read. I have supported this concept from the start, and agree with it here. Zebezt isnt starting his town reads (at least from what I gathered).
He shared his 2 scum reads.. and then asked others to share as well.. Again I don't see what is wrong with this?
Lastly, yes, that post should not give a town read. Its about consistency of actions, and whether actions are town motivated. I think he is keeping his eyes open in a rational way. Look he refers to your style as "idiocy" and then adds that i was "confirmation biased" in regards to our discussions. I dont see that as sheeping me.. he questions you and I equally as well?
(2)He has no original thoughts other than stratagies to play, which again, is easy to make as scum. That one is tough, I dont think he has been the initial instigator of any scum hunting; so perhaps the original thought is lacking. But then again.. there are plenty of people who have bandwagoned; I think this makes the comment overall: null.
My personal opinion on the matter is that, there can be only one instigator but original content doesnt have to stop there. Original content can be taking that information and progressing it further applying a new thought process. Did he do this.. I dont think so.. but like i said before, not many in this game actually have either..
(3)I think he is scum because he doesnt actually care to find out who is scum. Didnt ask specific questions, didnt pressure people, didnt even follow up on his original list of questions. Didnt ask specific questions Thats a matter of interpretation. You are obviously a straight-to-the-point personality, not shy of a confrontation. Not everyone else is inclined that way... Considering he too thought your posts were intimidating ("unwarranted hostility"), it can be assumed with some degree of reliability he will not ask confrontational pressure questions. I think he is trying to extract information the best way he can/knows how to. So to me i lean: null Didnt pressure people Again I think it is a matter of interpretation. I dont think he pressured either; but perhaps in his mind he did. I suggest you take your concerns and ask him directly...
@zebezt Do you you think the questions you addressed to Oats/Mocsta, and your two scum reads were pressuring them; do you think you asked them questions to gain specific information? etc
Didnt follow up on his original list of questions It does appear that way.. I would give him a bit more time to post, i Dont know where he is from, bu he said goodmorning when my timestamp reads 19:59, so I assume he is sleeping now. This one I think is valid and would definitely follow up on.
@zebezt Zebezt, now that Day1 has transpired; please lead the discussions with your top scum read. I suggest you start by identifying an action you find scummy, and asking them why it is NOT scummy
|
On January 14 2013 16:35 Oatsmaster wrote:@Troske, Why is Mandalor's vote bad considering 6 other players voted for Laguerta? Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 09:48 Trotske wrote: I think this post is of a really really bad town player who thinks he needs to defend himself with votes on other people and I think that Mandalor is trying to kill a bad townie. So for that and the post Macosta made stating the reasons for lynching him I am going to change my vote.
##Unvote ##Vote Mandalor Oatsmaster.. I aprpeciate the direction you are giving here.. and I assume I am next on your interrogation list.
However, we need to post without skewing perspective.
When I read that post in your context i was like WTF.. thats a complete scum slip.. great find oats.. so i went to check the quote agian.
On January 14 2013 09:48 Trotske wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 07:01 laguerta wrote: Umm bringaniga voted for me and then I voted for him to defend myself and also because vote thing is running out and i dont know who to vote for yet. I think this post is of a really really bad town player who thinks he needs to defend himself with votes on other people and I think that Mandalor is trying to kill a bad townie. So for that and the post Macosta made stating the reasons for lynching him I am going to change my vote. ##Unvote ##Vote Mandalor
Hes actually calling out laguerta as a bad town player; and thinks "mandalor is trying to kill a bad townie".
Im not against you continuing to question Trotske.. please go ahead.. Im just pointing out I think your first question has been interpretted incorrectly.
|
On January 14 2013 16:55 shz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +First of all: WHAT THE FUCK. On January 14 2013 12:30 OmniEulogy wrote: In fact, it was mentioned earlier... not enough of a fight from mafia to keep Laguerta in the game... the fact that the only two votes that aren't on him are on two different people makes me highly doubt they are both mafia either... guys I think we fucked this up
##Unvote And 1,5h later, laguerta is not dead, but Mandalor, the vanilla town. Was this the bus you were waiting for? On January 14 2013 12:13 Mocsta wrote: My vote is sticking on La Guerta. I cant let it go that he lied. it is punishable by lynch. On January 14 2013 12:59 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 12:54 glurio wrote: It's stupid to lie as town, but the arguments (mafia doesnt defend, stupid newbie play) kinda swayed me. He might just be a bad town player.
##Unvote ##Vote: Mandalor
I'll go with my number one scum ready. He just got too emotional for my taste. Also you look scummy to me oats. I ACTUALLY agree here! How the fuck does this post convince you (after you said you can't get over the fact, laguerta lied) that Mandalor was scum? This post adds nothing new, that wasn't said before. How can you agree then 1(!) minute before lynch? Also: On January 14 2013 13:12 Mocsta wrote: Look.. obviously I rode the train and hammered the vote.
Ask what you need to ask.
Im going to take a walk, and clear my thoughts, and will respond to your questions when I get back. On January 14 2013 12:34 Mocsta wrote: So far, the play from Sn0_man hasnt done anything to suggest zebezt was wrong in naming him as a scum read. If I am confirmation biased with this assessment, let me know? Because I have done my best to take a step back here and consider the information. Stop playing the victim card.If you are confirmation biased, people will tell you. You also obivously fucked this up, and people will tell you. Stop victimizing yourself in an attempt to look innocent. This will not fly. Just because you leave yourself an out with "am I biased?", "I admit I messed up" you are not less suspicious if this backfires. I would love to answer how glurios post actually changed your mind one minute before lynch with nothing new added to the table?
