EPTNewbie Mini Mafia XXXV
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
 #Sarcasm. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
 | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
So... my stance on lurkers is fairly similar to my other two games. I don't think we should actively try to push for their lynches D1, but if I don't have a solid scum read I have no problem getting rid of a lurker. Scum will be scum, try to fake contributions, post a lot of fluff ect. Possibly try to derail conversations. I'll be more active in the morning, I'm going to sleep for now. cya guys I'm excited to get this started. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Anyway just to touch on what has happened so far, I agree with Oats opinion on the lurkers, not on how Mocsta asked the question. If anybody really said yes/no to that question they would be pressured for it, possibly used as a reason to be voted on later in D1. It would be a silly thing for town to do, almost as silly as not answering the questions. I think having people explain the reasoning behind their votes is fantastic but I don't think it goes far enough, I believe we should go through each others cases and not only agree/disagree but see if we can prove the case right or wrong ourselves while waiting for the defense of the person being accused. (it is important to wait for them to defend themselves first, otherwise we give them an escape with no effort on their part) I know this is done to some degree each time a case is made but in both of my last games we've made the mistake of lynching townies due to their arguments not standing up to one persons case. I'm hoping we can avoid that if everybody weighs in with not only their own case but their thoughts on the other cases as well. It's a lot of extra effort but I believe it's a good way to discuss scum reads with each other and keep conversation strongly focused on scum hunting. I've got an event going on in roughly 4~ hours and I'll be busy for most of the night (cleaning up the house for it right now) so I'll periodically check in and hopefully be able to make some cases by the end of the night. Also if we could have Mandalor, Shz, Acid, Glurio, and Bringaniga answer at least one of the questions asked it would be nice. Let us know you are alive guys | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Mocsta has made his town meta fairly clear. He hasn't really deviated from it in his first few posts and nothing he has said moves me to believe he is town OR scum. I think you are reading with some pretty thick goggles already Oats. Reading through some of your other games, it isn't very characteristic right off the starting blocks. I can see it as scum attempting to derail the conversation as we were coming up with some good idea's and creating a friendly atmosphere, which as you have said you hate so much! Where is your town motivation for that? The hypocrisy in what you've accused Mocsta of and what you have done so far is amazing. I don't think this is enough for me to vote on but in your own words shape up or die. @Shz On the other side of things, as much as some of his posts annoy me and I agree he hasn't contributed much of anything, I believe I can see a town mindset behind what he has been saying. It's very clouded though and I can probably attribute that to his posting style. He starts off trying to get people to post (null) It's good for town but not very hard to do early on in the game. Or at any point really. He also tries to say that he thinks both Mocsta and Oats are town (I think) and that they are just butting heads because they have posted the most and it's easiest to make cases this early on people who have posted. It's very hard to get a read on nothing. So although I wouldn't mind seeing him try to explain himself like a normal person and answer some of the questions that have been addressed to him I can see a small townie vibe from what little I believe he has said. Anyway I just woke up, its 4am I'll be back after making some toast if anybody is around | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On the other side we have Oats as an example who posts an average amount in both roles. However his play style (now that I've read through his filter for XXXII) changes a little. Experience changes everything though but there are some similarities between his XXXII game and what he has done this time, and very little in his other games that I read through. Again not enough for me to vote for him but it's not a good sign either. I'm hoping some of our lurkers can weigh in, and if Bringaniga doesn't come up with anything by the lynch deadline, my current thoughts of him will turn to scum pretending to be active and I'll be pushing for his lynching over the current Oats for sure. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
