|
On March 09 2013 02:13 nobodywonder wrote:Krafla, did you really expect me to highlight your failings and call you out? I attacked you, one of my initial defenders. You're either a very perceptive townie or just scum. You should use such perception on other reads too then, and join the scum-hunting fun. Thanks for your explanation for your bandwagonning, that wasn't that much pressure on you anyway though. No need for yourself to declare innonence so early while other possible bandwagoners such as Chew haven't explained themselves. I expect you to expect great things - of both town and scum. MLuneth + Show Spoiler +##Vote: nobodywonder
This vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence.
Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? remember MLuneth, you yourself targeted lurkers and that was Arctic Daishi, lurked, and did not switch vote until after basically a consensus was made by the forum to ignore Daishi As for your question to Rainbow, what circumstances would you lynch a lurker. this question isn't even irrelevant. the consensus was already made. this post only strikes to further meaningless talk. besides that seems more like a PM to the town or scum coach. Show nested quote +On March 08 2013 14:52 MLuneth wrote:
EBWOP
My view at the time was and still remains is that unless I am confident that there is a high chance of an active person being scum I will Vote for an inactive scummy Lurker alright, show your confidence in me being scum. you should have switched your vote a lot sooner then
As I have already explained, my vote at that was a pressure vote. My goal was to get him talking rather than actually lynch him.
As for the switching vote sooner I live in Australia so if the town comes to a consensus on something at 3 in teh morning (which is happening) it'll be a minimum of 5 hours before you hear my reply/reaction
|
My vote in NW stays the same because there has still been no coherent defence to tell me why NW is not scum.
I agree that other players are looking very suspicious too but I'm more confident that NW is scum than they are
|
+ Show Spoiler +bduddy pointed you out soft defending Daishi. You keep saying we'd learn nothing if he flipped? Well we might learn something about you. We'd certainly also learn something about his voting patterns and we might be able to figure out if the people he was bandwagoning were scum or not.
Who was this directed at?
|
I am rereading cases now.
Going to be wishy washy either way, but I'd rather be correct
|
On March 09 2013 08:11 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2013 08:08 OmniEulogy wrote:On March 09 2013 08:04 WaveofShadow wrote:
Well it's too late now to worry about Rainbows' scumminess right now we can't afford to spread ourselves out any thinner. I personally hope he shows up to give further insight but if not we're really going to have a good look at him soon too.
We REALLY need vote consolidation from the following people:
MeatlessTaco, Arctic Daishi, Rainbows, ChewonStu, Luneth, Matriarch, Krafla. NW can vote to save his ass well.. tie on Arctic and I've already said I'll switch if I can't convince people to lynch Taco, but I've still got 2 hours to see if I can do it. As you yourself said, even his defense dabbles in scum MO. I don't understand how we aren't lynching this guy today. But one or two vote differences isn't going to cut it. If we don't have a +3 differences in vote between the first and second place then it's possible (though unlikely) for scum/3rd party to move last second and force a mislynch. I'm not saying Taco looks super innocent, btw, but I think Daishi is a better vote. Plus after the flip we may be able to start making associations related to Taco.
Be very suspicious of people moving at the last minute then.
If maf do switch at last minute then having the votes so close together is well worth it
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 10 2013 13:56 Rainbows wrote:Hey guys, sorry I've pretty much been a lurking piece of shit so far since mid day 1. Sorry, things to do, people to see, roomates to argue with. I'm looking at the red lynch atm... MLuneth is looking like a prime candidate for todays lynch imo. Opening PostShow nested quote +On March 07 2013 12:24 MLuneth wrote:Flavour was certainly pretty sweet  I know it's my first game so I'm still learning but I don't think we should just lynch Krafla without reason, even if it would be fantastically ironic. Your post Omni seems pretty reasonable and a good basis to work on ^_^ Completely buddies Omni, and acts all "pro town" by not wanting to lynch Krafla (which, was obviously a troll vote). MLuneth joke votes me, but someone calls him out on it, and get's really paranoid. Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 12:55 MLuneth wrote:
Last post was a joke, if that wasn't clear Why would town need to verify their obvious joke post was a joke? Nervous scum.
A weak distancing attempt Basically coinflip votes Arctic Daishi, which seems oddly enough like an attempt to disassociate the two should one of them flip. There is no reasoning behind it. Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 17:34 MLuneth wrote:
EBWOP Forgot to add TheRavensName to above list of people that have done little
Coin said
##Vote: Arctic Daishi
This scummy vote
Show nested quote +On March 08 2013 16:29 MLuneth wrote:
##Vote: nobodywonder
This vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence.
Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? Blatantly sheeps the NW vote, and keeps it there the entire game. And for what reason? Suspiciously targeting lurkers... OH WAIT, hypocrisy! Wasn't that exactly what MLuneth was doing? In addition, ML is picking on someone that hasn't defended themselves explicitly. Scum want to hit the easiest target, and someone who provided an "acceptable coherent defence" is just that. Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW. Lynch this guy. Show nested quote +On March 09 2013 07:48 MLuneth wrote:
My vote in NW stays the same because there has still been no coherent defence to tell me why NW is not scum.
I agree that other players are looking very suspicious too but I'm more confident that NW is scum than they are ^ There's that "no defence" statement again. ML hasn't attempted (even badly) to scumhunt at all to find a better candidate than NW. @MLunethRespond to this. Do things. Stop playing the noob card all game and perform.
Responding to said things.
Opening Post
+ Show Spoiler +On March 07 2013 12:24 MLuneth wrote:Flavour was certainly pretty sweet I know it's my first game so I'm still learning but I don't think we should just lynch Krafla without reason, even if it would be fantastically ironic. Your post Omni seems pretty reasonable and a good basis to work on ^_^ Completely buddies Omni, and acts all "pro town" by not wanting to lynch Krafla (which, was obviously a troll vote).
I think you're reading into it a bit too much here, sounds like you've already decided that I'm maf -__-
MLuneth joke votes me, but someone calls him out on it, and get's really paranoid.
+ Show Spoiler +
On March 07 2013 12:55 MLuneth wrote:
Last post was a joke, if that wasn't clear
Why would town need to verify their obvious joke post was a joke? Nervous scum.
Town can get lynched too. Nervous town doesn't want to get lynched D1 for a misunderstanding on a joke post.
A weak distancing attempt
+ Show Spoiler +Basically coinflip votes Arctic Daishi, which seems oddly enough like an attempt to disassociate the two should one of them flip. There is no reasoning behind it. On March 07 2013 17:34 MLuneth wrote:
EBWOP Forgot to add TheRavensName to above list of people that have done little
It really pisses me off that you seem to think that there is no reasoning behind this after I have explained that this was a pressure vote to get Daishi to stop lurking. Either that or you're just straight up lying.
This scummy vote
On March 08 2013 16:29 MLuneth wrote:##Vote: nobodywonderThis vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence. Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? Blatantly sheeps the NW vote, and keeps it there the entire game. And for what reason? Suspiciously targeting lurkers... OH WAIT, hypocrisy! Wasn't that exactly what MLuneth was doing? In addition, ML is picking on someone that hasn't defended themselves explicitly. Scum want to hit the easiest target, and someone who provided an "acceptable coherent defence" is just that. + Show Spoiler +
I would like to point out a previous post before I address this:
While I believe that nobodywonder's actions have been suspicious and that his case is less than stellar, I feel that it is foolish to lynch someone who has made an addition to the game (albeit at this point small) should not be lynched over a person that has simply lurked for 2 days straight.
I feel I need to point out that Frogon, as well as Krafla and Matriarch (to a lesser extent) have all input a similar amount of information as nobodywonder.
At this stage with so little info to go on I can only flip a coin on whether to vote Artic Daishi or bduddy
This post at the very least shows that I was considering NW before I "sheeped" on that vote. I did "sheep" on that vote simply because there was a strong case against NW that I had already previously been considering. I have already addressed my "targeting" of lurkers. I want to attack what is (imo) the most likely person to be maf. If I have to sheep to do that, fine I will sheep.
I'm not sure if Scum want to hit the easiest target, and someone who provided an "acceptable coherent defence" is just that .
is a spelling mistake, but someone who provides a clear coherent defence is not an easy target bro.
This.... "Thing"
+ Show Spoiler +]Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW.
Read my posts which clearly show my reasoning before you make idiotic statements like this.
Why not NW? I've already asked him questions and was waiting for a response.
OMGUS?
Next post will show how Rainbows post on me was incredibly scummy is OMGUS but points will be valid
|
While this may seem OMGUS motivated I implore you to consider my points before passing this up as OMGUS crap.
+ Show Spoiler +On March 10 2013 13:56 Rainbows wrote:Hey guys, sorry I've pretty much been a lurking piece of shit so far since mid day 1. Sorry, things to do, people to see, roomates to argue with. I'm looking at the red lynch atm... MLuneth is looking like a prime candidate for todays lynch imo. Opening PostShow nested quote +On March 07 2013 12:24 MLuneth wrote:Flavour was certainly pretty sweet I know it's my first game so I'm still learning but I don't think we should just lynch Krafla without reason, even if it would be fantastically ironic. Your post Omni seems pretty reasonable and a good basis to work on ^_^ Completely buddies Omni, and acts all "pro town" by not wanting to lynch Krafla (which, was obviously a troll vote). MLuneth joke votes me, but someone calls him out on it, and get's really paranoid. Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 12:55 MLuneth wrote:
Last post was a joke, if that wasn't clear Why would town need to verify their obvious joke post was a joke? Nervous scum.
