|
On February 12 2013 01:38 Sevryn wrote:
yes but your only putting pressure on one lurker. and there is a pretty good chance a townie is scum so if you are going to pressure vote lurkers you should pressure vote all of them so they post and you can get a real read. any pressure vote now however is not going to be very effective because you came out and said it was just for pressure. LAL should not even be seriously considered until closer to the end of day 1 IMO when we will actually lynch the lurkers
You're right, we shouldn't consolidate LAL votes until much closer to the deadline. But what is even the point of putting 1 vote on each lurker? It's not going to make them feel much pressure if there's (at that time) no chance of them actually being lynched.
Anyway, you are right that we shouldn't consolidate now. I didn't think of that -- I'm trying to get work done today and I'm not paying 100% attention to the game right now (I work Mon-Fri 9-5 EST).
##Unvote
Voting nobody for now. Still FoS WaveofShadow.
|
FWIW,
Mocsta's play is a bit like his scum play in XXXV, but maybe it's also his idea of optimal town play (which is why he tried to do it as scum in 35 -- as a ruse). I don't see anything scummy in what Mocsta's done (other than some meta wifom crap based on his play in 35).
I'm not dismissing the scum Mocsta idea, but I think zarepath's case on WaveofShadow is much more concrete at this point. I'm waiting to hear more from WaveofShadow before I consider voting him.
I am also more interested in lynching lurkers (than Mocsta) if WoS makes a non-scummy defense. I do not really count glurio as a lurker -- his last post was very atypical of his scum play in 36 and counts as a real contribution in my book. I also expect he'll continue making decent contributions before D1 is over.
|
On February 12 2013 05:44 Sn0_Man wrote:
@Warbaby care to clarify what part of Glurio's post is particularly townie compared to last game? I fully expect that, were he to roll scum again, he would up his game at least a bit with respect to looking more townie as scum. So one kinda OK post isn't gonna clear his name.
I added some notes to the glurio post I was referencing, below. I'm not saying I think glurio is town, I'm just saying his contribution was less scummy than those in the last game (when he was scum).
Also WoS's post is a start in the right direction. IMO none of the proposed cases have enough merit to be worth voting scum at this point. And I don't see why we'd want to lynch glurio right now, over someone with actually zero posts.
+ Show Spoiler [glurio's post + notes] +On February 11 2013 23:33 glurio wrote:Posting a shitload of fluff, useless RNG and grammatics discussion isn't pro-town behaviour Mocsta. Then hopping on the easy lynch wagon after warbaby made those terrible posts? [glurio tended not to be so aggressive, and point out poor town play in others, when he was scum. instead he tried to frame others as scum and hop on bandwagons]Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:55 Mocsta wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 11 2013 09:43 warbaby wrote:- Please do not lurk. People are busy and may have limited availability, but we should all expect a basic level of contribution from each other. Lynching lurkers (when appropriate) is fine by me.
- Post succinctly. Try to be up to date on what's going on in the thread before you post, and try to consolidate your posts.
- Don't be a jerk for no reason; try not to use personal insults and inflammatory language. Avoid OMGUS if possible.
Agreed, no lurky lurk. When appropriate is very loose wording, setting you up to change your agenda as you see fit. My thoughts are: Im going to lynch my best scum read. If scum reads are ambiguous and cases are grasping at straws, I will RNG out of the pool of lurkers (no pun on RNG intended,m ore so how do you chose between 3 or 4 ppl with 1 post) Post consolidation definitely important. No need to hear every thought. But this is no excuse for lurking either. + Show Spoiler +
Will try my best. But do I really have to tolerate idiotic play. But yes. OMGUS is terrible and often scum motivation.
Theres a difference between OMGUS and making a well-reasoned counter-case.