QUOTE]On January 13 2013 00:55 Oatsmaster wrote: 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. [/QUOTE] Keep in mind he asked other questions as well, and if anybody actually answered only yes/no they would be an idiot. The fact that you even think anybody would do that and not get follow up questions is extremely amusing. On January 13 2013 01:05 Oatsmaster wrote: Hey Mocsta, what was the point of your opening questions? Do you think you achieved your goal? On January 13 2013 08:42 Oatsmaster wrote: Mocsta, do you have any reads so far? You leave both of those open to 1 word answers. Just in case you don't know... Hypocrisy: Noun The practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform And then we have "2. I really dont want to answer that. Because I dont think my answer will help town in any way. " And "Come on, show how me and sno-man are not stimulating conversation?" That's a hard one... not answering questions and getting so defensive to the point of making a terrible case and voting on somebody because of it. I think that's pretty detrimental to town. I'm not saying Mocsta is playing without fault, your case makes decent points about what he should be improving on in terms of better explaining himself. Turning around and calling him scum for everything he's posted though without any real facts but CLAIMING they are without a doubt scummy and should get him lynched is wayyyyyy over the top. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
 | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Do I have scum reads? not really. There isn't enough information on anybody to label them as scum. There are scummier players at the moment, I'd say Bringaniga would be #1 for me right now until he makes a post that says something useful. I'm not sure why you tunnel Mocsta so hard with 9 other players who you should also think could be scum and you have no information on. Instead you focus on somebody who has been active, playing his previous town meta, and has been trying to promote activity while defending himself from you. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
For example I'm curious about how people find Bringaniga's posting. @Everyone Would you be willing to lynch him based on his current posting and why? I personally am against lynching Bringaniga right now. I feel that he has a town mindset behind his actions, and although it is annoying it is not very scummy yet. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
I believe we can use today to get some answers from the EU guys. Shz, Mandalor, Glurio ect. should give us their input. Zarepath should also be around. It wasn't the best 24 hours we could hope for but I'm trying to work a few things out with the limited information. I'll try to have one good case about 5~ hours before the deadline. Two if it's needed. It sucks to have to hope people will respond but most of them have given reasons for their inactivity during the weekend. Now is their chance to prove they want to help town and come in with some fresh thoughts. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 13 2013 20:21 zebezt wrote: Oops Got a bit carried away with my newly discovered filter skills I did the exact same thing last game, or in my first... maybe both. It happens You make an interesting point on Sn0 regardless. I think he's just acting as a paranoid townie though, which I am not implying is a bad thing I believe you should assume everybody is scum and have them prove themselves as town first. His activity level is low however but I'm not sure if I'd put him as #1 scum suspect at the moment. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
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. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
@Oats rather than brainwashing I don't mind Mocsta leading discussion because I don't believe he is capable of doing it without giving away that he is scum. I don't think I could do it either. I've never been mafia but I'd imagine it would be very difficult with little experience to play without giving yourself away if you had to talk so much. That and so far what he has said has matched with my thoughts. I'll have to go back and make sure he isn't just agreeing with what I'm saying though just to be safe. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
(lynch deadline) I'm going through it all right now, it's quite a bit of reading but I should be done shortly.I did notice something while I was reading so I'll address it. @Mocsta I was in a rush and the thought of a no-lynch didn't actually cross my mind. I put my vote on Acid~ because I felt positive that nobody would follow it. If I hadn't been able to come back and he did get lynched though, even if he flipped town it would do 0 damage to us, that was my thought process behind voting for him as I had about 5 minutes to decide who to vote for at the time that I did. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
I'm not happy at all about Laguerta's post count or quality of posts but I think Shz is a candidate for a lynch over Laguerta at the moment. Albeit it's very close for me between the two of them. Shz has voted for Bringaniga because he was annoying, not because he was scum. In my mind this is not a town motivated vote. It is a vote on somebody easy to target by scum. He hasn't contributed to very much at all, and instead has either asked very simplistic questions, answered the first few questions but mostly attacked players on their stances early on and hasn't done anything since then. It is a large change from my game with him in XXXIII and the fact that he has not contributed since then also makes me worried. I believe you are taking the easy way out by voting for Bringaniga, voting for one of the "easy" lynch candidates. Town should be scum hunting and trying to discuss leads with each other. Not voting because somebody is annoying who you yourself even said it is unlikely for him to be scum. ##Vote: Shz | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