Thanks for taking the time to trawl through the Day1 events. I will address your questions as follows.
(1) "Was this the bus you were waiting for" No. My mindset was firm on La Guerta due to lying.. not being my top scum read.
If memory serves me right you went to bed and werent available during the last 1 hr. So I appreciate that you have a fresh perspective on this, but you weren't in the moment.
When OmniEulogy unvoted, and then Oatsmaster unvoted they raised raised good points. The lynch for La Guerta was uncontested. Others started to share this opinion and were considering his play as just bad town.
I then became entrenched into words with Acid~, which did distract me I must admit. The timing was terrible.
My justification for voting La Guerta was because he lied; and yes.. it was striking me as odd that there was no opposition. You also dont add, that when I voted for La Guerta, I still said I suspected Mandalor to a high degree and would follow up on him. + Show Spoiler [Vote La Guerta but still suspect Manda…] +On January 14 2013 10:41 Mocsta wrote: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. Yeah my vote went in last minute.. but why dont you check my post timestamps.. i literally had just got off a post from Acid; its not like I was sitting there ready to post last minute. [As an aside.. I even refer to my confused state of mind with the whole situation when I addressed Acid in the spoilered post]
There is no doubt [only now].. i was wrong about Mandalor, but I built what I consider to be a good and reasoned case on him. And his reactions were indeed over emotional. He admitted it himself.
As for the victim card.. i dont know what you are talking about, and dont see how your 2 quotes elucidate that? I am putting myself out there to be questioned.. Who else has done that? I am standing by open and transparent play.. when am I claiming to be the victim? If anything, I am trying to answer your concerns so we can move on and scum hunt. What happened, has happened; did you question my case i built on mandalor? I cant remember you doing so.
|
On January 14 2013 17:16 Oatsmaster wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Mocsta On December 21 2012 09:42 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote + Unfortunately, this flip makes sense, I was suspicious there was no activity when i woke up.
(1) Fellow townies, I realise its easy to point the finger at Aquanim or even myself; we both developed cases against Spaghetticus. If you want to question either of us, I suggest action be taken by middle of Night 1. I believe if this matter is not closed sooner than later, it will cloud our ability to constructively look at the sequence of events that led to Spaghetticus. (2) We need to consolidate and stick to a battle plan. I think part of this is absorbing the Day 1 posts before sling accusations at persons. We need to start questioning peoples motives critically; and understand the town atmosphere at the time of key events. (3) For me.. Key Events are: (1) Reactions when Chromatically began targetting Corazon (2) Threesr announcing himself in the thread, in the way he did (3) Reactions to Threesr being top of the vote count (4) Interplay with FatChunk (5) Aquanim/Spaghetticus/Myself Please feel free to add/remove events as you see fit.. I wrote this from recollection. (4) I am going to start examining these events with the following goals (a) Who is pushing these events to occur (b) Who is not posting at all (c) Who is joining the bandwagon,but, not adding original thought When I have had time to answer these questions, I will post again in the thread. I hope you all too... take a step back.. and do a similar process. What is different about this games lynch than last games day 1 lynch? You seemed much more organised and posted a plan of action. This game, you posted this On January 14 2013 14:25 Mocsta wrote: ok im back.
(1) As I said before.. I realise its easy to blame me for the hammer vote; I even developed a case against Mandalor.
So ask what you need to ask. Point what fingers you need to point.
Just remember Night 1 is 20 hrs (not 24hrs).
I do not want this action to cloud our ability to constructively look at the what happened Day 1.
Self-pitying and not helpful to town in the slightest.
Umm.. yeah, they are different posts and...? I expressed key events in that game because it was clear cut what happened for that lynch. Completely different game.
This lynch, there was so much action/confusion/chaos that happened Day 1.. even just 1 to 2 hrs before lynch.. i dont think it is reasonable to have expressed key events... can you summarise all the key events even now with 4 hours to digest?
I think this point you have raised is a moot point.
And I dont see my post as self-pitying. As I said to Shz.. im putting myself out there.. by my own choice.. Im not asking for pity anywhere.. I asking town to re-group.. How is that self-pitying?
|
On January 14 2013 17:09 shz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 12:34 Mocsta wrote: Well.. if you wanted to swap.. im not comfortable with zebezt
I read his filter, and OK, he is not the most "direct" scum hunter, but we already have Oatsmaster for that role.. I see him as a townie.. and its got nothign to do with him agreeing with some of my concerns. In fact, he actually questioned me regarding a few.
Also.. he didnt share TOWN reads (like some individuals) he shared SCUM reads... remember.. its alot harder for scum to present scum reads as they are openly lying... Town or scum can produce a town read and feel true to themselves. Why is it, all of a sudden, okay that someone is the "most direct" scum hunter? And why are you giving him town-cred for not sharing town reads, when you do it in the same post yourself?
Your question is affected by your tunneling of me.
I have been advocating all game.. that early game it is bad play to share town reads... I think we are past early game.
If oatsmaster was scum. do you think he would really be this aggressive? I cant see it;
if you can. I am keep to hear what your case/pressure/reasonings is founded on.
People scum hunt in their own way.. the town environment is for bouncing the ideas off each other. I dont see anything wrong with a direct scum hunter, as long as he doesnt intimidate others from contributing. I think that outcome is far worse.
Have you been in a game Day 3.. where only 1 page of posts is made in 48hrs? I have.. and its painful.
|
|
|
|