| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Arctic Daishi
United States152 Posts
On March 09 2013 00:34 TheRavensName wrote: Why did you change your vote with no explination over the course of 13 minutes? Raven and Wave retracted their votes for Karfla, I figured I would follow in suite. Sorry, I'm such a noob at this. | ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
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. 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 | ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
On March 09 2013 01:58 Arctic Daishi wrote: Raven and Wave retracted their votes for Karfla, I figured I would follow in suite. Sorry, I'm such a noob at this. I'd like to hear your thoughts on scumreads, stay up to date. Chew explain your vote on me and hows your scumreads | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
| ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
after all, most of you guys all have rather small filters and this hinders what other people can make of you | ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
On March 07 2013 22:29 Frorgon wrote: Good morning all. Glad to see things picking up a bit now. As far as the discussion on "lurkers", I don't think it can be considered an applicable label for anyone as of yet, I mean there is still a lot of time left in day 1. But I will definitely be keeping my eye out over the next few hours.I also agree that I'd rather find a logical reason to lynch someone on day 1 instead of just randomly choosing someone. I'm not afraid to call people out but it seems quite scummy to just attack someone without any useful contribution behind it. Also bduddy, you can claim you are lurking for personal reasons, but how are we to know this is true? You were warned before this game started that you should only commit if you had the proper amount of free time. A busy schedule is no excuse, so I do hope you contribute. I believe now it is applicable to call you a lurker. I'm kind of confused as to why you think it is scummy to attack people to see their reactions and how they react under pressure. I've seen players vote on almost everybody in the game by the end of D1 who weren't scum but were fishing for information, I have yet to see scum play so ballsy. You claim to not be afraid to call people out on things but when you tried you were almost afraid to commit and were very back and forth about it. On March 08 2013 06:29 Frorgon wrote: @OmniEulogy I'm wondering why you asked me about what I thought was suspicious behavior. I clearly explained that in my initial post about the matter. It made me a bit uneasy about whether or not you were trying to get redundant information posted to cloud up the thread. As Wave said, the amount of posts you had started to raise a red flag for me. And don't get me wrong, it's not necessarily the amount of posts you had that was bad, it was that you seemed to be drowning the thread for a while with just your thoughts and limited discussion from others. That being said, I feel better about your contributions in the past few pages since other people have shown up. "The amount you talk to yourself while nobody is here raises a red flag, everything you've said while more than 1 person has been here has been awesome!" what? This to me seems like scum trying to pretend to contribute while at the same time not trying to make anybody upset. It wouldn't have made me look at it twice if you had been active and contributing but as we all know you've made 4 posts in nearly 48 hours. This is not acceptable for town. This is the behavior of scum. On March 08 2013 19:15 Frorgon wrote: Alright I'm back. In my opinion, bduddy is not making a good case for himself. That's 3 different excuses for being inactive right now due to his "busy life". I really don't care about how busy your life is. Nobodywonder still looking real scummy. Unvotes bduddy after the terrible explanation provided. I'm thinking they could both be scum covering for each other. NW makes a case early on against bduddy without actually being serious about it so there are no reprocussions. Bduddy has his suspicion on people who in my opinion don't same overly scummy as of yet, and is defending NW. Right now I'm narrowing down my vote between NW and bduddy and I plan to make an actual vote shortly after they respond, if they respond. There should still be a decent amount of time on the clock for D1 after my vote. So many things wrong with your last post. - Attacks the weakest player in the game NW, WITHOUT placing a vote. Just a casual "wow you are so scummy" - Makes