@Laguerta why should we NOT vote to lynch you in 2 hours? | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
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. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 14 2013 00:41 Mandalor wrote: Oh, forgot about bringaniga. His play is annoying the crap out of me. If he's town, he's helping scum a lot. I hope he knows that. However, I still favor going for the more easy targets. Scum would think of Bringaniga as an "easy target". I'm going to say that thinking of this post from a town vs scum point of view it seems more town even though he's talking about lynching easy targets. I believe lynching Mandalor would be a mistake D1. Sn0 is a possible target I'd consider lynching. I think people are dead on with their idea's of him. He hasn't come back at all and stirred things up to create an atmosphere that isn't really town friendly. I wasn't aiming for a love-fest with my post about taking each others cases apart either, but I gave reasons for why it would be beneficial towards town and how it would help us scum hunt. He has done nothing that would promote a town agenda. He seemed quick to jump on Mocsta, which is understandable but he has contributed nothing after stopping the discussion and what posts he has made aren't very good. He is another lurker and it is very hard to get a good read on him. Glurio - has posted nothing. Acid~ - has posted nothing. Shz - very little posted, jumped on Bringaniga out of frustration, left for the rest of the day. Possible scum move to get his vote out there early on a target nobody would complain about and then went MIA so he could not explain himself. Mandalor - Jumped between targets, has stayed with his scum read though. Has defended himself actively. A little bit defensive, but when being accused of something most people are. Trotske - Seems to be aiming for a lurker lynch D1. At this point I'm not entirely against it but he has shown little care for anything else that has happened. Weak case at best due to such little information from Sn0 available. Laguerta - started off with this "1) If I dont have a strong mafia read on someone by the end of the day, I will feel compelled to policy lynch and not waste a day with a NL." He just voted for a no-lynch. Already makes him a liar. He voted for Bringaniga as an OMGUS. Anybody have anything to add? I think one of these guys should be our lynch candidates for today. Zarepath barely makes it off the list. I find his activity is also very spotty and outside of policy he hasn't offered much. He also voted for Acid, which to me seems like a scum move. Trying to explain why he would vote for Acid over another lurker, I can understand it because of TeMiL in our last game who literally only posted once to vote and that was pretty much it... but still, it's not a very compelling vote for somebody who has had time to come to a conclusion. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Shz I'd still like your thoughts on how everything has been playing out and who you believe the top 2 players (or more if you'd like) for this lynch should be. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Although it is not much it's still a nice step in the right direction. I didn't take a close look at Zebezt but he has said some pretty odd things. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 12 2013 13:36 laguerta wrote: 1) If I dont have a strong mafia read on someone by the end of the day, I will feel compelled to policy lynch and not waste a day with a NL. 2) I think scum would try to get influence by offering bits of analysis but not taking a strong lead on lynching someone until someone else does first, and then supporting that lynch and bandwagonning. 3) I know dude, we have an open pool with no screen around it and I have to skim it every day, and vacuum every other day. Such a bitch. and then proceeds to vote no-lynch. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 14 2013 11:43 Sn0_Man wrote: Admittedly, I've been pretty inactive. Lets just way weekends aren't when I anticipate putting a lot of effort into Mafia. Monday morning I'll finish reading the thread, but for now, Mocsta has done very little to foster a townie atmosphere while working far too hard to throw in subliminal townie claims for my liking. Such as... proof 1 proof 2 proof 3 proof 4... If you had made this case during N1 instead of at the very end of D1... well... you didn't make a case but... I think it would have suited you much better. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
##Unvote | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 14 2013 12:35 Mocsta wrote: WTF... you have been lurking this whole time. and now I name you,. you post... This is pretty good timing... lol | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