Let's start with that and don't post endlessly. While i agree with everyone that warbabys posts have been really horrible he basically did everything he shouldn't do (soft-blue claim, getting overly emotional, giving up, citing countless times hes town), i think we should really step back and take a look at the whole picture. [i don't remember glurio scum saying sensible stuff like this] I think he would be much more cautious with his posts if he actually was scum. I'd like everyone to look at mocstas filter. Does he do anything to seriously scumhunt? He asks questions in every direction, has people on his "watch" but this is the same as NMM XXXV, where he was infact the mafia gf. He picks the easiest target and highlights everything everyone already read. Sn0 didn't add anything useful with his arguably limited posting time, only talk about RNG and english grammatics. Useless but i'm sure he'll pick it up. [these last few paragraphs are a bit more like scum glurio, where he just throws around accusations and waits to see what sticks]
|
On February 12 2013 07:21 Sn0_Man wrote:
@Warbaby: Lynching a 0-poster is functionally a no-lynch (unless they get replaced, which I suppose is what happens in newb games). I'm happy with asking 0-posters to post, but people who demonstrate presence and ability to post and fail to demonstrate willingness to contribute are worth less to town than possible useful replacements.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. I've even thought the same thing myself before, I was just distracted when I posted earlier and didn't think first. Lynching the lowest post count player definitely makes more sense than a zero-post player, in absence of any convincing scum cases.
|
That's a fair point Sn0_man. So who are the lurkiest players still?
Sylencia - Currently at work? promises to post more, posts appear reasonable, but not really moving discussion forward so far.
Mandalor - Few decent posts, nothing really interesting here, yet. Please do "put a finger" on scummy Mocsta, if you can. I can't without relying on meta wifom. Hope you have more time later to post more.
Zarepath - More decent posts, seems legitimately busy but puts effort into reading the thread and making a sensible case. Really not lurking, especially if he continues his current pace for the next 24h. Hardly lurkier than glurio.
Macheji - 0 posts, 24 hours in
I don't think we can accuse anyone else of lurking at this point? I'm actually still busy with work (overtime yay) so I may not be posting a whole bunch tonight.
|
Oh and obviously 9-bit, another zero-poster.
|
Mocsta, I've already commented on the noises people are making about your play. I don't think they make enough sense to call you scummy, yet.
Me vs WaveofShadow is a false dichotomy, Mocsta. What about sylencia? He could easily be a scum trying to blend in.
I can't seriously vote WaveofShadow when there are other people who have made very small contributions. I'm not commenting on the case against me any more at this point, except to maintain that I think it's fairly ridiculous.
|
Also Mocsta, I don't think geript is using a chainsaw defense for me, I think he's just trying to make a case against you. Your association here is pretty shaky, although not entirely unfounded.
|
You asked me a question, so I answered you. My stance on you is null, so of course I have the ability to change my stance later. That's not a back door, that's called making up my mind when I have sufficient evidence.
The way you're analyzing my response is... bizarre. You need to chill out and think rationally, not come up with the most tenuous of associations and strained explanations for motivations when people do simple things like answer your questions directly.
If you want my general opinion on geript, well it's only like 24h into the game. So far his contributions aren't stellar, but neither are anybody else's (including yourself). I'm certainly not going to claim he's scum based on the available evidence this early in the game (like you seem so eager to do, to anybody, which could be a bit scummy).
I think voting Sylencia makes more sense right now than anybody else.
|
Reasons I think sylencia is "scummy": his posts are minimal and blendy. But he has more than zero posts, so it could be possible to say we're lynching him as a lurker. There is still 50% of D1 left, so I want to see what more he posts. Sevryn and (less so) Mandalor are in the same category right now, IMO.
All these accusations of active players being scum around aren't completely bad, but none of them are really making sense to me right now in D1.
|
Sn0_man, it's D1 and I have no real idea who the scum are. So no, I don't have strong opinions right now, and I'm feeling very noncommittal towards lynching active players that aren't making egregious scumslips (which IMO is all of the currently active players).
The problem with Sylencia is similar to zarepath's case against WoS. Sylencia's not putting a lot of effort into moving discussion forward. WoS seems to be addressing this, but so far sylencia isn't (sevryn is pretty bad in this regard as well).
|
On February 12 2013 11:32 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 11:01 warbaby wrote:
I think voting Sylencia makes more sense right now than anybody else.
You've signed your death note. ##Vote: WarbabyEver since the pressure has died down on you (almost a day ago), you have slunken away to the shadows and not contributed to the scum hunt. Now you want to lynch Sylencia because he's doing what 5-6 other players are doing? It makes no sense. Right now, we are talking about Geript and you. Don't give us this shit that we should stop talking about it. The only way you can save yourself now is to tell us why we should lynch Geript and not you. 22 hours. GL HF.
