EPTI even asked us to move on because its obvious we are just two clashing personalities.you vhose to threw this back in my face.
For me. You are basically a vivax. I.e or going on my auto ignore list.
Nomination Mafia - Page 4
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
I even asked us to move on because its obvious we are just two clashing personalities.you vhose to threw this back in my face. For me. You are basically a vivax. I.e or going on my auto ignore list. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
Quote it otherwise learn to read and stop shitting up the thread. As I said you are approaching flaming now and THAT is scum motivated behaviour. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
That is a fair deduction but isn't what was in my head. You are null for me. As for why I don't want to interact with you. Its simple. Your shitting up the thread and whoever in this game is scum have no reason to join the thread. Several have pointed this out and you keep choosing to ignore their advice. So it remains I'm ignoring you and your posts. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 06 2013 23:12 Djodref wrote: ; First of all, I'm going to get a read on Oats from everybody. He's a fairly active player, and I think there is enough in his filter to have a read on him. Then, I hope that some people are going to join me for this random lynch, and I expect them to give some reasoning for joining me on this. I see if they match my own reasons or not to vote Oats (which I'll keep for myself for the moment) and try to start my investigations from there. Djo. You say u have your own reasons for voting oats, yet initiated oats as a candidate by way of RNG. WTF Either u wanted him lynched before u suggested RNG Or U doing it due to RNG U can't have it both ways, which is it | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 06 2013 23:24 Palmar wrote: ##Vote prplhz he scum Hi Palomar. Can u please expand on why? I recognise both alignmnets can break up fights. But I thought the way prplhz went about it was fairly constructive. I.e. I didn't get a scum vibe from it. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
(1) Issues with people overnight
(2) Issue with Mocsta Meta Firstly, in regards to Newbie XXXV (my only completed game as scum); this is my second post in the QT. Hi Darthpunk. Its a bit hard to come up with any gameplans yet, barely anyone is contributing (here or in thread). As mentioned earlier, I would like to infiltrate town and be the scum mastermind  I have had 2 games in a row where town kept saying I was that, but never had the confidence to vote for me; so i think this is a good play. i.e. I was simulating my town meta. Your calling me out for pushing town atmosphere; is something I am known for doing as town (aside from being tunneled). Therefore, those that played with me in Newbie 33/34 know pushing for a solidified town atmosphere is part of my game. I dont think that makes me pro-town, its just a trait of my character. Me and Oats butted heads in Newbie 35 not because I was scum; but because we have different avenues of pursuit. He is a loner by trait, I like to work in teams by trait. What made us kept butt heads together is because he is stubborn, and I was scum trying to flame. As evidenced again from the scum QT Hey DP/Guys.. whcih do you think is the better approach for dealing with Oats... set him up as the easy mislynch; his rational is just way too confirmation biased (I think theres a high chance he will escape the lynch because too many lurkers).. OR.. call him out as a bad townie, identify the mistakse in his play to hoepfully turn my scum read into a town read... I may get good town cred frmo this play as well... as town thats probably what I would do... even though he is a easy mislynch, his conviction seems genuine of a townie. Guess what I have been pointing out to Oats: (in my opinion) flaws in his logic/play - its pretty clear from above thats my town agenda. ========== Off to dissect Yamato case | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
What you wrote was interesting, I dont feel the same way you do about the first post + vote. At the time I interpreted it as a pressure vote, standard Day1 banter. Having said that, it left me null: breaking up fights is not alignment indicative. As for the final post you quoted; im at a cross roads too. I dont like he defended Palmar without reason, it was something I noted (internally) before too. But I dont know you enough to know if the meta argument is valid, aside from that, I dont see much from him to support a vote that could carry to a lynch. ====== Im not supporting a Snarfs lynch with the current post interactions. Yes, I need to see more from Snarfs, Yes, he has done a good job of standing in the middle, and Yes when asked to present info, it was not as analytical as I would have hoped. He is actuallyl asking us to look into the filter, instead of present his "finds". While the last point can be seem as scummy, im actually fixated on Yamato currently (I am about to start building a case / retort to his case on me) - its hard building a case at work | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 09:44 Oatsmaster wrote: ##Unvote ##Vote: Sloosh WTF This better have a damn good explanation. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 09:48 jaybrundage wrote: Oh and plz peoples give me your thoughts on my Djo case. Agreed. For me, its between him/yamato/jiexian. On February 07 2013 09:19 Mocsta wrote: (1) Issues with people overnight
| ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 09:56 Oatsmaster wrote: Chill out guys, I think he is scum. I also agree with Djo, Snarf is waffly as shit. I wanna see more from sloosh though You "think he is scum". Can you expound on that? ( im talking to you the way you talk to me, hoping that way we speak the same language for once) If you find that too vague, what I would say is "You think he is scum" Please identify what you think in his play is based on scum motives? Please identify if you think those motives could have town rationale behind it. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 10:05 Oatsmaster wrote: Dont defend him and shit, Sloosh, have you only played in LVIII Parellel Worlds Liquid City LVII Dwarf Fortress? Im not defending him. Im saying expound on what you find scummy. Your not giving a town read; your giving a scummy read, obviously you have a bunch of tells. I want to know what I am missing. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
Mocsta breakdown on Yamato Case against Mocsta http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=395690¤tpage=17#335 + Show Spoiler + On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: This is from page 1 of Mocsta's filter in LIX, the game he was town. He gives out, in the part I bolded, his rationale in thinking Toad and I might be mafia, but in doing so reveals his own thought process when mafia, that being passive-aggressive is a way to play mafia. Yes, being passive-aggressive is “A” way to play mafia. There are also many other ways. Whats the point of this? You are meant to adapt to the environment at hand. I have given my thought process of how to manipulate staying off the radar; you can do that as town or scum. Your thought process is very lazy Yamato, and the outcome you have specified lacks conviction. In fact the conviction is so NOT present I can not even say you are confirmation biased. On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: This is the first alignment-indicative post Mocsta made in NMM XXXV, the game he was mafia. What do you notice here? I do not see how this is alignment-indicative. If so, I would have been a scum read to everyone in the game. (P.S. I was a town read at that point). And as others stated, the tone is completely different between the two. Hence as above, lazy heuristics (is starting to become a common theme). Try again. On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: He's making the same sort of argument about Oats this game that he did about Sn0 in the other game, that their play isn't "optimal" and they are "helping mafia". It's a fabricated read, in my eyes, and a fabricated contribution to say such things. It doesn't matter how a player is playing versus how you think the ideal town player SHOULD play, it matters if that player is playing in a way you know mafia would play. The argument is completely different. I have said repeatedly, Oats is taking a simplistic view at this game. His motto is “lynch the scummiest player”; which yes, whilst the aim of the game, is not as straight forward as that line. I have pointed out several reasons why that is case. You can read my filter if you have forgotten what they are. And I disagree with your last statement. The game of forum mafia is constantly changing. Meta shifts are constantly occurring. If we know how mafia play and react, and lynch off that; we would never mislynch and the game would be instantly solved. This is obviously not the case. Again, such a blunt statement and lazy heuristics. On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: Those two posts showcase a trait I see in Mafia Mocsta's play, a preoccupation with "contribution" and "lurking" from other players. Aside from the meta similarity here, the mafia trait is that he's doing exactly what he thinks people give out town reads for, and indeed what some of you have given him a town read for this game, simply post. He calls out "lurkers" to appear to contribute and care about the town atmosphere, something I readily see as a common trait in his mafia game and this one. I already addressed this here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=395690¤tpage=19#373 TL;DR The mafia trait he is referring to, is actually me emulating my townie trait. Again argument that doesn’t hold up; its obvious the tone between the two quoted posted is different (as the motives are different). Lazy heuristics once again. That’s 4 strikes in a row. On February 07 2013 03:05 yamato77 wrote: I highly doubt Mocsta is town. Who is his scum read so far? All I see in his filter is a bunch of arguing with Oats, and then arriving at the conclusion that he's town/null/whatever. It doesn't look to me like he's hunting mafia, it looks like to me that he's just trying to look town. Who is my scum read? Yamato, who has been online whilst I was active? Only Oats; who was constantly trying to argue with me, even when I was asking to walk away. Again, your entire case, each point referenced lacks any conviction – which is highly unusual for your meta known for confirmation bias. On top of this, your case is full of lazy heuristics. All points have been disputed (easily) This lack of care is enough to warrant your vote; but lets give benefit of the doubt and examine your town tells on Phagga, and the pressure that made you release the town tells. ============================== (2) Mocsta breakdown on Yamato read on Phagga + Show Spoiler + On February 07 2013 01:59 yamato77 wrote: Translation: I doubt Phagga scumminess, read = null to leaning townI see what Sloosh is saying about Phagga, and I agree on some level that his entrance to the thread has been weak, and relatively quiet so far. There are some things that make me doubt his scumminess, however, so what I need from him is some more meaningful contribution on things that aren't setup. That also goes for VE, who was here early spouting setup info, and then dropped