I don't like the constant vote jumping. Or pulling off Laguerta after jumping around so much. It makes me think you know who the townies are and have been testing to see which wagon sticks. That confidence in nailing Zebezt is bothering me too... I'm biased with my thinking past thing point. Don't wanna screw with anybody else I'll explain it after the lynch. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Mandalor (3) - Trotske, glurio, Mocsta, Mocsta, Oatsmaster Laguerta (2) - Mandalor, Shz, Mocsta, Zarepath, Oatsmaster, OmniEulogy, glurio zebezt (2) - Acid~, Oatsmaster Oatsmaster (2) - zarepath, OmniEuology, Mocsta Sn0_Man (1) - Zebezt, Trotske, Mocsta Mocsta (1) - Sn0_Man, Oatsmaster bringaniga (0) - shz, Oatsmaster, Mandalor, Laguerta shz (0) - OmniEulogy Acid~ (0) - Zarepath, OmniEulogy No-Lynch (1) - Laguerta My case on OatsMaster. I was trying to write this up with 20 minutes left during D1, couldn't find the right words / was too pressured and feel like I left it unfinished. I want to explain why I voted for him, my thoughts behind it and why I believe it still makes sense after this lynch. I'll start off at the very beginning, his strange approach to the start of the game. + Show Spoiler + On 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: 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. Instead of answering any of the questions, he deflects them and then becomes defensive, saying "2. I really dont want to answer that. Because I dont think my answer will help town in any way." after being asked about it again. He still refuses to discuss how scum would possibly go about playing this game. I highly doubt it's because he thinks they will use his idea's. I believe it is because he doesn't want us to know how he is going to play scum. This is speculation but should be taken into consideration. Especially considering the massive double standard he sets when accusing Mocsta in the early D1 hours. He attacks Mocsta for asking a question that could potentially be a yes/no question. NOBODY would answer Mocsta's question with a yes/no and get away with it, I don't believe its a town mindset to answer questions like Mocsta's with yes/no answers. Then we have this. + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 19:16 Oatsmaster wrote: Turning around and calling him scum for everything he's posted though without any real facts I really dont know what real facts your need to have before you lynch. A scumslip? You leave both of those open to 1 word answers. Just in case you don't know... Hypocrisy: Noun Do you think that Mocsta would answer those with 1 word? Exactly. Its all about context. That's a hard one... not answering questions and getting so defensive to the point of making a terrible case How was I defensive? I didnt even see the FoS before I posted the case as I mentioned above. Ok Omni, What scum reads do you have? He talks about not having any facts before a D1 lynch which is complete bullshit. As we found out there were many things to take into consideration during our D1 lynch. Next up, asks Mocsta two Yes/No questions. Gets Extremely defensive about doing it and says its about context. Wrong. Mocsta could have just as easily answered yes/no and been asked a ton of follow up questions, he didn't because it would be a dumb thing to do, just like the opening questions which Oats never answered fully. Lastly (and for the 2nd time this game) He asks for somebody elses reads after barely answering any concerns about him and deflecting. He claims scumslip but in reality He's already said "let me tell you why you are scum" to Mocsta. That confidence... with no facts he sure does know what alignment people are. "Also, with your current level of activity, and the way you defended yourself. ##Unvote HOWEVER I really dont like the way you are going around buddying everybody and keep referring to yourself as an excellent town player. " He backs off Mocsta as he realizes that nobody else is getting on this train and he's running out of fuel to throw at him, I don't recall Mocsta ever claiming himself to be an excellent town player either. His next post is this one + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 20:49 Oatsmaster wrote: Ok posters with little to no content laguerta Trotske Acid~ glurio Posters that seem to be trolling the shit out of the thread Bringniga ##Vote: bringaniga Its less than 12 hours to lynch and I know that you are active. Please contribute in a manner that will help town Either we lynch them, or lynch an active player. Also, in case you guys didnt read the OP or dont know, its plurality lynch so the person with the most votes at the end of the day will get lynched. THEREFORE there is no need to consolidate to lynch. HOWEVER town should consolidate in order to prevent scum from being able to affect the final vote with a last minute vote switch He goes after somebody I have kept my eye on as a potential for SCUM to try and lynch. Shz has already voted for him out of anger at this point making him an "easy" target. There are many other players who are lurking worse than Bringaniga at this point, AND bringaniga has said repetitively that he will be releasing cases in the future. Everything he has said I could see a very subtle town undertone and his actions make it unlikely for him to be scum. Oats also does exactly what he accused Mocsta of being scum for. He highlights all of the lurkiest players before voting on Bringaniga. Except he doesn't mention anything about them other than that they are lurking. No other insight at all. He starts to go after lurkers with very basic questions that don't probe too deep, accusing Mandalor after he finally becomes active by saying "Manadalor, what makes you different from laguerta and Trotske? As far as I can see you have been about as active as them" The largest difference between Mandalor and them is that he has shared his thoughts and explained exactly why he was not active up to this point. Oats realizes his lynch on Bringaniga is no longer sticking, I've raised my own concerns about him and start to draw attention to players that would vote for him, most people agree he seems town and will not vote for him depending on how he acts for the rest of D1. Oats again switching his targets realizing Bringaniga is no longer a viable option. