|
Alderan, do you think I'm scum?
|
On February 27 2013 07:45 Alderan wrote:I had suspicions on you early, but I those have kind of subsided. I'm certainly not putting you in the confirmed list, more null, but you're asking question I want answered so no reason to push you right now. You were just the only one talking in the thread, and like I said, I'm not completely sold.
Then wat was this about? What is the purpose of this post:
On February 27 2013 07:13 Alderan wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 06:53 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 06:32 Alderan wrote:On February 27 2013 06:29 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 06:16 Alderan wrote:On February 27 2013 06:13 Acrofales wrote:More about double lynch, because I feel like arguing and Alderan clearly doesn't get it: + Show Spoiler +On February 27 2013 05:59 Alderan wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On February 27 2013 05:40 Acrofales wrote:
Okay, you finally answered how you think it is scum-motivated. You're completely wrong, but at least you answered why you think no-voting is scum motivated.
It doesn't decrease time for discussion. In fact, it increases it, we have to wait for the full 48 hours to get a no-lynch.
Doesn't dilute voting either, unless you think when two players flip, you can't learn anything from the fact that people voted for BOTH of them.
It INREASES motivation for duelers to present cases. We CANNOT no-lynch, so the best they can hope for is that "the other one" gets lynched. If people start leaning towards lynching Adam, then Keirathi is suddenly under very little pressure. As long as there's a serious chance he'll get lynched, he is in deep shit and should be convincing us to let him off the hook and JUST lynch Adam. Same goes for vice versa.
Anyway, I'm happy to let this rest, as the discussion has served its purpose: to clarify to me your thought process.
No you're wrong, and you're not even close. Show nested quote +It doesn't decrease time for discussion. In fact, it increases it, we have to wait for the full 48 hours to get a no-lynch. Let's assume it take 40 hours to get to a decision. Then we lynch one, get more information. Then we have a mandatory 24 hour night period. Then we get more information. Then we have a 24 selection period (or if Adam is still alive a 3 minute selection period). Then we have another 48 hours to discuss all new information and assess our situation instead of jumping to that point right now. Except that double-lynching doesn't magically stop the rest of the game from playing out. This whole thing you bring up is only relevant if double-lynching decreases the mislynches we can make. In the *most standard* situation, this is not the case. + Show Spoiler +
Doesn't dilute voting either, unless you think when two players flip, you can't learn anything from the fact that people voted for BOTH of them.
Adding an extra voting category allows scum to hide among all 3. Also why would we add a category that would be so beneficial to scum? We set up a double lynch option and its extremely attractive if they know both are town. Allowing people to not vote one way or another is allowing them to lurk which hurts everyone. By even allowing the option for a double lynch we have dispersed our votes even more, making a coherent mafia that much more effective. You realize it's instant majority, right? Therefore unless it goes up to 6-6, there could be up to 5 players who don't vote without stating any opinion at all in your "ideal" scenario. If it's extremely attractive to vote for a double-lynch, then you should be jumping at the opportunity of giving scum that option, shouldn't you? It'll catch them all out! If they both flip town you just lynch down the list of apathetic double-lynchers for the win! Show nested quote +It INREASES motivation for duelers to present cases. We CANNOT no-lynch, so the best they can hope for is that "the other one" gets lynched. If people start leaning towards lynching Adam, then Keirathi is suddenly under very little pressure. As long as there's a serious chance he'll get lynched, he is in deep shit and should be convincing us to let him off the hook and JUST lynch Adam. Same goes for vice versa. The motivation should be there regardless. If a guaranteed town is not motivated enough to defend themselves they sure as hell don't give a shit about someone else going down with them. Any added benefit it might have does not compensate the option of a double town loss. I'm done talking about it. I'm pretty sure I hate a double lynch in every scenario, but I'll be playing it by ear every round. That said this round a double lynch would be inexcusable. Player X is voting for lynch candidate A: he clearly wants him dead far more than lynch candidate B. Player Y is voting for neither and has stated he thinks both are scum, with a slight preference for lynching candidate B. Which of these two players do you think is more easily swayed into voting for candidate B? I think player Y. Therefore, which of these two players is giving the candidate MORE motivation to be scumhunting and actively proving he's townie? The one that he has a hope of swaying? Or the one who has made up his mind and is just waiting to kill him? Let's get a little different convo going. If I vote double lynch, and we make it happen, and it ends up being 2 town, will you agree to duel Dienosore as soon as the next selection period starts? Why you want that to happen immediately? Isn't one of the reasons you don't want a double-lynch because it will eat up discussion time? Why do you want to throw away another 24 hours of it? Other than that, if Dieno doesn't start pcking up his game I have no problem with him dying, although he's far from my strongest scum read (still Thrawn, and Sylencia promoted to second). I have 0 intention of doing it, wanted to see how you responded. Do you not have any worries the Thrawn thing has been too easy, and if it wasn't for Adam he would have been almost unanimously sent to the duel? No. If he's scum, then both Marv and I were gunning for him correctly. Scum has to be very careful of defending that. That's enough buddying Marv for one day, big dog.
