|
On February 11 2013 23:36 warbaby wrote:
I'm not soft blue claiming, glurio. I'm hard alignment claiming, and reserving a role claim until it actually makes sense to do so.
You understand the difference between alignment and role, right?
I agree that there could be scummy motiviations in the ridiculous case against me, but I can't really pursue this avenue without being accused of OMGUS. [/B[] I encourage you and others to look at this more.
Matey,
Disagree fully with this sentiment.
I am a large advocate of the counter case, and by all means do not classify it OMGUS.
its all about delivery; OMGUS is basically "you voted me, which means YOU ARE SCUM"
counter case is about either:
(1) refuting the case against you with logic and rational thought
AND (sometimes)
(2) developing your own case against the attacker
i.e.
[B]On February 11 2013 09:55 Mocsta wrote: Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:43 warbaby wrote:- Don't be a jerk for no reason; try not to use personal insults and inflammatory language. Avoid OMGUS if possible.
OMGUS is terrible and often scum motivation. Theres a difference between OMGUS and making a well-reasoned counter-case.
|
On February 11 2013 23:41 zarepath wrote:
Yeah, this feels a lot like the last time we mislynched warbaby so far. I'm not saying there's nothing there, but it is very easy to rile this guy up and get confirmation bias. We still have a lot of Day 1 left and a lot of people to consider still, and I think that if warbaby's detractors are satisfied with the evidence in his defense, we should look at some other people and allow warbaby to take a step back himself and make some of his own reads. If by the end of the day, you still think warbaby is the scummiest, go ahead and make a case and vote for him. But let's proactively avoid tunnel visioning here.
zarepath,
I am happy to follow suit with this, I think it is a good idea.
Why limit our selves to warbaby with 38hrs left on the clock.
His filter comments are transparent enough; so may as well start pursuing the next scum read.
Hopefully the USA shift (and remaining non-posters) pick up activity over the next 6-8 hours.
|
On February 11 2013 23:51 warbaby wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 23:46 Mocsta wrote:I think a town player is confident in their role PM and has no need to be this hysterical, derogatory or ad-hominem so early.
This is amusing coming from the guy making a bunch of hysterical wall of text posts, desperate to appear to be scum hunting. I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings, but I call out stupid when I see it. This is confirmed by my meta (and the post-game analysis) in '36.
Dude, i dunno why your harping on about NMM 36.
This is 37, everything is reset.
Stop resting on the laurels of being MVP in one of the shittiest newbie games in TL history *sorry for the harsh tone, but the game was terrible.. that is the truth, i am genuinely sorry if it hurts to hear*
P.S. thanks, I find it interesting you now accuse me of not scum hunting.
It does seem coincidental you make this comment, shortly after glurio said the same thing?
If you feel truly feel this way, I suggest the same thing I did to Glurio, I am here for one hour. If you want to ask me questions, go ahead. I am all ears.
|
On February 12 2013 00:02 zarepath wrote:
Mocsta, since you're here, I have a question for you.
Of the following, how scummy do these people look to you, and can you rank them?
geript, corazon, sn0_man, WaveofShadow, Mandalor, and glurio
Thanks in advance.
Sn0_man;
Wave of Shadow; Glurio; Mandalor
Geript; Corazon;
basically, i want to see more from Sn0_Man the most.
Sn0_Man
Please share your thoughts on the warbaby case; are your for or against.
zarepath, I showed you mine, can you show me yours 
|
On February 12 2013 00:07 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 00:04 warbaby wrote:
I don't have any questions for you, and I'm not accusing you of being scum, yet (when I accuse scums, I use FoS first).
I'm referencing '36 because my play this game mirrors '36, and I'm hoping someone with half a brain will understand my meta: I made useful suggestions on how town can play well, idiots mislynch me for terrible reasons and I try to defend myself while hunting scum. Except this time I'm sick of fending off idiots for the whole game. I'm pretty sure I made myself clear: STOP TALKING ABOUT NMM 36. Your mislynch there does not make you an angel for this game. You're trying too hard to associate yourself with playing town and trying to exploit your mislynch last game to get easy town cred. It don't come easy, buddy...
corazon,
im kinda shocked he's still pushing MVP stuff so hard.