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 08:21 Oatsmaster wrote: Mandalor, what changed from earlier? You were not even close to active this time of the day yesterday. So, basically apart from trolling, you want to lynch a lurker which gives us 0 information. Umm you want to lynch a lurker too, laguerta.. ##Unvote ##Vote: Mandalor You too [spolier] ##Unvote ##Vote: laguerta Explain your vote. Now. [/spoiler] Mandalor has made a few mistakes, explaining his top scum reads as "easy" lynches. but it is true that he always stuck with Laguerta as one of his top reads. Oats uses this regardless to jump to Mandalor, using his position as a lurker for the first half of D1 and poor explanation of his vote as reasons. Again Oats does not wait for the play accused to defend himself first, he votes and then waits for the defense AND gauges the response from everybody else to see if a wagon will form on the target. Zebezt makes some comments against Sn0_man and Oats So far I don't have a scum read on Zebezt, I am leaning slightly towards town. He's already said this is his first game, and I'm quite pleased with the little amount he has brought to the table. Oats attacks him for sheeping Mocsta and for Zebezt pressuring him which is exactly what town is supposed to do, take people they think are suspicious and try to apply pressure. Again Oats becomes overly defensive and lashes out at him. Soft claims he's scum by saying "mafia QT must be taking about it" in regards to Kush being found to be Bringaniga. I know Oats has obs/played many games. The fact that he claims he didn't know what would happen to Bringaniga is unbelievable to me. I believe this is his attempt to soft claim town and I'm not buying it. I believe he is setting up another target (Zebezt) on the off chance Mandalor doesn't work out. We then have On January 14 2013 08:33 Oatsmaster wrote: Mocsta, If I wrote the post Acid wrote, what would you do? A useless post with no point. Mocsta attacked Acid for his post already. Soon after, the Mandalor wagon that looked like it was taking off gets stopped. Nobody else is joining it and other players are starting to look much scummier, players are discussing the lurkers and how suspicious Laguerta is. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 10:10 Oatsmaster wrote: I dont think lynching Mocsta is a good idea today. ##Unvote ##Vote: laguerta Mandalor, you get a pass today but you better start scumhunting. Since that you dont need to defend yourself anymore. The fourth vote during D1. It's starting to look like he doesn't care who gets lynched. He votes for Laguerta because of his no-lynch (I assume, it's never really stated). On January 14 2013 11:49 Oatsmaster wrote: I really dont know who to vote for....... laguerta is scummy, but I really dont feel confident in lynching him... He isnt here to defend himself, so... Also from past experience, scum has always been around at the deadline so... He begins to back track on Laguerta as I have shown my unwillingness nearly the entire time up to the point where I finally cave when I realize Laguerta has lied about his no-lynch policy. With so little information I find this very incriminating and convince Mocsta on board with it as well. Oats claims scum is always around at the deadline from his past experience. Is this past experience in his game as scum? I've played three games so far and its fairly random if scum will be there during the lynch or not. I've had 1 there in both games, two not there in my 1st game and 1 never there in my 2nd. I think this might be a scum slip, although Zare made a joke about it and its faulty logic, I believe it was a subconscious slip. He then follows up with On January 14 2013 12:43 Oatsmaster wrote: Glurio, do you think that laguerta is scum? @Mocsta, I dont think its really scummy in itself, we are nearing lynch and people will start to show up. What?! You just said... scum is always around near the lynch... Do you know their alignment or something? You can pick which players who are around at the time of the lynch are scummy or not? It doesn't make sense. There are so many contradictions. On January 14 2013 12:54 Oatsmaster wrote: 7 minutes to vote, If you guys think that laguerta is scum, by all means, vote for him. If you cannot justify scum behaviour in his posting, vote for someone else, preferably zebezt cause he is scum. This post is another one that bothers me, You just finished saying Laguerta is not scum, you just finished saying if you have a scum read PUSH for them hard. Saying "go ahead and vote for Laguerta but I KNOW Zebezt is scum" makes no sense! You don't care who gets lynched. You softly imply you know Zebezt's alignment again... this is the third time you've done this. