|
Well, I reviewed stuff, and I keep ending up typing up cases on why geript really doesn't look that scummy (he's consistent in his play, seems to be interested in keeping the discussion going instead of finding out who the most likely bandwagon is), or sn0_man doesn't look that scummy (he doesn't have a ton of posts, but they're fairly constructive when he's not being wrong about spelling xD), or Mocsta doesn't look that scummy (he's does seem to be honestly interested in scumhunting, and he's not trying to control town any more).
Sorry, but I just don't see how I can make a convincing, new case that anybody is scum right now, except the idea that a low-post lurker could be a scum (it's fairly common in newbie games). I'll try again tomorrow morning when I'm not so worn out from work. Hopefully the low-post-count lurkers will have posted some more by then, too.
On February 12 2013 13:03 Sylencia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 12:23 warbaby wrote:
Someone with 2 or 3 crappy posts is scummier to me than the current active posters. You can't seriously say that considering the posts I made were targetting you. You don't have an objective view when it comes to things regarding you and your attitude towards anyone who accuses you of anything is the worst. I'm not going to argue against the quantity of posts or my lack of discussion so far but your attitude is pissing me off.
Er, I don't recall saying you attacked me. I just said your posts so far were fairly minimal (maybe crappy wasn't a nice way to put it).
|
On February 12 2013 13:12 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 13:03 Sylencia wrote:On February 12 2013 12:23 warbaby wrote:
Someone with 2 or 3 crappy posts is scummier to me than the current active posters. You can't seriously say that considering the posts I made were targetting you. You don't have an objective view when it comes to things regarding you and your attitude towards anyone who accuses you of anything is the worst. I'm not going to argue against the quantity of posts or my lack of discussion so far but your attitude is pissing me off. Wait....what? Did I miss something? Uh...welcome back Sylencia but wtf did that come from? When did he ever say you were targeting him?? Boy oh boy here I thought you posting might remove your aura of scumminess...
Yeah, my thoughts exactly 
|
On February 12 2013 13:17 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 12:58 warbaby wrote:
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.
Oh really? 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?
Asking him to chill out in general is not asking him to stop attacking me. You're wrong, sorry.
On February 12 2013 13:17 cDgCorazon wrote:Anyways... Show nested quote +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.
First of all, don't say my arguments are BS. They aren't. The problem is that you've only been active before you were attacked by me and Mocsta. After that, here's what you did: Made a sarcastic comment to Mocsta Agreed to LAL and voted for 9-Bit (when there are other lurkers out too) Zare make a case on WoS: "Hey Zare, that's a good case, FoS!" Repeated your same argument on Gloria Made a list of lurkers (again) Said we should vote out Sylencia for lurking That amounts to a grand total of zero scum hunting and no original contributions to town. No one is expecting a post every 20 minutes, but we are expecting a higher quality of posts than yours right now. Show nested quote +
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?
You literally could replace Sylencia's name with the names of 5 other people. I've hammered this point to death but you've said nothing about what makes him different from the other lurkers.
No, you could replace his name with sevryn (although sevryn is now starting to post now). Not 5 other players. I've pointed out that there were 2 lurkers several times. Again, you are unfortunately factually incorrect.
Please, give me your opinion on Geript. Tell me why you think he is town/scum/null.[/QUOTE]
I just did, and I'm tired and need to sleep. Right now I think geript's contributions are about as helpful as sn0_man's, and definitely not OMGSCUM LYNCH HIM D1 material.
|
On February 12 2013 13:20 cDgCorazon wrote:
EBWOP: Scratch the "give opinion on Geript" part.
Sorry, missed that before I responded. I will take a closer look tomorrow morning and will let you know if I come up with anything interesting.
|
Corazon, why would you lynch 9-bit as a lurker if he has 0 posts? He's just going to be replaced. Same for Macheji. This has already been discussed multiple times in the thread, did you miss it?
Why is pressuring sylvencia dumb? He made very minimal posts, so he's a lurker currently (more so than Mandalor and Glurio). Is lynching lurkers dumb? I don't follow you.
|
On February 13 2013 00:36 zarepath wrote:
My first instinct is to lynch Sevryn because I irrationally read anyone who avoid using capital letters as scum.
I'd rather go after sylencia right now, as an LAL target. I don't understand sevryn's case on glurio at all, but at least he made one. Sylencia has contributed less than sevryn at this point. He's the lurkiest player, that has more than zero posts, right?
Also, Zarepath, did you miss the part of the thread when I repeatedly pointed out that everybody's scum cases were pretty weak, due to the minimal evidence on D1? That included your case on WoS. You imply I was all about your case on WoS, but I never voted him, and I lost interest in the case after WoS made a rational response and didn't just freak out (or lurk harder). I think you misread my intentions.
|
On February 13 2013 01:28 zarepath wrote:
Fair enough. So WoS's defense persuaded you that he wasn't someone worth lynching, then?