Look we both played scum before, I am not sure if I would stick to my guns so hard under this type of pressure.
Because you have been under the gun Day1 before; do you think you would have stuck to your story like warbaby has?
Im asking because, I can see a townie in general sticking to his story if he truly thought it was an awesome idea (even if it was shit in the end.. e.g my RNG (which I still think is awesome lol))
|
On February 12 2013 00:19 Sn0_Man wrote:
Warbaby looks scummy, but I don't see how you lynch somebody this active day 1.
Im asking for clarification here:
Are you suggesting if warbaby is your strongest scum read, you will not vote him due to activity?
Or am I misinterpreting?
|
I can agree with the second half of that logic (as expressed to zarepath earlier)
We can discuss lynching a lurker vs scum read later in Day1.
KK, lets move on.
corazon, are you happy to move on, and try to get more information from the remaining players?
i think the points you raise are valid, and have yet to see warbaby refute (maybe even acknowledge them); however, focusing on just warbaby for 35hrs may not be the best use of our time.
|
On February 12 2013 00:37 warbaby wrote:
You're giving me a wake-up call? That's rich.
I was just about to unvote... seriously.
To everyone, except warbaby
I am happy to continue scum hunting (and focus on others), but shit like the post above is why my vote will remain on warbaby, until a better alternative arises.
He doesnt get a free pass; its just, there is no value grilling him for 30 hours.
|
On February 12 2013 00:42 Sevryn wrote:
Hey guys Im currently getting caught up on today still have a couple of pages left but want to say I am against RNG lynches with RNG you wont see how someone will try to defend themselves when they get lynched so you get little to no information from the flip. This effectively gives scum a much easier second day if we lynch townies.
I look forward to your contributions on meaningful things.
Maybe because your not up to speed, but RNG is dead.
Heres some prompters for discussions.
I dont know you, but you have a decent post count.
(1) Have you played forum mafia before?
(2) Do you prefer (for lynch) warbaby or WaveofShadow or alternative?
(3) Given a choice D1, between random lurker, or null read ; which would you choose
(4) Given a choice D1, between random lurker, or scum read ; which would you choose
Thank you
|
Guys im going to bed.
zarepath, I am not sure if the start of your post was addressed to me?
If so, I had mandalor as null read; he said a few things but until he follows through its all NON-alignment indicative.
btw, quite a few decent points in that case; I think some are educated assumptions, and others are really contradictory to ideal town play. Will wait and see what wave has to say for himself before proceeding further.
|
On February 12 2013 00:55 warbaby wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 00:52 Mocsta wrote:
are really contradictory to ideal town play No u. Good night and sweet dreams :3
I will stay up for 5 min.
Sorry what does that even mean?
|
On February 12 2013 01:00 warbaby wrote:
I don't think you're helping town by posting like this, Mocsta. I honestly believe your case against me is bad, and I don't like how you're asking other people to tunnel on me. That's not constructive.
We all know you have a problem with me. You don't need to spam up the thread asking other people to confirm your bias.
Look, im not going to enter into these "flame" games with you.
It is now pretty clear you are relying to baiting emotional responses from anyone that does not like the smell of your shit.
Sweet dreams back @ you.
P.S.
My issue is with your play; not you as a person.
[fluff]
I also don't think I am treating you in any way, shape or form as Acid did in NMM XXXVI.
Please don't take it personal, mafia is just a game in the end and should be fun to play.
|
Almost at a desk to write my thoughts.
Sno will answer your syl q then. And update my scum reads
Guys im hesitant to spam walls of text. Do u want me to address geript case points?
I am more than happy to.
|
OK guys
Musing Overnight
(trying out new communication method, I know its still large but I am trying short points to communicate many items….please give me feedback if this works better)
- Warbaby follows status quo
- Geript employs chainsaw defense to protect warbaby
- Glurio follows through
- Lurkers are still an issue
- Waveofshadow effectively concedes
- WoS vs warbaby
- warbaby follows status quo
Warbaby basically follows who ever is giving him direction. Votes a lurker; then swaps to different lurkers etc.