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 12:58 Oatsmaster wrote: Constant vote jumping? Voting 3 players in a 15 hour span is called constant vote jumping. Right. I am reasonably sure because Zebezt has scum motivation for posting how he does. I voted laguerta cause lying is bad, but upon reading his filter, I feel that he is newbie town/null. Why does it matter how many people you voted for in a 15 hour time span? It matters how many people you have voted for over all... I don't care if you've only voted for 3 people in 15 hours. You have voted for 5 players during D1. Without a good reason on any of them. Without explaining why you were suddenly switching. I looked over the votes and who they were on for nearly the entire last 20 minutes and noticed that 4 of your 5 votes were on the "easiest" targets. Players who all had the potential to be lynched if people started to make cases on them. Most people voted for at least two of them. You hit all of them. This is not town oriented play. This is scum looking to hide in the crowd. Warning: Confirmation bias / Association case. + Show Spoiler + This is where I started to lose my mind so close to the deadline and noticed something I wish I hadn't. It is the sole reason I hadn't been able to get my case out on time. Oats defends Sn0, Sn0 and Oats attacked mocsta, Zebezt voted for Sn0, Oats finds Zebezt scummy for reasons that he is active but not contributing a whole lot. Plus he set his vote to lynch Zebezt up earlier when Zebezt made a comment about Sn0 being the scummiest player. Oats asks Sn0 a REALLY odd question with + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 12:38 Oatsmaster wrote: Mocsta, you are confirmation biased. I dont think Sno is scummy for attacking you, it created conversation which was a good thing and I had similar concerns as him. How stupid is it as scum to vote you? Sno-man, why are you voting Mocsta? Is it because you dont like him? Or because he is scum? Does this indicate Oats believes Mocsta is still scum? Is he leading Sn0 to be able to leave that option open to him? + Show Spoiler + I HIT BACK INSTEAD OF ENTER AND ALMOST DELETED THIS WHOLE THING HOLY SHIT. Also I'm aware that my last paragraph is confirmation biased to hell, an association case, and just all around things you NEVER want to do... but I saw it and I can not unsee | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 15 2013 02:24 Oatsmaster wrote: Nice disguising the OMGUS case on me Omni. Ok, so your problem is that I seem sure with my cases, How do you present your cases? Ummm like this + Show Spoiler + On January 15 2013 02:00 OmniEulogy wrote: Final Vote Count! Mandalor (3) - Trotske, glurio, Mocsta, Mocsta, Oatsmaster Laguerta (2) - Mandalor, Shz, Mocsta, Zarepath, Oatsmaster, OmniEulogy, glurio zebezt (2) - Acid~, Oatsmaster Oatsmaster (2) - zarepath, OmniEuology, Mocsta Sn0_Man (1) - Zebezt, Trotske, Mocsta Mocsta (1) - Sn0_Man, Oatsmaster bringaniga (0) - shz, Oatsmaster, Mandalor, Laguerta shz (0) - OmniEulogy Acid~ (0) - Zarepath, OmniEulogy No-Lynch (1) - Laguerta My case on OatsMaster. I was trying to write this up with 20 minutes left during D1, couldn't find the right words / was too pressured and feel like I left it unfinished. I want to explain why I voted for him, my thoughts behind it and why I believe it still makes sense after this lynch. I'll start off at the very beginning, his strange approach to the start of the game. + Show Spoiler + On 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: 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. Instead of answering any of the questions, he deflects them and then becomes defensive, saying "2. I really dont want to answer that. Because I dont think my answer will help town in any way." after being asked about it again. He still refuses to discuss how scum would possibly go about playing this game. I highly doubt it's because he thinks they will use his idea's. I believe it is because he doesn't want us to know how he is going to play scum. This is speculation but should be taken into consideration. Especially considering the massive double standard he sets when accusing Mocsta in the early D1 hours. He attacks Mocsta for asking a question that could potentially be a yes/no question. NOBODY would answer Mocsta's question with a yes/no and get away with it, I don't believe its a town mindset to answer questions like Mocsta's with yes/no answers. Then we have this. + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 19:16 Oatsmaster wrote: Turning around and calling him scum for everything he's posted though without any real facts I really dont know what real facts your need to have before you lynch. A scumslip? You leave both of those open to 1 word answers. Just in case you don't know... Hypocrisy: Noun Do you think that Mocsta would answer those with 1 word? Exactly. Its all about context. That's a hard one... not answering questions and getting so defensive to the point of making a terrible case How was I defensive? I didnt even see the FoS before I posted the case as I mentioned above. Ok Omni, What scum reads do you have? He talks about not having any facts before a D1 lynch which is complete bullshit. As we found out there were many things to take into consideration during our D1 lynch. Next up, asks