Yes, although I was not terribly persuaded either way at any point. You put effort into a case, so I'll admit I did get a bit excited about it.
I'm going to take a much, much closer look after D1 is over and we have some real voting patterns to look at. At this point, all the players but one are either active or have 0 posts. I think there's a good chance one (or more) of the active players is scum. But I have no good idea who, yet.
|
I just read sylencia's filter again for the nth time, and it's still pretty short and unimpressive. He's completely wrong that I claimed blue (I didn't claim a role at all, just that my alignment is town). I think others understand this now, but he's not even responding, or trying to follow up against me. Reminds me a bit of scums slayalot and (less so) glurio in my last game.
Mandalor and sevryn still have somewhat minimal contributions, but they seem to be trying to move the discussion forward to some degree.
##Vote: Sylencia
Because I think he's lurking (harder than anybody else), and the posts he did make aren't really helpful to town. I'm not saying "omg sylencia is 100% scum", just that he's the prime LAL candidate right now, in my eyes.
And no, someone with zero posts (9-bit and macheji) on D1 is not an LAL candidate, IMO.
|
To clarify a bit: I differentiate between 0 posts (not playing) and a few unhelpful posts (lurking). I want to see any zero-post players be replaced, so we can analyze the play of someone who is actually playing the game. Apparently others don't agree with this, but that's OK by me (I'm not going to try to evangelize my concept of Lynch all Lurkers over someone else's).
|
OK, Sn0_man.
Mandalor doing towny things like voting a lurker (and pretty clearly not trying to start a bandwagon, he admits he's pressuring a lurker):
+ Show Spoiler +On February 12 2013 08:48 Mandalor wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2013 08:24 Sn0_Man wrote:Mandalor, after a quick review of the filter, is another low content, sheeptacular poster. "GOTTA PRESSURE LURKERS" -> safe vote on basically nobody (9-bit). Then a fairly safe sheepy FoS with a very weak "addition" to the case on him. Actually, I think mandalor's voting/posting was quite a bit townier the game we mislynched him day 1... @mandalor you can feel free to invalidate this post. Even a "nuh-uh" post would at least indicate that you are around  My vote on 9-Bit is not a "safe vote". It's a pressure vote. We have more than 24 hours to go - most people change their vote tons of times during such a long time period. Honestly, I'm having trouble making good cases right now. I looked at glurio, but he was already mentioned. Sylencia is kind of in the same boat. I would LOVE to make a case on Mocsta, but while he always feels scummy to me, I just can't put a finger on it (and I was wrong about him in two of his past games where he was an all new category - "annoying town"). That's gonna have to be it for now. I'm off to bed - hopefully you guys give me some stuff to analyse tomorrow.
And uh, sylencia's entire filter is basically unhelpful to town. He tunnels me a bit (with factual errors), says he won't post a lot, tries to say people shouldn't vote unless they're really serious about it. None of this is really good for town (although I'm not discouraging people from attacking me, I'm just saying sylencia hasn't contributed anything that other people weren't already pointing out).
Like I said, I'm not calling sylencia out as "omg 100% scum lynch him nao" I just want to pressure him with an LAL vote. If he responds bizarrely, I might be able to make a better case against him.
|
That's a fair point, Sn0_man. There is still time for lurkers to post more, so we can re-evaluate our opinions on them. But I do feel like Mandalor (and sevryn) showed a bit more effort in their posts than Sylencia, so far. Maybe it's just a gut feeling.
I definitely will pay more attention to the active posters later, especially their actions during the critical late-day period. But currently I'm still more interested in the lurkers.
|
On February 13 2013 03:49 cDgCorazon wrote:
@Warbaby
Who is playing more similarly to when they were scum: Sylencia or Glurio?
It's hard to call. Probably sylencia -- his first 24-48 hours of XXXIV (as scum) seem pretty similar to his behavior so far in this game. I see what you're saying about glurio, I'll keep it in mind.
|
On February 13 2013 06:21 glurio wrote:
Well warbaby soft-blue claimed, so i don't think we can or should lynch him today.
He obviously made some terrible posts at the beginning of the day, but he did so last game too, also he soft-blue claimed last game to and turned out to be the doc.
Hes also very active so if he's scum he'll actually slip up sooner or later.
I'd prefer lynching one of the lurkier players, sevryn, syl or mandalor right now.
Can you quote the post where I soft blue claimed? All I recall is hard claiming town alignment, and refusing to role claim (which is not a soft claim).
|
OK I see what you mean, thanks for explaining. That wasn't my intention but I'm not gonna argue the point more.