@warbaby: copying others blatantly is not helping you; I want to see some original thought from you, that is not based on the pre-tense of your last game.
You can start by giving me your thoughts on Geript.
- Geript employs chainsaw defense to protect warbaby
- Chainsaw Defense: When person A attacks person B; person C defends person B by attacking credibility/personality of Person A (instead of attacking the argument). It is considered on average to be a major scum tell (as it is the natural inclination of scum to protect their buddies)
On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:
I do think warbaby is town. On points 1 and 2: While this is a newbie game, I don't think that taking his townie claim or referencing 36 as anything other than a null read..
Geript claims warbaby as town; yet says the actions are null at best Wat the?!?!?
He then proceeds to defend his “town” read, by diverting attention to the attacker (Mocsta) upon a foundation of OMGUS, character swipes and poor reasoning. Henceforth, the chainsaw defense criteria is satisfied.
Ask yourself, if you didn’t like warbaby case I see three options of approach
(1) Breakdown the case presented – and present flaws in logic
(2) Query warbaby for more information – to devine his alignment
(3) Attack the attacker
Clearly, (3) is the scummiest action of those three.
##Vote: Geript
- Glurio makes a post asking everyone to look into my filter; but also hints towards grievance with Sn0
- Follows through with Sn0; as of yet, I haven’t had a chance to read it in depth; but from first read, I am confused by the logic deductions.
@Glurio
This game isn’t about making cases for the sake of making cases. I find it odd, you come into the game; call out two people and instead of pressuring them for alignment-indicative information; you outright make a case (and one that is hard to read at best; and poorly written intentionally at worst)
With your track record, I want to treat this as bad townie. Your last town game, you lurked so hard, so with that meta, I am treating this “increase in effort” as a town attempt – for now.
- lurkers are still an issue
-I don’t think guys like 9-bit posts over night. This is a major problem, 24hrs and no post?
-Then guys like Sylencia have still not offered anything other than irrelevant RNG discussion; or summary information.
Sn0_Man wanted my thoughts on scum Sylencia.
Simple: Blendy as… just sits in the middle and says what you want to hear.
-Mandalor is interesting; starts off with lurking pushing. Which to me is NOT alignment indicative. Posts some statistics, which might be good for him to circle-jerk over, but again, doesn’t help town scum hunt; it just gives him purpose to pursue the lynch all lurkers. Pretty selfish play so far. I think there is much better reads out there, but have it on note to check in on him from time to time.
- WaveofShadow effectively concedes
- Guy effectively says, great posts I am going to struggle to refute…
Whats important to me, is that on Day1 (post 24hrs) there are two guys that majorly fucked up. (warbaby and WoS)
The question comes down to: are they both bad townie; are they both bad scum; or is one bad townie, one bad scum.
Look at the approach
warbaby
Does not address case criteria
Incites emotional arguments
Continues to flame people, even when they agree to back off
Just blindly follows others, once the heat is off.
WaveofShadow
Attempts to address case criteria
Blindly follows others (voting lurkers)
Puts some analysis into Glurio post
The key differentiator is that WoS admits the situation outright, and has tried to still contribute (some parts blind following, other parts on his own accord). Im reading WoS as pretty genuine right now; and am willing to put him at this stage as “bad townie”
Warbaby simply has done nothing to establish his innocence all game; My analysis and my gut is still telling me “first time scum”.
+ Show Spoiler [Breakdown of Geript case on Mocsta] +On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:
My concern would moreso be Mocsta.
1. He seems unconcerned as to who to throw towards the vote
While some may read it as him aggressively trying to test the town, I read his posts and various switches and tests as just trying to see where he can gain traction. As well, he jumps on the first person having any real traction.
2. He doesn't even read his own posts
First, he calls Warbaby's generic opening scummy when it's null at best. Next he tacks on his own important notes, and finally he calls Warbaby's initial post null.