A weak distancing attempt Basically coinflip votes Arctic Daishi, which seems oddly enough like an attempt to disassociate the two should one of them flip. There is no reasoning behind it. Show nested quote +On March 07 2013 17:34 MLuneth wrote:
EBWOP Forgot to add TheRavensName to above list of people that have done little
Coin said
##Vote: Arctic Daishi
This scummy vote
Show nested quote +On March 08 2013 16:29 MLuneth wrote:
##Vote: nobodywonder
This vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence.
Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? Blatantly sheeps the NW vote, and keeps it there the entire game. And for what reason? Suspiciously targeting lurkers... OH WAIT, hypocrisy! Wasn't that exactly what MLuneth was doing? In addition, ML is picking on someone that hasn't defended themselves explicitly. Scum want to hit the easiest target, and someone who provided an "acceptable coherent defence" is just that. Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW. Lynch this guy. Show nested quote +On March 09 2013 07:48 MLuneth wrote:
My vote in NW stays the same because there has still been no coherent defence to tell me why NW is not scum.
I agree that other players are looking very suspicious too but I'm more confident that NW is scum than they are ^ There's that "no defence" statement again. ML hasn't attempted (even badly) to scumhunt at all to find a better candidate than NW. @MLunethRespond to this. Do things. Stop playing the noob card all game and perform.
Why this screams scum
Takes points out of context to imply guilt "+ Show Spoiler +
A weak distancing attempt
Basically coinflip votes Arctic Daishi, which seems oddly enough like an attempt to disassociate the two should one of them flip. There is no reasoning behind it.
This scummy vote On March 08 2013 16:29 MLuneth wrote:
##Vote: nobodywonder
This vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence.
Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? Blatantly sheeps the NW vote, and keeps it there the entire game. And for what reason? Suspiciously targeting lurkers... OH WAIT, hypocrisy! Wasn't that exactly what MLuneth was doing? In addition, ML is picking on someone that hasn't defended themselves explicitly. Scum want to hit the easiest target, and someone who provided an "acceptable coherent defence" is just that.
This miscontextualisation is not by accident as he very clearly neglects to mention things that I have said that disagree with his argument.
Rainbows seems to think he's above questioning
+ Show Spoiler +Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW.
No, I asked you a question because I suspected that you were scum. Answering the question "should" be easy if you are town. Avoiding the question and saying that the post was aimed at you rather than the person I ended up voting for is incredibly scummy and another example of you ignore other evidence over stuff that helps your argument
This is clearly scum orientated behaviour and therefore
TL:DR : read the post, Rainbows is scum
##Vote: Rainbows
|
On March 11 2013 18:44 Krafla wrote:
Good morning all, sorry I've been MASSIVELY INACTIVE again.
So it looks like the vote at the moment is between MLuneth or MeatlessTaco.
I was initially suspicious of MeatlessTaco due to his aggressive nature, but early on I decided against a vote for him because he'd contributed more than nobodywonder. Now by the time night one rolled around I'd been convinced by reading through the thread that a check on MLuneth would provide a better return than a check on Meatless.
It turns out it didn't matter who I made a check on because I got roleblocked. Now (Warning speculation) assuming I was RB'd by the scum and not by the town, who do you think the Mafia would've seen as my most likely target?
Especially over the night there was a lot of speculation towards MLuneth, which is what persuaded me to use my check on MLuneth. Now if I picked MLuneth as the person most warranting a check, what are the chances that the mob second guessed me and blocked me?
For the moment I'm going to
##Vote: MLuneth
primarily because even though he was active at the time he didn't switch his vote when near the end of Day 1 whilst town was coming to the consensus that a vote on AD was better.
Just saw Krafla's post.
I will not vote with town when I think there is someone more likely to be maf.
Furthermore, consider the possibilities of the last lynch
1. NW gets most votes, gets lynched
2. Tie, NW gets lynched
3. AD gets most votes gets lynched
Either the person who I think is most likely to be scum is lynched or the person who the "town consensus" gets lynched.
CONCLUSION
Both look scummy, I voted for the one who (imo) looked more scummy
If such a vote happened where of the two major candidates one looked scummy while the other didn't and my vote was on a third person, I'm going to switch to who I think looks the scummiest and has a chance of being lynched.
Hope this clears stuff up
|
Not good with spoilers etc, all my quotes were from the one post, so I didn't cherry pick.
|
Going to bed now, will rewrite post if more people struggle with it.