In other news, what do you think of that post by Thrawn?
|
Adam, where are you? Sleepy time is over in Australia.
|
On February 27 2013 10:00 Sylencia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 05:55 Acrofales wrote:
Where did Sylencia disappear to... again? To sleep? I went off at 12am... I don't really understand why there's such a need to announce everything you're doing. In any case, if you're asking that were you going to follow up with a question? It's not like I'm incapable of reading a question you post in advance...
I need to ask you questions in order to prod you into scumhunting now? What, I have to sing you lullabies too?
Your reads so far total:
.
.
.
Yeah, that was about it. You're voting Adam, because he is "least useful to town", not because you think he's scum. You have not mentioned Keirathi at all and you have stated repeatedly your reads will come "tonight", whenever that is supposed to be.
|
Also, lol at the timing on those Ozzie posts. Unless both of you live in Perth, the timing on those posts is uncanny... almost as if you weren't reading the thread and were chumming up in the scumQT until someone mentioned you need to stop lurking and haul ass into the thread.
|
On February 27 2013 10:48 Adam4167 wrote:I will consolidate why I find keriathi scummy, as some people seem to be missing it in my filter. His play is lacking conviction and curiosity. I use this to catch many scum players because it is extremely hard to fake. It is what made my vote on Sandroba so easy in ChronoTrigger mafia, when some of the town seemed undecided. Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 11:01 Keirathi wrote:On February 26 2013 10:52 Oatsmaster wrote:
reads keirathi? No solid reads yet. I'm interested in thrawn, obviously. The town thrawn I know is logical and takes his time to look at all sides of the situation, and I just haven't seen that from him this game. He's just been flying by the seat of his pants (iamp scum, no town, no scum again! Hapa should be a dueler tomorrow!) with little to no reasoning for his "reads". He claims to have no reads, and in the same post, posts about thrawn not playing in line with what he expects from 'town thrawn' - so a read. He doesn't pursue this read with any form of questioning, just leaves it hanging. Then his case on me, and it is a case, he even bolded my name at the top, suggested that I could be acting and how my actions were nefarious. We go back and forth and he ends up arguing that, among other things, I may never have to back up my desire to duel, which is somehow scummy. When this case gets shot down, he starts to back out in a "I never called him scum, don't put words in my mouth" kind of way, which is exactly what I tried in Hero mafia as scum. Since he's gone back to doing nothing. He's produced two reads for the game, neither of which he considers reads, neither of which he calls scum.
This case doesn't convince me of Keirathi's scumminess. Partially because you are reading Keirathi's posts rather differently from the way I read them and partially because some of the things you bring up aren't scumtells.
I do not trust your judgement with regards to Keirathi at the moment, and with Dieno out of the picture for now, that leaves 0 other people you have seriously commented on. You've given brief town reads on some players, but that is about it.
I'm still trying to make up my mind what to do about you. Quite a few people have said that they think that your premature duel could be because you were a triggerhappy townie. Reading your filter again, I can see how they reach that conclusion. However, townies own up to their mistakes. It's clear you realize it was not a good move from a town point of view:
On February 26 2013 21:49 Adam4167 wrote:
LOL YEP, that quote looks quite bad.
I really wish I was scum, it'd make post-game far more bearable.