off. On February 07 2013 02:34 yamato77 wrote: OK, that’s fine; giving out town tells early is dangerous so agreed. I'll make my case on Mocsta, then. I won't be giving out my town tells, however. On February 07 2013 03:42 yamato77 wrote: Complete contradiction. The first post @ 02:00 says you doubt his scumminess.I said I agree with the general scumminess of phagga, in that he has some of the things I think mafia might do in his play so far. What I didn't tell you is why I doubt those, and I'm not going to. You've got to do better than equate phagga to Mocsta to prove he's scum. You're making an association case here, which is incredibly scummy this early in day 1. @ 03:42 you now say, some things are mafia oriented. In the same post you back pedal and say you still doubt it. Which is it, town or scum? You’re doing your best to stay in the middle and not commit. The contradictions are clear. You top off this post, by claiming Sl00sh is making association cases, which is clearly not happening (others already called you out on this) On February 07 2013 03:54 yamato77 wrote: I already have my vote on him. I understand what you're saying, though I don't think this is anything like my attack on you in Normal 4. This is an example of alignment: null post (Yamato). So what if your attack is nothing like Normal 4. Each game is different. That statement does not make you town in any way, shape or form. On February 07 2013 04:36 yamato77 wrote: Furthermore, note that if you don't think anyone could get a read on him at this point, I haven't exactly given my certain read on him either. My references to him have been that I think he's overall scummy, but there are things that make me doubt it, and that I want MORE from him to get a better read. I think this was just a misunderstanding. You thought I had a town read I didn't. Fair enough. Note “He’s” refers to phagga and is overall scummy. Noted 2hrs prior the below: On February 07 2013 01:59 yamato77 wrote: Phagga …There are some things that make me doubt his scumminess This does not read as the above: I think he is scummy, but some things make me doubt it. Why the change within 2hrs 30? Perhaps the read of Phagga below will expound on the change in read. On February 07 2013 04:46 yamato77 wrote: While this is, indeed, similar language to Mocsta and my mafia tell on him, the fact that he points out things about Mocsta in general so far makes me think him more town. Why would one mafia player pick at his mate this early in the game? It's a weak tell, like I've said, but it is one nonetheless. This is indeed weak, at least you admit it. How about this: Why would one town player pick at another town player early this game? How about this: Why would a mafia player pick at a town player early this game? Lazy heuristics again, you treat one example to suit your agenda, and do not consider any other options. On February 07 2013 04:46 yamato77 wrote: He reached the same conclusion I did about Prplhz, something I find encouraging for his town alignment. Perhaps this is a little foolhardy, to think someone town for thinking like me, but giving out a quick town read like that is also a towntell to me in general. Check this out (before Phagga posted liking Prplhz) On February 06 2013 23:29 Mocsta wrote: Hi Palomar. Can u please expand on why? I recognise both alignmnets can break up fights. But I thought the way prplhz went about it was fairly constructive. I.e. I didn't get a scum vibe from it. So why is when Phagga does it, you get a town read. When I do the same thing, its not. Your point is moot; and is part of the contradictions Sl00sh noted about you. On February 07 2013 04:46 yamato77 wrote: He calls out Palmar, and gives an accurate analysis of what he's done so far. While I know Palmar can, and will, do this as either mafia or town, the fact that he bothers to notice and point it out is somewhat encouraging. Again, I could be wrong about this as people agreeing with my first impressions aren't always town, but it's enough for me to doubt him being mafia, which is what I've said about him so far. Happy now? Do I need to point out the above post? I am asking Palmar to dictate why he made that choice. I take the same action as Phagga (and before him), yet he is town, I am not. ============================== TL;DR Your scum cases are full of lazy heuristics. Your town tells are full of double standards. You points lack conviction, and cant even be read as confirmation biased. Town has no reason to be sitting on the fence his openly; especially after receiving pressure. Incorporating all these points is clear scum motive to me. ##Vote: Yamato77 | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 10:58 yamato77 wrote: So your scumreads are three of the four people who think you might be mafia? Why do people think you're town again? Who do i think might be mafia. See the post above this one. *hint* ##Vote: Yamato77 | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 11:08 Djodref wrote: Regarding Mocsta I'm also very suspicious of Mocsta. I didn't expect him at all to decline my invitation to join my random lynch on Oats because I was expecting him to have a scum read on Oats. Let's look at these quotes here (they are from before my invitation and him giving a town read on Oats). I really thought that Mocsta had a scum read on Oats from these posts (and other) but then WTF ? I was honestly very surprised. And here is one more post from Mocsta after this one. Seriously, what is the need to antagonize your town reads with this force ? I think Mocsta was painting Oats as scum and didn't want to take the responsibility to led the lynch. Maybe he saw an opportunity when I've pushed my random lynch and declined my invitation. I think he is deliberately