Will also write summaries on who I think is scum.
|
On March 11 2013 19:39 nobodywonder wrote:
Well, your case on Rainbow, I think is rather weak. One reason you claim Rainbow is scum is because he is above questions such as yours. I reread your filter and Rainbow's yet I can't find your question. Care to clarify and quote it for me? For all I know the question might not even be there or irrelevant.
"Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker?" Was the question, but it's more the point that he's above answering it as shown by "Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW."
|
Question: "Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker?"
More important that he was above said question as shown by:
"Look at this vote again. Notice how he asks ME a question. Why me? Why not, you know, the guy you are voting for and want to lynch? Town mentality = zero. The vote is a blatant sheep with little-to-no reason and is used as a catalyst (somehow) to ask me a question. The vote is more about me than it is about NW."
|
I did unless I misunderstood what you want
|
Still neglected to answer -___-
|
I wanted to know where he stood because he just voted different people all over the place, without being held at all accountable for doing so.
|
On March 12 2013 01:06 Rainbows wrote:
MLuneth:
Doesn't vote AD when he was clearly around.
Distances AD early with non-threatening vote early.
Sheep votes most popular mislynch target.
OMGUS cases me.
Only contributions are sheeping and 'casing' me when he's up against the wall.
Discuss.
MLuneth talk with me bro. Don't just pop in when I'm not around and be all like HEY IM TOWN WTF U SCUM
I believed at the time that NW was more likely to be scum than AD.
I distanced myself to AD by voting for him to get him to say something. Similar votes were made on bduddy, or at least threatened, are those people maf too? Purely coincidence.
Sheep votes the target with the most compelling scum case after previously being suspicious before bandwagon started. Just because I waited to hear from NW before voting him does not make me maf, it makes me want to avoid mis-lynch. Furthermore, if I wasn't confident that NW was maf then I would have sheeped onto the AD vote, which I did not.
The point of chasing you is that you blatantly misrepresented facts to make it seem I'm maf.
EXAMPLES
A weak distancing attempt[/b]
Basically coinflip votes Arctic Daishi, which seems oddly enough like an attempt to disassociate the two should one of them flip. There is no reasoning behind it.
On March 07 2013 17:34 MLuneth wrote:
EBWOP Forgot to add TheRavensName to above list of people that have done little
Coin said
##Vote: Arctic Daishi
I've already explained my reasoning for voting AD at this point, which he chooses to ignore
"Forgets" to mention that I already had voiced suspicions over NW before "sheeping" the vote
|
On March 12 2013 07:48 Rainbows wrote:Here: Show nested quote +On March 12 2013 07:27 MLuneth wrote:On March 12 2013 01:06 Rainbows wrote:
MLuneth:
Doesn't vote AD when he was clearly around.
Distances AD early with non-threatening vote early.
Sheep votes most popular mislynch target.
OMGUS cases me.
Only contributions are sheeping and 'casing' me when he's up against the wall.
Discuss.
MLuneth talk with me bro. Don't just pop in when I'm not around and be all like HEY IM TOWN WTF U SCUM I believed at the time that NW was more likely to be scum than AD. I distanced myself to AD by voting for him to get him to say something. Similar votes were made on bduddy, or at least threatened, are those people maf too? Purely coincidence. Sheep votes the target with the most compelling scum case after previously being suspicious before bandwagon started. Just because I waited to hear from NW before voting him does not make me maf, it makes me want to avoid mis-lynch. Furthermore, if I wasn't confident that NW was maf then I would have sheeped onto the AD vote, which I did not. And Before: Show nested quote +On March 09 2013 07:48 MLuneth wrote:
My vote in NW stays the same because there has still been no coherent defence to tell me why NW is not scum.
I agree that other players are looking very suspicious too but I'm more confident that NW is scum than they are Show nested quote +##Vote: nobodywonder
This vote is basically the result suspiciously targeting lurkers but more importantly the lack of an acceptable coherent defence.
Rainbow, it strikes me as odd that while you have accused/pressured people to find out their position on certain matters but your position is not clear. In what circumstances would you lynch a lurker? ----> Says he waited to hear from NW to vote for him because he wanted to avoid a mislynch. ----> Actually voted NW because he wasn't defending himself. Nice lies, lynch this guy.
NW was active and made no defence.
I heard from NW (he made more posts etc) which made me more confident about NW.
I don't see how I lied -___-
|
Please stop mucking up the thread geript, it's stupid/inane
|
I didn't explicitly question because others asked the obvious questions to ask. I waited ~24 hours for a response. In this time frame he answered questions which made me confident that he is scum. Not defending himself was one part of why I voted for him and you need to realise that he chose not to defend himself.
It's not as if you haven't heard this before -__-
|
Rather than being scummy it's more explaining why you did things that could be taken as scum motives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