Yet we have, just half an hour earlier:
On February 26 2013 21:15 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 19:23 Acrofales wrote:
Adam: if you're town, you're a selfish douche who is not playing in town's best interest. I will reevaluate you, but I really feel like policy lynching you for playing like this. I will now fight my instincts, because I don't think policy lyncing idiots is a good idea, but that's the way I feel right now. Well, I am town and you can call me whatever names you please, I give not a shit. I cant even promise that this wont happen again if I survive this cycle. <snip>
Are you maybe a 3rd party?
Regarding Keirathi, I'm waiting for his promised activity before I proceed on him.
|
On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 11:33 Dienosore wrote:Keirathi + Show Spoiler +
Timeline:
- disagrees with Thrawn's stance to just 'let things happen as they will'
- says Thrawn is currently his biggest scumread
- puts suspicion on Adam due to his rogue bravado
- tries to advance our dueling policy
- says he is willing to duel Thrawn
- argues a bit more with Adam about dueling policy
- gets called out by Adam
- general defending
Summary:
As I said earlier, I was completely surprised by Adam snapping on Keir. I've gone through Keir's filter a few times since the duel was called, but I still can't find anything that sticks out as obviously scum motivated. Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile. The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn. It's true his activity has been a little slow, but not so much that I'd see any reason to raise any alarms. Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything.
anyone. Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph: "Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile" "The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn" "Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything." Those things are not suspicious? wtf
What is your conclusion?
|
Thinking about the setup a bit more, I can absolutely imagine the existence of a 3rd party who has to duel X times and survive. While it's a complete deus ex machina for explaining Adam's behaviour, it DOES in fact fit.
|
On February 27 2013 11:57 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 11:50 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play On February 27 2013 11:33 Dienosore wrote:Keirathi + Show Spoiler +
Timeline:
- disagrees with Thrawn's stance to just 'let things happen as they will'
- says Thrawn is currently his biggest scumread
- puts suspicion on Adam due to his rogue bravado
- tries to advance our dueling policy
- says he is willing to duel Thrawn
- argues a bit more with Adam about dueling policy
- gets called out by Adam
- general defending
Summary:
As I said earlier, I was completely surprised by Adam snapping on Keir. I've gone through Keir's filter a few times since the duel was called, but I still can't find anything that sticks out as obviously scum motivated. Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile. The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn. It's true his activity has been a little slow, but not so much that I'd see any reason to raise any alarms. Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything.
anyone. Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph: "Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile" "The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn" "Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything." Those things are not suspicious? wtf What is your conclusion? that dienosore is hella scummy for not being suspicious of obviously scummy keir. keir's actual alignment probably doesn't even factor into it. town dienosore should not be looking at someone who hardcore lurked and only introduced 1 unique point to the thread and seeing them as not scummy.
The main question is: is Dieno capable of making coherent cases? I was looking over PU and it is the worst possible game to try and read back into. It is clear from his filter that Risen, at least, was not convinced by his scumhunting. Nevertheless, his reads when he died were on 3 scum. The 3 completely obvious scums, but scum all the same.
If I recall from CT, his maps were not useful, but he was actively analysing in a coherent manner and not missing obvious shit like Keirathi being virtually AFK. Insofar as I know, Dieno has never rolled scum. It could be as simple as that.
|
On February 27 2013 12:03 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 11:57 Dienosore wrote:On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:
dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play
Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph:
"Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile"
"The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn"
"Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything."
Those things are not suspicious? wtf
They are only suspect because of how boring and mundane they are. It either means he is scum trying to blend in or is just a low impact towny. Right now, because of my read on Adam and the assumption that scum wont duel themselves so early in the game, I'm left with the conclusion that Keir is town. So by your logic, a scum Adam, that was under zero pressure, not in danger of being lynched at all, decides to call a duel on a semi-lurker and put himself up for a lynch as a result? When my alternative, as scum, would have been to sit back and let everyone else go at it and stay out of the limelight. Think about why I am doing this and what my alternatives were. There's only one smart answer and a stack of dumb ones. I've said it a dozen times now.