I'm done with work for the day, so I'll catch up with the thread and will be around for the next couple hours
|
I explained why I won't role claim, but why I'm happy to alignment claim. Scum does not know my role yet. If I'm VT, then scum can skip lynching me tonight, which gives them a higher chance of hitting a blue. Claiming blue now would be insane because it would guarantee my lynch tonight. How do you not understand this?
Honestly it almost seems like you're scum, and trying to trick me into claiming my role instead of just my alignment.
Because I assume you do understand the difference between a role and an alignment.
|
On February 13 2013 06:06 zarepath wrote:
Okay, the vote is in just four hours, yes?
I would really like everyone's opinion on warbaby. We certainly got away from him for a while, and he seemed less emotional, but I think we should all look at his filter again (I will be doing it, too), and decide if the second half of Day 1 changes how you see him for the first half of Day 1.
I would especially like to hear from 9-Bit, Mocheji, Sevryn, glurio, [b]warbaby[b/], Mandalor, and Sylencia.
I'll have my final read and vote before lynch time, hopefully early enough so that the last hours aren't insane.
You want my opinion on myself? I think I'm dashing and handsome.
But seriously? I've already responded as much as I care to right now about the case against me. I guess this doesn't satisfy corazon (or others), but my job isn't to satisfy corazon (and others), it's to hunt scum.
My opinion on others hasn't changed a whole lot. I think it's a bit odd glurio would take off for a movie after dinner, when there are 4 hours to lynch, seems a little odd. Is he delaying to see where the bandwagon goes? This makes him seem more like he did in the last game (as scum).
Mandalor's post about sylencia is not exactly breaking news, so I still think he's lurking pretty effectively. No new posts from sylencia or sevryn -- so I'm happy leaving my vote on sylencia for now.
|
On February 13 2013 07:34 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you are VT, you would've said it to avoid being killed.
If you are blue, you would not have tried to look so pro-town that the scum would try to kill you.
What? Scum does not know who is VT and who is blue yet. If I claim VT or blue, scum will gain information. As town (which scum already knows), I will not do anything to give scum information unless it helps town. Anyone claiming their role on D1 is not helping town. It's that simple.
|
On February 13 2013 07:35 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 07:29 warbaby wrote:
I explained why I won't role claim, but why I'm happy to alignment claim. Scum does not know my role yet. If I'm VT, then scum can skip lynching me tonight, which gives them a higher chance of hitting a blue. Claiming blue now would be insane because it would guarantee my lynch tonight. How do you not understand this?
Honestly it almost seems like you're scum, and trying to trick me into claiming my role instead of just my alignment.
Because I assume you do understand the difference between a role and an alignment. BTW, this may be my favourite post to date from WB, except for the soft scum claim on Cora. Reeks of OMGUS.
I'm not OMGUS'ing Cora, I'm trying to explain to him why claiming any sort of role on D1 is a terrible idea.
|
Corazon, since you apparently haven't read my filter, maybe I can help.
+ Show Spoiler [links to posts] +
The point I'm making is that, while I've had to defend myself against silly attacks all game (just like last game), I've stood firm on my opinions about who are the scummiest lurkers, and who I'd be willing to lynch. I've given my thoughts on other people's "cases" against active players, without being inflammatory or derailing discussion. I'm not casting my vote around looking for a bandwagon, I'm evaluating who I think is lurking in a scummy way and voting for them. And my vote is staying where it is unless I or someone else can make a real scum case, or sylencia picks up his contributions.
|
On February 13 2013 08:02 Sylencia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2013 07:29 warbaby wrote:
I explained why I won't role claim, but why I'm happy to alignment claim. I'm back again, and I don't understand how alignment claims ever help. Seeing as how it'd either be town claiming town, or scum/3rd party claiming town. That gets us nowhere.
WaveofShadow claimed town as well:
On February 11 2013 13:04 WaveofShadow wrote:
Yay for active lurking!
I have to agree with Mocsta here, at the very least lurker removal D1 can be a useful strategy, but I can't say I'm in favor of removing those who are performing the bare minimum (read: have actual 'qualitative additions,' as geript put it) when there will be scum actively trying to disrupt our hunting efforts.
If it comes to pass that those who are performing the bare minimum ARE the scum who are detracting from our efforts, then that's another story, but I feel like we should be slightly more certain of this than a regular lurker lynch, and I would also argue that this kind of thing would have to happen after D1.
Once again, making my position very clear: if you are inactive or do not contribute to the hunt D1, then you are my target. Obviously the Day is still young but I expect more from my Town as the day progresses.
Why aren't you getting on his ass about it? Are you capable of making posts that aren't tunneling me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