3. He has diarrhea of the keyboard #1 – Disagree. My discussions have been transparent, and I have been more than clear about my read and follow up pressure on warbaby. Secondly, I have been actively trying to review information from both sides of the fence to remove confirmation bias. If anything, that is a sign of a guy who “actually cares” about who he votes. #2 – I called warbabys posts null; I am starting to think it is you who is not reading MY posts. On February 11 2013 14:11 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 13:54 warbaby wrote:
My posts so far have either been suggesting ways town can play better (my first post) or helping town keep track of who's posted, and who hasn't. Action: "Suggest ways town can play better" Tell: "Null" Action: "summary list of postings" Tell: "Null"
Think long and hard before responding, if you want to counter and say that those actions are indeed pro-town. Anyone can do those actions; it comes down to whether genuinely trying to create a solid atmosphere; or trying to score easy town cred. That you want to cease discourse when we are finally getting somewhere, is disconcerting to say the least. The ball is in your court on how to proceed. #3 – Nice personal attack there On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:55 Mocsta wrote:
Post consolidation definitely important. No need to hear every thought. But this is no excuse for lurking either. Additionally, he brings ups the post consolidation point which he actively avoids. I haven’t been sharing every thought. People were engaging me for discussion. On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:52 Mocsta wrote:
Did not realise 4 people represented a majority in this game.
Why dont you give others a chance to post their own thoughts instead of trying to forcefully influence them before they have spoken.
Are you trying for a dictatorship here or something? Here he's accusing me, in effect, of running for mayor all while pushing his RNG agenda heavily. No, A mayor is a person who tries to coordinate town efforts. I am implying you think you speak for the town and do not bother to consult them. On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 14:15 Mocsta wrote:\
I thought you said you were going to take a break from posting anyways.... Blames warbaby for coming back to post 2 times after 'taking a break' when Mocsta has posted 8. At best, all this comes off as unintentional bad play. At worst it's an overexcited scum player. I find the latter more believable and either way I feel better about lynching him currently than lynching a lurker.
I have not witnessed one point in your “case” that indicates bad play, let alone scum play.
I finish with how I started.
This post reeks of chainsaw defense to protect warbaby, and is scummy as.
|
Sorry forgot to vote properly
##Unvote
##Vote: Geript
|
On February 12 2013 10:28 warbaby wrote: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. Either you think I'm scum, think I am null, or think I am town. The "scummy, yet" indicates you think I lean towards scum, or at the very least highly suspicious. Hence, again, I see no reason why you are pointing this out as if you are "buddying" me and sticking up for me.
Me vs WaveofShadow is a false dichotomy, Mocsta. What about sylencia? He could easily be a scum trying to blend in. Why is you/wave false dichotomy? Both of you majorly fucked up in my opinion; but took quite different approaches in handling the situation? Are you suggesting there is no dichotomy; if so, my only thought is that you think you have both walked the same path?
As for Sylencia, yes he is blendy as, and... so far his post contribution is alignment null to me. Im not voting for a guy D1 based on that filter. If you want to pressure him, be my guest, but my sights are on Geript currently.
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. I am not against waiting for everyone to input, before making jumping to a conclusion on scum read.
But what you have written reads to me as:
I will not pursue my scum read; as I am choosing to follow-up on a lurker.
Either way, I asked for your opinions on Geript. Are you planning to share?
|
On February 12 2013 10:29 warbaby wrote:
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.
warbaby,
is there a point to this post?
let us summarise
- its not chainsaw defense
- he makes case against you
- your association is shaky (weak)
- you association is not unfounded (link exists)
All I am reading is a conflicting, wishy-washy stance:
either, Geript made a chainsaw or he didnt.
Why are you giving yourself a backdoor to change your stance as required?
|
On February 12 2013 11:18 WaveofShadow wrote:
Note that I'm pressuring you because I want to see something positive come out of you; I'm inclined to agree with Mocsta's analysis of bad town. Stop focusing on defending yourself because you only make yourself look worse.
*Coming out of hibernation*
I said you (WoS) were bad town in my opinion.