I'll ask again: are you 3rd party?
|
@Dieno: when I say your maps were not useful, I meant to say they were not useful for other players to make sense of. I can totally understand them being useful to you in scumhunting, and pictures of them *might* help understand your thought process.
|
On February 27 2013 12:20 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 12:18 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 12:03 Adam4167 wrote:On February 27 2013 11:57 Dienosore wrote:On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:
dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play
Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph:
"Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile"
"The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn"
"Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything."
Those things are not suspicious? wtf
They are only suspect because of how boring and mundane they are. It either means he is scum trying to blend in or is just a low impact towny. Right now, because of my read on Adam and the assumption that scum wont duel themselves so early in the game, I'm left with the conclusion that Keir is town. So by your logic, a scum Adam, that was under zero pressure, not in danger of being lynched at all, decides to call a duel on a semi-lurker and put himself up for a lynch as a result? When my alternative, as scum, would have been to sit back and let everyone else go at it and stay out of the limelight. Think about why I am doing this and what my alternatives were. There's only one smart answer and a stack of dumb ones. I've said it a dozen times now. I'll ask again: are you 3rd party? No.
Then why can you not promise you won't pull such a stunt again?
On February 26 2013 21:15 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 26 2013 19:23 Acrofales wrote:
Adam: if you're town, you're a selfish douche who is not playing in town's best interest. I will reevaluate you, but I really feel like policy lynching you for playing like this. I will now fight my instincts, because I don't think policy lyncing idiots is a good idea, but that's the way I feel right now. Well, I am town and you can call me whatever names you please, I give not a shit. I cant even promise that this wont happen again if I survive this cycle. <snip>
You have owned up to it being an anti-town move already. If you know that, why are you not able to promise you won't do it again?
|
On February 27 2013 12:26 thrawn2112 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 12:16 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 11:57 thrawn2112 wrote:On February 27 2013 11:50 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play On February 27 2013 11:33 Dienosore wrote:Keirathi + Show Spoiler +
Timeline:
- disagrees with Thrawn's stance to just 'let things happen as they will'
- says Thrawn is currently his biggest scumread
- puts suspicion on Adam due to his rogue bravado
- tries to advance our dueling policy
- says he is willing to duel Thrawn
- argues a bit more with Adam about dueling policy
- gets called out by Adam
- general defending
Summary:
As I said earlier, I was completely surprised by Adam snapping on Keir. I've gone through Keir's filter a few times since the duel was called, but I still can't find anything that sticks out as obviously scum motivated. Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile. The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn. It's true his activity has been a little slow, but not so much that I'd see any reason to raise any alarms. Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything.
anyone. Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph: "Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile" "The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn" "Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything." Those things are not suspicious? wtf What is your conclusion? that dienosore is hella scummy for not being suspicious of obviously scummy keir. keir's actual alignment probably doesn't even factor into it. town dienosore should not be looking at someone who hardcore lurked and only introduced 1 unique point to the thread and seeing them as not scummy. The main question is: is Dieno capable of making coherent cases? I was looking over PU and it is the worst possible game to try and read back into. It is clear from his filter that Risen, at least, was not convinced by his scumhunting. Nevertheless, his reads when he died were on 3 scum. The 3 completely obvious scums, but scum all the same. If I recall from CT, his maps were not useful, but he was actively analysing in a coherent manner and not missing obvious shit like Keirathi being virtually AFK. Insofar as I know, Dieno has never rolled scum. It could be as simple as that. I don't have a problem with dieno looking at kei/adam and deciding that adam is the scummier one. The problem is when he summarizes keir's play as lurky, safe, etc and doesn't seem to be the least bit suspicious.
That's what I meant too. However, there are players who just do that kinda shit. Bill Murray is the famous example. Oats did it just yesterday on Marv, drawing completely illogical conclusions from a nonsense argument.
You can't catch them on making nonsense arguments about alignment, because they do it as both alignments. The trick is to look at whether they are actually trying to figure stuff out.
What I meant to say is that I am not yet sure Dieno falls into the same category. If he doesn't, it might just be as simple as that he's very new to playing scum and doesn't know how to fabricate fake reads to save his life. If he does, well, then 90% of everybody's case against Dieno falls flat on ints face, because he falls in the obvious lynchbait category and you have to look deeper.