You think I'm scum because I want to lynch the worst lurkers (sylencia, sevryn)? So you think LAL is a scum tell? Sorry I don't follow. I'll look at geript's filter and get back to you, but I'm still not comfortable lynching active players unless they do something seriously scummy.
|
On February 12 2013 11:32 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 11:01 warbaby wrote:
I think voting Sylencia makes more sense right now than anybody else.
You've signed your death note. ##Vote: WarbabyEver since the pressure has died down on you (almost a day ago), you have slunken away to the shadows and not contributed to the scum hunt. Now you want to lynch Sylencia because he's doing what 5-6 other players are doing? It makes no sense. Right now, we are talking about Geript and you. Don't give us this shit that we should stop talking about it. The only way you can save yourself now is to tell us why we should lynch Geript and not you. 22 hours. GL HF.
You think I'm scum because I want to lynch the worst lurkers (sylencia, sevryn)? So you think LAL is a scum tell? Sorry I don't follow. I'll look at geript's filter and get back to you, but I'm still not comfortable lynching active players unless they do something seriously scummy.
|
Ebwop sorry for the double post. Trying to post mobile. I meant to post:
Ebwop: I'm not OK lynching active players D1 if there are lurkers with 2 or 3 posts, which there still are.
|
9bit and macheji have 0 posts and will be replaced. No point lynching them
|
On February 12 2013 11:40 Mocsta wrote:
"he has only been here 24hrs, so i dont have an opinion" - yet he wants to hunt Sylencia?!?!?
*back to active lurking*
a) I literally didn't say "I don't have an opinion", I said "I don't have strong opinions right now". [b]Why are you lying about what I said, Mocsta? And you are [b]lying, the proof is right here, just click the link 
b) I don't have a strong opinion that someone who is a currently active poster is scum, enough to want to lynch them D1. It's that simple. Someone with 2 or 3 crappy posts is scummier to me than the current active posters. Except maybe you, because you lie.
|
No, they are not the same. I am forming opinions, which will later become strong opinions as the game develops. You read my post, and then claimed I said something different. Therefore you lied about what I said.
I'm only saying you lied, not that you're scum. I think you're probably just impulsive, you simply have confirmation bias for me, so you twisted my words in your own mind, which isn't necessarily scummy (potentially just suboptimal town play).
|
OK Mocsta, that's fair.
Sevryn is back, rejoice! Hopefully he makes some decent posts and helps to narrow down the legitimate lurker pressure to sylencia.
I'm really tired after a long day of work. I'll review the thread and post my opinions on whether I think any of the active players really seem scummy to me, but I still maintain that if there are lurkers to lynch, we would be safer lynching a lurker than an active player on D1.
|
EBWOP: I'm really tired, so after that I'm gonna try to go to bed.
|
On February 12 2013 12:52 cDgCorazon wrote:
Warbaby, ever since I've made the original case against you, you have done nothing to refute my arguments, and have continued most of the behaviors I called you out for (except for playing the victim from XXXVI).
When Mocsta pressures you, you ask him to drop it and stop pressuring you.
When the request is granted, you drop out of sight trying to hide behind pressuring others.
You sheep onto every single idea that more than one person agrees with.
You randomly decide that we should vote Sylencia instead of the 5-6 other people who are exhibiting the same behavior without justifying why we need to vote out Sylencia in particular.
You're playing without a purpose. You're not interested in who we lynch, as long as it isn't you. You're trying to keep the attention off of you and hide in the shadows while we sit around and mull who to lynch. You haven't contributed anything ORIGINAL to this town, and it's not looking good for you now.
When did I ever ask Mocsta to stop pressuring me? I've suggested he could post less because he's spamming the thread, but I've never once suggested what the content of his posts should be. I can't address your other criticisms because they're bullshit, and I don't know how to logically explain this, because I don't speak bullshit-ese. I explained multiple times, in the pre-game, that I would be more IRL busy this game, and not posting every 20 minutes 18 hours a day like I did last game.
My justification for pressuring sylencia is because his contributions are very minimal, which classes him as a lurker. How many times do I have to tell you I don't want to lynch an active player D1 (barring major scumslips, which there have been none of) when there are still lurkers around?
Anyway, I'll review the thread and see if I find anything scummy (other than lurkers) that hasn't been brought up yet. Either way I'm going to bed after that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