That warbaby is continually swapping wagons, and attempts to continually share opinions which are actually "in the middle" and say nothing; reeks to me more of a scum trying to contribute but not knowing how to do it.
If he wanted to be "pro-town" or even just town;
He had a golden opportunity to provide a read on Geript.. instead.. he says
"he didnt chainsaw" - using wishy-washy reasoning
&
"he has only been here 24hrs, so i dont have an opinion" - yet he wants to hunt Sylencia?!?!?
if you think that the actions above are that of a "bad townie", I am willing to here out your reasons
*back to active lurking*
|
On February 12 2013 11:40 geript wrote:All three cases have a problem with me having a town read on Warbaby. So what? The worst thing that I read from him is: Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 21:22 warbaby wrote:If you're upset that I'm giving up this early, I would consider requesting a replacement. Just let me know if you'd prefer to shit all over someone other than me. Which reads to me as, "Don't look at me." In context, I think it's more of a wanting to catch his breath between arguments. If you want to make a case against Warbaby, then do that.
Not sure the point of this? Corazon made the case; and I have re-enforced the case by pressuring warbaby. Not sure if you realise, but cases are not required to point out scummy behaviour. Cases are required to persuade town to VOTE with you.
My question to you is why are you guys so interested in having me waste time talking about a town read rather than actually going back and evaluating who is likely scum? On the chainsaw defense: If you read my post on 24: + Show Spoiler +On February 12 2013 01:11 geript wrote:I do think warbaby is town. On points 1 and 2: While this is a newbie game, I don't think that taking his townie claim or referencing 36 as anything other than a null read. Sorry, but I'm not seeing the point you're making in 4 either. As I read: Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 13:54 warbaby wrote:
Since we've both posted plenty, how about we not post for a while? more as trying to get the town as a whole involved rather than have Mcosta posting incessantly as he has been. While I agree on point 3, that warbaby hasn't really partaken in scum hunting, I don't think that this is a good measure of town v scum 6 hours into D1. To be honest, your case feels more like a gag. My concern would moreso be Mocsta. 1. He seems unconcerned as to who to throw towards the vote While some may read it as him aggressively trying to test the town, I read his posts and various switches and tests as just trying to see where he can gain traction. As well, he jumps on the first person having any real traction. 2. He doesn't even read his own posts First, he calls Warbaby's generic opening scummy when it's null at best. Next he tacks on his own important notes, and finally he calls Warbaby's initial post null. 3. He has diarrhea of the keyboard Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:55 Mocsta wrote:
Post consolidation definitely important. No need to hear every thought. But this is no excuse for lurking either. Additionally, he brings ups the post consolidation point which he actively avoids. Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 09:52 Mocsta wrote:
Did not realise 4 people represented a majority in this game.
Why dont you give others a chance to post their own thoughts instead of trying to forcefully influence them before they have spoken.
Are you trying for a dictatorship here or something? Here he's accusing me, in effect, of running for mayor all while pushing his RNG agenda heavily. Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 14:15 Mocsta wrote:\
I thought you said you were going to take a break from posting anyways.... Blames warbaby for coming back to post 2 times after 'taking a break' when Mocsta has posted 8. At best, all this comes off as unintentional bad play. At worst it's an overexcited scum player. I find the latter more believable and either way I feel better about lynching him currently than lynching a lurker. in light of Cora's post on 21 + Show Spoiler +On February 11 2013 14:46 cDgCorazon wrote:##Vote: WarbabyCongratulations WB, it's been 5 hours and I already think you are scum. I'm going to break this down into a few points: 1. Your "I'm not Mafia rofl" claim.The biggest problem is that you have claimed town within the first 4 hours. You not only claimed town, but you're basically waving a giant sign that says "HEY LOOK EVERYONE, I'M TOWN". The nature of your claim is ridiculous, almost too much. Examples: Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 13:41 warbaby wrote:
So you have a problem with me claiming that I'm being pro-town? You clearly did not read the post-game analysis in '36. Claiming town is not a scummy thing to do.
I'm not trying to trick you into thinking I'm town.