an association case between NW and Bduddy. - Claims he will make his case and we will have plenty of time to analyze and go over it. Nice case he's made. ##Vote: Frogron We need to step it up town. The only two players I can identify as even having a chance at being town are Krafla and Rainbows. If you are town and have been content to just stay quiet and not contribute, wake the fuck up. Nobody is getting replaced tonight, stop talking about it. Everybody has posted D1 the only way somebody is getting replaced is if they don't vote. The following players are also on my list of potential scum Arctic Daishi - Playing the noob card after lurking for 36~ hours, NOT a smart move. I want to see some serious contribution from you starting D2 and if I don't I will be pushing for your lynch. Hell if Frogron can save his ass before the end of D1 from me I'll go after you in the next 7 hours. Bduddy - Lurking, scummy, if Frogron hadn't contributed less I'd be happy to see him gone today. BUT he does claim he's been busy so for D1 he gets some slack. Could just be an uninterested townie. Nothing to really disprove that so far. ChewOnStu - almost as bad as Frogron, really bad sheep vote. scummy. NobodyWonder I was going to vote on for most of today but realized if he is lynched and flips town we gain nothing, I'm not against seeing him lynched as I agree he's scummy as hell but I don't want to put all of our eggs in one basket. And then there is also Matriarch who is lurking as well... the largest problem I can see here, IS THAT THERE IS NO WAY ALL OF YOU ARE SCUM. So TOWNIES again I ask Wake The Fuck Up. I am seriously getting annoyed by the lack of activity out of you. You will cost us this game if you don't snap out of it before we end up lynching you. | ||
|
Rainbows
Germany1217 Posts
On March 09 2013 03:37 OmniEulogy wrote: My Case on Frorgon I believe now it is applicable to call you a lurker. I'm kind of confused as to why you think it is scummy to attack people to see their reactions and how they react under pressure. I've seen players vote on almost everybody in the game by the end of D1 who weren't scum but were fishing for information, I have yet to see scum play so ballsy. You claim to not be afraid to call people out on things but when you tried you were almost afraid to commit and were very back and forth about it. "The amount you talk to yourself while nobody is here raises a red flag, everything you've said while more than 1 person has been here has been awesome!" what? This to me seems like scum trying to pretend to contribute while at the same time not trying to make anybody upset. It wouldn't have made me look at it twice if you had been active and contributing but as we all know you've made 4 posts in nearly 48 hours. This is not acceptable for town. This is the behavior of scum. So many things wrong with your last post. - Attacks the weakest player in the game NW, WITHOUT placing a vote. Just a casual "wow you are so scummy" - Makes an association case between NW and Bduddy. - Claims he will make his case and we will have plenty of time to analyze and go over it. Nice case he's made. ##Vote: Frogron We need to step it up town. The only two players I can identify as even having a chance at being town are Krafla and Rainbows. If you are town and have been content to just stay quiet and not contribute, wake the fuck up. Nobody is getting replaced tonight, stop talking about it. Everybody has posted D1 the only way somebody is getting replaced is if they don't vote. The following players are also on my list of potential scum Arctic Daishi - Playing the noob card after lurking for 36~ hours, NOT a smart move. I want to see some serious contribution from you starting D2 and if I don't I will be pushing for your lynch. Hell if Frogron can save his ass before the end of D1 from me I'll go after you in the next 7 hours. Bduddy - Lurking, scummy, if Frogron hadn't contributed less I'd be happy to see him gone today. BUT he does claim he's been busy so for D1 he gets some slack. Could just be an uninterested townie. Nothing to really disprove that so far. ChewOnStu - almost as bad as Frogron, really bad sheep vote. scummy. NobodyWonder I was going to vote on for most of today but realized if he is lynched and flips town we gain nothing, I'm not against seeing him lynched as I agree he's scummy as hell but I don't want to put all of our eggs in one basket. And then there is also Matriarch who is lurking as well... the largest problem I can see here, IS THAT THERE IS NO WAY ALL OF YOU ARE SCUM. So TOWNIES again I ask Wake The Fuck Up. I am seriously getting annoyed by the lack of activity out of you. You will cost us this game if you don't snap out of it before we end up lynching you. This just in: Omni is town. I agree with the sentiment that this lynch is going too smoothly. Zero opposition. TOWN: Consider targets like ChewOnStu and Frogron. Good case by Omnizzle here. | ||