antagonizing Oats to shit up the thread and make the game unreadable. So, yeah, I don't like Palmar and Mocsta so far. This post made me laugh out loud. The rational is as weak as Yamato. You expected me to join you on a non-committal opportunity to lynch Oats? Is it not scum who would grasp at this opportunity? That you want to interpret everything this way is disconcerting. You point out posts where Im saying Oats play is indicative of his scum meta; and so what? It is indicative . what I said is a fact/statement. Im not calling him scum, I was responding to his pressure on me. Rather, it was Oats who was calling me scum. Do i actually need to reference the quotes? The game is only 10 pages long, its an easy read to find out. Why dont you read through LIX and show me how Oats post structure as scum is NOT mimicking his structure this game Djodref. I dont even get your post on me being antagonistic? Im trying to walk away from everything. If you think I am the one leading this antagonistic exchange If you think the actions of one the two only present participants at the start of the game are top two scummy; I think you need to re-read the thread Djo. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 11:17 yamato77 wrote: Djo, what do you make of Mocsta's case on me up there? I have a hard time thinking it came from scum but he quite clearly misunderstands quite a lot of stuff. Like what? are you suggesting the heuristics are NOT lazy? Are you suggesting that you have not grasped at straws to make conclusions? Are you suggesting your town tells on Phagga still do not apply to me? | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 11:27 Djodref wrote: Yes, I expected you to join my random lynch. I didn't understand why not at that time and I don't understand it more when I read the thread again. So I'm suspicious of you. What is the point of saying that he is mimicking his scum post structure in this game if you don't think he is scum then ? What is the point of keeping shitting up the thread with him (not saying that you are the only responsible for it) when you have pegged him as town ? Why not take a break and wait for other players to post ? Where did you see that I had Oats as scum ? Well i already spelt it out, RNG is a non-commital lynch. Im not interested in it full stop. Regardless of the proposee. I also made this clear you, when I suggested you were my target from my RNG simulation. At the start of Oats/Mocsta feud, I labelled him a as scummy-ish town player.The point of the post structure comment to inform him, I happen to interpret that structure scummy. I dont see a problem with that. It was not mentioned in a malicious way, and if you think it is, then you are obviously too sensitive when it suits your agenda; as comments he made were much more direct yet you dont take issue with it. I didnt want to keep shitting the thread. I offered to stop when VE stepped in. I offered to stop when it kept going and I could see it being pointless. I offered to stop when others started saying again it was shittign up the thread. Each and everytime he threw it back in my face; and at points even called me scum. Of course I am goign to stand up for myself. Dont give me this shit about taking a break; I did, and as soon as people join into the thread, look at the first thing Oats "DEMANDS" of them. Feedback on the feud, hes the one who cant move on. Your last comment is a misinterpretation: What I wrote was reference to Mocsta/Palmar being scum (one of the two active participants = me out of mocsta/oats) | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 11:22 slOosh wrote: Mocsta, I think the stem of this yamato confusion (and it's something I took a while to pinpoint), is that he views you as scum which in turn influenced his other reads. It can seem hypocritical but really it's just making really strong assumptions. I do think there was clear effort made to understand where I was coming from and that he isn't the best lynch for today. The point you raise is worth discussing, and if Yamato case read with conviction, I would completely agree with you. Herein lies the problem Yamato points for both Phagga and myself do not have conviction. They read lazy and the outcome changes and evolves as pressure is mounted. Insufficient reasoning is given for the change in outcome. Are you honestly telling me, the points yamato made of me, read as if he is truly convinced, and udnertaking extreme confirmation bias? That is the play Yamato is known for, and in my opinion, is not exhibited here. Rather, it is wishy-washy in the middle stances, that he can adapt to either side of town/scum as required. Yamato has not even addressed the points I raised; instead shoeing it off as "I misinterpret him". Look at the difference, I said he is misinterpreting me, I provided rational. Where is his for the counter? My vote is remaining; | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 11:57 Djodref wrote: What if I had picked up yamato ? Would you refuse to join me then ? The fact that I picked Oats randomly only engages me, and if you join my lynch or not engages you. It's only non-committal for me, and I wouldn't even say it's fully non-committal. And it appeared that you had Oats as scum, even if you deny having him as scum, so I really suspect you to have wanted to paint him in red. Anyway, you don't tell people what makes their post scummy, you don't tell them what is a scum tell for you. Town players doesn't do this, they push scum to make the mistake that is going to allow them to nail them. So either you wanted to paint Oats in red (without joining his lynch), either you were trying to coach him the hard way. I don't see the town motivation for doing any of this. Yes I