Corazon was town in '36 and so am I, right now, in '37.
You're coming on way too strong with this claim for me to believe it. 2. Continuing to play the victim from the mislynch in NMM 36.Examples: Show nested quote +Warbaby
"Also whatever guys, if you want to vote me for posting good ideas for town that you agree with, go ahead. That's why I got mislynched in '36 and now it's up for nomination as the worst lynch in 2013. I suppose you want to top '36 by mislynching me D1? :D"
"I had to defend myself against these ridiculous claims in '36, until I was finally mislynched for it."
It's another part in trying to associate yourself too hard with being townie. You need to get it through your head that this isn't XXXVI anymore. We're all sorry for the mislynch last game, but you need to come in here and forget about it. It's a whole different game with different players. Stop trying to stay in the past. 3. Your lack of scumhunting.Goes without saying, you've done none of it yet. All the jabs you made at Mocsta have been points that myself and other people have discussed to death already. Bring something new to the table. 4. Trying to change the subject when the pressure is on you.Show nested quote +On February 11 2013 13:54 warbaby wrote:
Since we've both posted plenty, how about we not post for a while? This is the scummiest part. If you are town, you should be trying to prove that your claim is true, and not kill discussion right when it starts to pick up. For these reasons, you are getting my vote for the time being. If you are really town, you should have no trouble proving your innocence.
Then you'll see that I address his points as he presented them. I didn't claim warbaby as town; I stated I think he's town. There's a big difference between the two.
Yes, I understand thinking/claiming is different; but that is not the point. Lets say you “thought” warbaby was town; the method you employed to defend his “honour” was still the scummiest action of the 3 options I presented.
On February 12 2013 09:57 Mocsta wrote:
Ask yourself, if you didn’t like warbaby case I see three options of approach
(1) Breakdown the case presented – and present flaws in logic
(2) Query warbaby for more information – to devine his alignment
(3) Attack the attacker
Clearly, (3) is the scummiest action of those three.
Further to this; scum are the ones constantly proof-checking posts etc; claiming he is town is a pretty stupid scum slip. I don’t want to treat you as stupid; so I choose not to consider this point as a valid counter
Hence, it has not been disputed why this is not a chainsaw defense..
As for attacking you, if you call me saying you have taken a wet watery crap all over your filter attacking you, then I'm guilty. But hey, I'm not the only person who's "attacked" you by commenting on your style.
Wow; this is quite lame logic.
I didn’t realise, others agreeing with you, made the argument reasonable.
http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon
There is a clear contrast behind how I am presenting my reads; and how you are. I am transparent in my thought process; and have been responding to peoples arguments with clearly laid out logic.
You on the other hand, continue to make swipes; do not actually refute the argument; and then rely on the opinion of others as your justification.
And with your wall of text; I still have not seen anything to dispute the chainsaw defense claim.
As for Cora's problem with me throwing jabs, he's wrong. I work best as part of group think being able to bounce ideas off of people. I enjoy figuring out the positioning and the setup far more than the finish; plus it's what I'm good at. If you don't like it, then either deal with it (as you do with Mocsta and his 'style') or vote me off the island.
Is this your plea?
That you are a team player; that you enjoy setup speculation; and that you do not enjoy “the finish”.
If this was a job interview, do you think you would get the job with that?
Let me give you a real-world translation:
I like working in teams because I can focus on the unimportant things I like; and allow others to do the leg work. Further, I get bored easily, and will start to drop in participation and contribution.
Let me give you a forum-mafia translation:
I like blending in by working in teams and focusing on setup speculation. As the game progresses I will feign being a bored player as a reason to explain my drop in contributions.
i.e.
I AM SCUM
On February 12 2013 10:07 Mocsta wrote:
##Vote: Geript
|
On February 12 2013 12:12 warbaby wrote:
You think I'm scum because I want to lynch the worst lurkers (sylencia, sevryn)?
Matey,
please explain why they are the worst-two lurkers.
To me they are all shit.
+ what about guys like 9-bit & macheji; why are you ignoring them in your campaign?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