So far I get the impression that Dieno is not putting the same effort into figuring stuff out as in PU or CT, but there is both still time and I haven't fully analysed him yet.
|
On February 27 2013 12:29 Adam4167 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 12:24 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 12:20 Adam4167 wrote:On February 27 2013 12:18 Acrofales wrote:On February 27 2013 12:03 Adam4167 wrote:On February 27 2013 11:57 Dienosore wrote:On February 27 2013 11:45 thrawn2112 wrote:
dienosoe let's walk though that summary of kei's play
Here are your main points about keir, taken from that bottom paragraph:
"Other than a bit of back and forth banter mostly discussing dueling policy, he has kept a relatively low profile"
"The only real aggression shown has been directed towards a scummy looking Thrawn"
"Overall, I'd say he has been playing it overly safe, if anything."
Those things are not suspicious? wtf
They are only suspect because of how boring and mundane they are. It either means he is scum trying to blend in or is just a low impact towny. Right now, because of my read on Adam and the assumption that scum wont duel themselves so early in the game, I'm left with the conclusion that Keir is town. So by your logic, a scum Adam, that was under zero pressure, not in danger of being lynched at all, decides to call a duel on a semi-lurker and put himself up for a lynch as a result? When my alternative, as scum, would have been to sit back and let everyone else go at it and stay out of the limelight. Think about why I am doing this and what my alternatives were. There's only one smart answer and a stack of dumb ones. I've said it a dozen times now. I'll ask again: are you 3rd party? No. Then why can you not promise you won't pull such a stunt again? On February 26 2013 21:15 Adam4167 wrote:On February 26 2013 19:23 Acrofales wrote:
Adam: if you're town, you're a selfish douche who is not playing in town's best interest. I will reevaluate you, but I really feel like policy lynching you for playing like this. I will now fight my instincts, because I don't think policy lyncing idiots is a good idea, but that's the way I feel right now. Well, I am town and you can call me whatever names you please, I give not a shit. I cant even promise that this wont happen again if I survive this cycle. <snip> You have owned up to it being an anti-town move already. If you know that, why are you not able to promise you won't do it again? Because I don't have faith in the 'lets force two other people to duel' policy. Are we really going to go through all this again?
Fine, I'm happy killing you. Now all that's left to figure out is whether I really want to kill Keirathi as well or not.
|
On February 27 2013 12:56 iamperfection wrote:
acro you still up for lynching them both?
i am
Yeah. I just confirmed my desire to kill Adam. Keirathi has not done anything noteworthy in his lunch break.
|
I'm awake and first things first. Lets ask this again:
Syl, if you think Adam and Keir are both town, who do you think is scum?
|
Can we please have a votecount? Can you also please add Vivax and Gonzaw's filters to the OP instead of (or in addition to) a link to pm them?
|
On February 27 2013 15:44 Snarfs wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 15:37 yamato77 wrote:
Have you proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sylencia is mafia? No. Then it's a bad association case.
The guy does fuck all as town. I lost a game as town because of his propensity to lurk and be useless. There's zero indication to me that he's CONFIRMED MAFIA and we should get off the person he wants to vote for.
The only question here is if you're really dumb enough to push this sort of logic or if you're mafia attempting to manipulate the lynch. You're not following me. If I believe that Sylencia is mafia. And I believe that Sylencia wants Adam dead. And I DON'T believe that Sylencia is busing Adam. ----------------------------------------------------- Then I should conclude that Adam is town. Corazon is missing one of these. That's all I'm saying and trying to figure out why.
Okay, this part makes sense. However, you seem here to present it as an argument for voting for Keir:
On February 27 2013 15:10 Snarfs wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2013 14:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
@Snarfs: I literally just said I have a good feeling that they are both town due to my read on Sylencia and his "on the middle of the fence but I'll vote for Adam just cause I need to vote". I'm voting for, in my opinion, is the more useless townie.
I think Sylencia's posts imply Keir has a much higher chance of being scum. (If you think Sylencia is scum).
Which it really really isn't.
Taking unflipped associations into account is a terrible idea, unless you have a bordering-on-certainty scumread on Sylencia. Even then it's possible that all three are scum or that both of Adam and Keir are town/3p. In both these cases any association is meaningless.
