EPTAFKing (1) Zarepath
SkaPunk (4) Warbaby, Sn0-man, Slayalot, glurio
Abenson (1) cDgCorazon
SkaPunk is set to be lynched! You have two hours to the deadline and voting is MANDATORY.
Sorry about the formatting, phone posting.
Newbie Mini Mafia XXXVI - Page 9
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Stutters695
2610 Posts
AFKing (1) Zarepath SkaPunk (4) Warbaby, Sn0-man, Slayalot, glurio Abenson (1) cDgCorazon SkaPunk is set to be lynched! You have two hours to the deadline and voting is MANDATORY. Sorry about the formatting, phone posting. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
##Vote: abenson By glurio's metric, we should lynch scum, then scummy lurkers, then lurkers. If SkaPunk's single post was a scum trying to blend in then he's the worst scum ever. My (very weak) read on him is that he's town, but playing with extremely little effort so far. Pressure is apparently not getting a rise from him. Maybe he's not reading the thread, but one would really expect scum to put up some kind of defense when they're 2 hours (is that right?) from being lynched. So I'm going to vote for an actual 100% lurker. I like that Corazon didn't vote for SkaPunk. If Cora was scum, there's a chance he would have just bandwagoned SkaPunk right off the bat. So I'm voting with Cora. The same applies to Zarepath, but Zare's been less active than Cora so I feel it's a bit riskier voting with Zare (in case AFKing suddenly steps up his game). Speaking of pressuring people to get a rise from them, what the heck happened to Acid~? He defended himself from my bullshit aggression, then ignored Zare's question about LAL and peaced out. | ||
|
zarepath
United States1626 Posts
Just saying. | ||
|
Stutters695
2610 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
##Vote: AFKing Zare you do have a point. SkaPunk's still going to be lynched as it is, though. I don't think Cora being unsure about the rules was odd. The rules state "Please wait until this game is over to talk about modkills and bans resulting from this game." but don't mention discussing replacements. Anyway, I won't argue with stutter's request to not discuss this stuff. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
##Vote: SkaPunk Well now that we have been advised that the guy I just voted for isn't playing, I really think that there isn't much choice between the three candidates for lynching. However, posting one random post and then not posting at all is slightly more scummier to me than not posting at all. A scum would be more likely to post and then take advantage of 2 other people not posting to fly under the radar than they would be to not post anything at all. | ||
|
glurio
Germany597 Posts
On January 28 2013 09:20 zarepath wrote: Someone being obviously scummy Day 1 in a newbie game and yet still being scummy is not unheard of; in my last two newbie games, the two most scummy lurkers were scum all along, but we jumped off of them both times because we were sure they couldn't be THAT scummy on purpose. Just saying. Exactly what i thought about. Won't let myself get swayed this time and will stick to Ska. He clearly knew he was in the game, and we gave him enough time to post again. | ||
|
Stutters695
2610 Posts
SkaPunk, the Vanilla Town has been lynched. It is now night one. You have 24 hours. Please send night actions to both Marvellosity and myself. I'm working on what to do with the no-voters. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
Sn0man and SlayAlot didn't waste much time voting for SkaPunk after I did. SlayAlot called me out for over aggression one minute before Sn0man called me out for playing like scum Mocsta and claiming town. Does anybody think these sequences of events are important? | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
On January 28 2013 10:22 warbaby wrote: Sn0man and SlayAlot didn't waste much time voting for SkaPunk after I did. I'd also like to point out that Sn0, SlayAlot, and Glurio all voted after you and cited that they wouldn't be at the deadline. They voted for the person who looked like was going to be lynched. I would like to say that you really did blow things with Sn0 out of proportion. It wasn't tunneling, but you got very aggressive with him just because he disagreed with you. I'm just curious why you decided to argue with him just because he disagreed with you. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
I pressured him because I felt that he was trying to discourage scumhunting (with the statement that scumhunting D1 is "rich"). I'm a little disappointed nobody else commented on this. I don't think he's addressed all of my concerns, but he does at least claim to not be discouraging scumhunting, and backed off trying to frame me as Mocsta in XXXV (for now at least). You're right, that I didn't respond to your posts during my spat with Sn0. I even overlooked them later when we were discussing tunelling at the top of page 8. I felt like you were backing me up, and me just agreeing with you wouldn't really mean anything. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
On January 28 2013 10:59 warbaby wrote: I pressured him because I felt that he was trying to discourage scumhunting (with the statement that scumhunting D1 is "rich"). I'm a little disappointed nobody else commented on this. I don't think he's addressed all of my concerns, but he does at least claim to not be discouraging scumhunting, and backed off trying to frame me as Mocsta in XXXV (for now at least). I wouldn't have a problem with you pressuring him, but the fact that he (Acid~) disagreed with you and then you just went berserk on him over that one point. He said that he felt like being a jerk was ok if it was in the name of scum-hunting and then you went on him for saying that and calling it a "useless post". I don't feel like it was very useless at all. He was giving his opinion on one of your points, trying to create discussion. There was no reason for you to hammer him for it. I think you did a good job of making discussion, but I disagree with your methods. Blasting someone for their opinion is one of things that creates a hostile town environment. You haven't done that yet, but I just feel like you could have gone a different way in pressuring Acid. However, one thing I would like to bring up: On January 26 2013 20:59 Acid~ wrote: Why would you assume I automatically agree with Snoman, especially without knowing either of our alignments? What is curious to me is that he would not automatically assume that scumhunting is a good reason to be a jerk. There are a myriad of reasons why. My two guesses are: He assumed that "being a jerk for no reason" meant "being a jerk at all". OR Freudian scum slip? When you (WB) pushed him on this part of his response (indirectly, I feel like you should have pushed this more, and I wish I would've caught it as well), he replied with: On January 27 2013 01:59 Acid~ wrote: Are you dense or just vomiting words for the sake of it? You couldn't know my position until I mentioned it. If you think it's not valuable to know where people stand on issues, why the fuck would you make your first post specifically about issues? He makes a very emotional defence and personally attacks you (which you did call out). Once again, the question of why isn't scumhunting obviously a good reason to become a jerk come to play. I would like to hear Acid's response to this. | ||
|
glurio
Germany597 Posts
I'd like to summarize the votes: first vote of the game zare votes Afking (lurker) warbaby votes skapunk (oneliner) sn0 also votes skapunk cora votes abenson (lurker) slayalot votes skapunk glurio votes skapunk warbaby unvotes skapunk, votes abenson abenson isnt in the game -> warbaby votes afking cora votes skapunk skapunk dies flips VT With 3 people not voting there is less then ideal information but i think we can get something out of those votes. What strikes me as odd is warbabys voting pattern: first one voting for skapunk, then jumping off to another lurker? Why? And why did you not go back to skapunk after abenson was out? I'll leave you with this question and will go to sleep. Probably gonna sleep long so don't expect me to respond till the evening, good night. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
Basically, I was voting lurkers to try to pressure them into contributing, falling back on the assumption that lynching someone who failed to contribute D1 would't be the worst possible result for town. Since it might not be obvious: It's not my fault abenson was still listed as a player in the OP 41.5 hours into D1. I would have never voted for abenson if I had known he wasn't playing the whole time. | ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
warbaby
United States510 Posts
| ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
I'm still waiting for Acid's response to my long post above. If anyone has something to say, they should bring it up before the deadline (10 hours left). An inactive town is a pathetic one. | ||
| ||