would refuse to join you on RNG yamato, (1) Because I wouldnt join you in a RNG at any point and on any one. and (2) Yamato hadnt entered the game yet. Im not voting for someone I cant get a read on. Right, you seem to be the only person saying I had Oats as scum (aside from Oats). I have said I was defending myself, and guess what, other people commenting on the situation have also said I was defending myself and right to call him out. Your points are weak, and Im starting to think your intentionally shitting up the thread. You are constantly pussy footing about my "reaction to RNG"; why dont you just be a man and make your case. At least Yamato had the stones to attempt a case. & What a load of crap about keeping scum tells to yourself. The whole point of making a case is identifying scum tells and providing reasoning behind the motive to why it is a tell. This comment that we keep scum tells to ourselves has to be the stupidest comment I have read this entire game. Why are you spewing so much bullshit Djo? Are you trying to bury that Jay and me have issues with JX and his sole post? Are you trying to bury my case against Yamato? Perhaps your just trying to bury something else I have not noticed yet... either way, your contributions are still lacking. | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
Yamato thinks I "seriously misinterpreted" his actions in my case. Do you agree with him? | ||
|
Mocsta
Australia9388 Posts
On February 07 2013 12:38 Djodref wrote: Okay, let me explain to you clearly once again, because either you don't understand the case I'm trying to convey, either you are doing this on purpose. Let's imagine that you are town and Oats is scum. You should never tell him, "oh, by the way, you are mimicking your scum post structure" if you don't attack him for this. What if Oats is scum ? He can correct himself without being really called for it. So either your early post concerning Oats were attacks against him that you don't want to take the responsibility for (what I'm thinking and that would be coming from scum Mocsta), either it was some way for you to start a flame war with Oats and make the thread unreadable (also coming from scum Mocsta) or either it is a very poor way of playing town. And I'm not trying to divert anything from anything, my main concerns right now are Palmar and you. Djodref, lets look at the situation holistically. Oats town, Mocsta scum: This is the situation in Newbie 35; and is the meta argument both Oats and Yamato presented. This has been refuted by myself already, in addition to several others who (I assume) are not aware of my meta. It is clear my tone in addressing Oats is not with the intention to flame. This is refuted. Oats scum, Mocsta town This is the situation in Mafia LIX; and I made meta comments to Oats regarding this game. I dont think this scenario applies either. Oats and I minimal had banter in LIX, but it did not manifest itself the way it is this game at all. Oats was a lot more reserved as scum in LIX and at one point ignored my meta case on him all together. Hes not ignoring anything this game. I think this is refuted. Oats scum, Mocsta scum I dont see this as viable. Yes bussing is a viable strategy; but I think the main reason Oats and I continued the feud is because nobody else interjected [enough]. Whether this is due to observers or timezone difference, who knows. It doesnt matter; if anyone thinks me and Oats simulated that "feud" we should get a mafia 2013 award. I think this is refuted. The fact is, me n oats have personal differences in how we approach life in general. Whatever game we are in, we will be polar opposites, and lead to this type of situation. I tried to be the bigger man and walk away, but I was lured in each time. Thats my fault and I do take responsibility for it. But if you think I was not being antagonised to respond, I think your intentionally misreading the thread status quo. Oats town, Mocsta town When you are town, you have nothing to lose and can push your tunneled bias without being intimidated. Sounds pretty much like what Oats and myself did. Oats doesnt like my approach to the game; as I said before, he is more of a loner type player. Guess what, I dont like Oats approach & I actually do believe in fostering a collaborative environment - even though I admit my actions have unfortunately not aided in this occurring. I think holisitically this is the most likely scenario of Oats and myself. The feud between us is due to personal differences, and both of us need to make more of an effort to accept that and not react so hastily. =============== Djo, I think that you have rallied on about these perceptions now for several posts. I am concerned because I think they have been addressed either directly to you (or others). I think you are intentionally over-inflating matters, to keep me in the limelight. Palmer is an easy choice to advocate for lynch; he has 2 or 3 posts which are completely trollish in nature. Your choice on me is easy as well; the feud between oats/myself created a lot of heat, especially as most players chose to talk about it to me, and not oats. The points you raise on me,conveniently have all been raised by others first; you are essentially summarising and producing no new content. You are quickly elevating up my scum list and I am giving serious thought to swap my vote. I want to see your opinions on something different in the thread, than what others have said. =============== @Djodref Considering JX and you have a commonality ( a vote interest on me) What do you make of JX case on me. Do you agree with it? Do you think this is the substantial contribution of a town player? If so, i would like to know what I am missing that you see clearly. | ||
| ||