However, I am keeping tab of the votes and am not particularly happy about what I'm seeing. People I suspect of being scum are on both sides of the fence. Now neither votes have gone anywhere yet (I believe Adam is leader at 4, but not completely sure), so it's possible they just parked votes to have them there when the time comes.
Regardless, I think we should kill both. I actually really liked Adam's last list. It makes a lot of sense. However, I have never really had a problem with his reads, which is why I asked him if he was 3P. His whole playstyle just makes no sense for town. I am managing to convince myself he's the 3P with wincon I invented to fit his play, but I realize that I have no evidence for this, it's just a gut feeling. What he has promised is that if he's town he will be thoroughly unpredictable and will duel whoever he wants whenever he wants at any point in the future again. I cannot possibly see any advantage to town in that playstyle, it is 100% selfish.
Keirathi came by in his lunch break to promise reads at night. Never showed up. Story of his play this game.
Kill them both with fire. Scum Keir and 3P Adam will burn!
|
Okay, I read through Keir's filter. Here are the three main points I find:
1. He enters the thread with a post that does absolutely nothing beside announce his presence. He is, however, not present, because his next post is > 15 hours later. At the time it got my alarm bells ringing, but unless Keir's scumplay went completely down the shitter since GSL Open, all we can conclude from that is that he made a stupid opening post and then buggered off without ever contributing.
2. His pressure on Thrawn seems quite okay. Then again, Thrawn was pretty easy pickings. What I get from GSL Open is that scum Keirathi makes sensible cases on low-hanging fruits (Risen that game, on D1, in a similar situation to Thrawn here, if I understood what I read correctly). However, he is never around to scumhunt or update his read, so I have no clue whether he is trying to actually figure thrawn out, or just push a target for the sake of pushing.
3. His Adam read is the only really novel thing he has contributed to the thread. This was after Marv and I had both said Adam seemed to be null, leaning town (at the time, don't rip this quote out of context). However, he says that this wasn't a scumread on Adam, just calling him out on something he didn't like and trying to get a discussion going. The main question is: was this just throwing out a test balloon, or was he actively trying to figure out Adam's alignment? We'll never know because the conversation was cut short and Keirathi is too inactive to tell.
As you can see, his inactivity completely prohibits me from drawing any conclusions about what he has done. However, what makes him scum is what he hasn't done.
So far the wishy washy both sides bit where I explain how his inactivity is screwing with my reads. The BEST indicator of scum Keirathi is the inactivity himself. There are 3 players who have played repeatedly with Keir: Iamp, Hapa and Marv.
Keir has played about a billion town games between GSL Open and now. I can imagine it must be really scary to be scum for the first time in ages and playing with 3 players who are very familiar with your playstyle. Intimidated, and maybe short on time, he is simply not posting his reads like he would as a townie.
I will call it the Sandroba defense, because Sandroba did the exact same thing in CT: rather than try to play the game, even when he was at risk of being lynched, he just disappeared out of the game. In that game, I wanted to give Sandroba the benefit of the doubt, because I argued inactivity, in and of itself, is not a scumtell. I was wrong. I learned my mistake. Keirathi signed up for the game, he has played plenty of games to know what is the time commitment required. He is simply not motivated to post. That makes him scum.
Kill it with fire. Kill them both with fire! Vote for the double lynch
|
On February 27 2013 21:26 Oatsmaster wrote:
Acro what do you think about Alderan?
Or you agree with all adam's reads?
I haven't made up my mind about Alderan. There's some things I think are weird in his play, but frankly, there are bigger fish to fry. I clearly don't agree with all of Adam's reads, or even most of them. What I meant with that I liked the list is that it seems a sincere effort to read the players. He brought a new perspective and is sticking his neck out on a number of issues. I don't expect scum to do that, and I definitely don't expect scum-Adam to do that. Doesn't mean I agree with his reads.
The reason Adam is not town is not because his reads are bad, or he is not actively trying to figure out the game. It's because he knows his duel stunt was blatantly anti-town yet threatens to do it again whenever he feels like it. Why would a townie threaten to pull a move he knows is anti-town? He wouldn't. Therefore Adam can't be town. 3P fits the bill perfectly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