Mocsta two Yes/No questions. Gets Extremely defensive about doing it and says its about context. Wrong. Mocsta could have just as easily answered yes/no and been asked a ton of follow up questions, he didn't because it would be a dumb thing to do, just like the opening questions which Oats never answered fully. Lastly (and for the 2nd time this game) He asks for somebody elses reads after barely answering any concerns about him and deflecting. He claims scumslip but in reality He's already said "let me tell you why you are scum" to Mocsta. That confidence... with no facts he sure does know what alignment people are. "Also, with your current level of activity, and the way you defended yourself. ##Unvote HOWEVER I really dont like the way you are going around buddying everybody and keep referring to yourself as an excellent town player. " He backs off Mocsta as he realizes that nobody else is getting on this train and he's running out of fuel to throw at him, I don't recall Mocsta ever claiming himself to be an excellent town player either. His next post is this one + Show Spoiler + On January 13 2013 20:49 Oatsmaster wrote: Ok posters with little to no content laguerta Trotske Acid~ glurio Posters that seem to be trolling the shit out of the thread Bringniga ##Vote: bringaniga Its less than 12 hours to lynch and I know that you are active. Please contribute in a manner that will help town Either we lynch them, or lynch an active player. Also, in case you guys didnt read the OP or dont know, its plurality lynch so the person with the most votes at the end of the day will get lynched. THEREFORE there is no need to consolidate to lynch. HOWEVER town should consolidate in order to prevent scum from being able to affect the final vote with a last minute vote switch He goes after somebody I have kept my eye on as a potential for SCUM to try and lynch. Shz has already voted for him out of anger at this point making him an "easy" target. There are many other players who are lurking worse than Bringaniga at this point, AND bringaniga has said repetitively that he will be releasing cases in the future. Everything he has said I could see a very subtle town undertone and his actions make it unlikely for him to be scum. Oats also does exactly what he accused Mocsta of being scum for. He highlights all of the lurkiest players before voting on Bringaniga. Except he doesn't mention anything about them other than that they are lurking. No other insight at all. He starts to go after lurkers with very basic questions that don't probe too deep, accusing Mandalor after he finally becomes active by saying "Manadalor, what makes you different from laguerta and Trotske? As far as I can see you have been about as active as them" The largest difference between Mandalor and them is that he has shared his thoughts and explained exactly why he was not active up to this point. Oats realizes his lynch on Bringaniga is no longer sticking, I've raised my own concerns about him and start to draw attention to players that would vote for him, most people agree he seems town and will not vote for him depending on how he acts for the rest of D1. Oats again switching his targets realizing Bringaniga is no longer a viable option. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 08:21 Oatsmaster wrote: Mandalor, what changed from earlier? You were not even close to active this time of the day yesterday. So, basically apart from trolling, you want to lynch a lurker which gives us 0 information. Umm you want to lynch a lurker too, laguerta.. ##Unvote ##Vote: Mandalor You too [spolier] ##Unvote ##Vote: laguerta Explain your vote. Now. Mandalor has made a few mistakes, explaining his top scum reads as "easy" lynches. but it is true that he always stuck with Laguerta as one of his top reads. Oats uses this regardless to jump to Mandalor, using his position as a lurker for the first half of D1 and poor explanation of his vote as reasons. Again Oats does not wait for the play accused to defend himself first, he votes and then waits for the defense AND gauges the response from everybody else to see if a wagon will form on the target. Zebezt makes some comments against Sn0_man and Oats So far I don't have a scum read on Zebezt, I am leaning slightly towards town. He's already said this is his first game, and I'm quite pleased with the little amount he has brought to the table. Oats attacks him for sheeping Mocsta and for Zebezt pressuring him which is exactly what town is supposed to do, take people they think are suspicious and try to apply pressure. Again Oats becomes overly defensive and lashes out at him. Soft claims he's scum by saying "mafia QT must be taking about it" in regards to Kush being found to be Bringaniga. I know Oats has obs/played many games. The fact that he claims he didn't know what would happen to Bringaniga is unbelievable to me. I believe this is his attempt to soft claim town and I'm not buying it. I believe he is setting up another target (Zebezt) on the off chance Mandalor doesn't work out. We then have On January 14 2013 08:33 Oatsmaster wrote: Mocsta, If I wrote the post Acid wrote, what would you do? A useless post with no point. Mocsta attacked Acid for his post already. Soon after, the Mandalor wagon that looked like it was taking off gets stopped. Nobody else is joining it and other players are starting to look much scummier, players are discussing the lurkers and how suspicious Laguerta is. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 10:10 Oatsmaster wrote: I dont think lynching Mocsta is a good idea today. ##Unvote ##Vote: laguerta Mandalor, you get a pass today but you better start scumhunting. Since that you dont need to defend yourself anymore. The fourth vote during D1. It's starting to look like he doesn't care who gets lynched. He votes for Laguerta because of his no-lynch (I assume, it's never really stated). He begins to back track on Laguerta as I have shown my unwillingness nearly the entire time up to the point where I finally cave when I realize Laguerta has lied about his no-lynch policy. With so little information I find this very incriminating and convince Mocsta on board with it as well. Oats claims scum is always around at the deadline from his past experience. Is this past experience in his game as scum? I've played three games so far and its fairly random if scum will be there during the lynch or not. I've had 1 there in both games, two not there in my 1st game and 1 never there in my 2nd. I think this might be a scum slip, although Zare made a joke about it and its faulty logic, I believe it was a subconscious slip. He then follows up with What?! You just said... scum is always around near the lynch... Do you know their alignment or something? You can pick which players who are around at the time of the lynch are scummy or not? It doesn't make sense. There are so many contradictions. This post is another one that bothers me, You just finished saying Laguerta is not scum, you just finished saying if you have a scum read PUSH for them hard. Saying "go ahead and vote for Laguerta but I KNOW Zebezt is scum" makes no sense! You don't care who gets lynched. You softly imply you know Zebezt's alignment again... this is the third time you've done this. + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 12:58 Oatsmaster wrote: Constant vote jumping? Voting 3 players in a 15 hour span is called constant vote jumping. Right. I am reasonably sure because Zebezt has scum motivation for posting how he does. I voted laguerta cause lying is bad, but upon reading his filter, I feel that he is newbie town/null. Why does it matter how many people you voted for in a 15 hour time span? It matters how many people you have voted for over all... I don't care if you've only voted for 3 people in 15 hours. You have voted for 5 players during D1. Without a good reason on any of them. Without explaining why you were suddenly switching. I looked over the votes and who they were on for nearly the entire last 20 minutes and noticed that 4 of your 5 votes were on the "easiest" targets. Players who all had the potential to be lynched if people started to make cases on them. Most people voted for at least two of them. You hit all of them. This is not town oriented play. This is scum looking to hide in the crowd. Warning: Confirmation bias / Association case. + Show Spoiler + This is where I started to lose my mind so close to the deadline and noticed something I wish I hadn't. It is the sole reason I hadn't been able to get my case out on time. Oats defends Sn0, Sn0 and Oats attacked mocsta, Zebezt voted for Sn0, Oats finds Zebezt scummy for reasons that he is active but not contributing a whole lot. Plus he set his vote to lynch Zebezt up earlier when Zebezt made a comment about Sn0 being the scummiest player. Oats asks Sn0 a REALLY odd question with + Show Spoiler + On January 14 2013 12:38 Oatsmaster wrote: Mocsta, you are confirmation biased. I dont think Sno is scummy for attacking you, it created conversation which was a good thing and I had similar concerns as him. How stupid is it as scum to vote you? Sno-man, why are you voting Mocsta? Is it because you dont like him? Or because he is scum? Does this indicate Oats believes Mocsta is still scum? Is he leading Sn0 to be able to leave that option open to him? + Show Spoiler + I HIT BACK INSTEAD OF ENTER AND ALMOST DELETED THIS WHOLE THING HOLY SHIT. Also I'm aware that my last paragraph is confirmation biased to hell, an association case, and just all around things you NEVER want to do... but I saw it and I can not unsee [/spoiler] If you don't feel like addressing anything seriously though, keep at it. | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 16 2013 05:13 zarepath wrote: I feel better about him as a town read than anybody else but myself, to be honest, save for the fact that he hasn't posted for a while now. Sorry! I blew my power bar with a new heater and had to go buy a new one (and return the heater). I'm catching up now and I'll get right back into things | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
Sorry my computer decided I wouldn't be able to see things through | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On January 23 2013 10:16 Promethelax wrote: I think that was a big tell for you being scum but I'm not sure if you discussed wanting to change with anyone besides me pre-game. I remember him saying it and was operating based on that up till the flip of Oats and his last minute vote change to lynch Manda. I never got to put my case in though imo it was a weak case in the first place though... I think I'm extremely biased when dealing with mocsta lol | ||
| ||