|
Rainbows
Germany1217 Posts
Jeeze. ##Unvote: ##Vote: Frogron This is a pretty sheepy vote. The NW lynch seems like an easy way for scum to not do anything. We need a DYNAMIC lynch here. I am consolidating my vote. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
Reading over the latest updates to the thread as we speak and I gotta say, I like what I'm seeing so far: no replacements D1 makes me happy. Reads inc. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
I will admit, much like a lot of other people in this thread I was going to vote for him earlier on since he seemed like the best choice but there just wasn't enough to go on. Now that he's posted again I like him much more. He does some very good analysis on Luneth's awfully scummy post history and calls Krafla out: No need for yourself to declare innonence so early while other possible bandwagoners such as Chew haven't explained themselves. Which is a HUGE indicator of scum play. Why feel the need to declare yourself innocent before anyone has accused you of anything? To LOOK innocent: scum's MO. One thing still bothers me about you though. You seem to have changed your attitude completely from earlier in the game and you've started scumhunting hardcore. Are you still in favour of a no-lynch as per your quote here? On March 07 2013 17:56 nobodywonder wrote: I'd rather like to avoid lynching on Day 1 if theyre unjustified. I want the threat to pressure lurkers to contribute and this would lead to the best case scenario. But if lurkers dont contribute, I have no issues with lynching, SO Pressuring lurkers to contribute => they contribute. the goal is get contribution (not to lynch, unless necessarily) This looks like coaching to me; I can't see why you changed your attitude so abruptly and immediately started pressuring the way you should have been from the very start. Explanation please. OE's read on Frorgon is great in my opinion. I'm not set on voting him just yet because I think I'm trying to decide between Luneth and Nobodywonder for now. The rest of the lurkers (like Matriarch) just can't be as important right now because we don't know enough. Daishi now that you're back don't make excuses, do what you're supposed to and hunt scum. | ||
|
TheRavensName
United States911 Posts
##unvote ##Vote:Chewonastick My logic behind it is simply going to be that he doesn't want to lynch lurkers then lurks, and seems to ignore his on view on pressure voting lurkers. Ontop of that, his only posts seem to mostly be when people are posting at him. | ||
|
TheRavensName
United States911 Posts
| ||
|
OmniEulogy
Canada6592 Posts
We have his opening joke vote, which alone I have no problem with On March 07 2013 14:47 MeatlessTaco wrote: Nobody's only post is sheeping the experienced guy adding no new content of his own? Now you can lurk and say "I would have contributed if the game were more exciting?" That seems pretty anti-town to me. ##Vote: nobodywonder Now it's more exciting. However we do end up sticking on NW through pressure of other people so he never actually has to vote. He uses this as an excuse to pressure others to place votes on people when he himself never actually made a serious vote. Keep in mind how early in the game these posts are. On March 07 2013 15:49 MeatlessTaco wrote: Matriarch / Krafla: If I held a On March 07 2013 17:05 MeatlessTaco wrote: Why are you afraid to take a position? Are you going to vote for Arctic Daishi or just write his name with a question mark? I feel that Krafla here was trying to apply pressure the Arctic who had yet said anything at all but Taco tries to pressure him to vote for somebody who hasn't said a single word so far? that's sketchy so early on in the game. Makes it seem like he doesn't care who is voting for who. On March 07 2013 17:13 MeatlessTaco wrote: Take a stand. Are you going to side with me trying to lynch someone acting suspicious or side with nobodywonder trying to lynch a lurker who can't defend themselves? This is TL Mafia which is serious stuff. You aren't allowed to be Switzerland. Again goes after Krafla early on, Why is Taco so obsessed with getting people to vote? The game isn't even through the first 24 hours. Town doesn't need to throw votes out so quickly, they need to think about their actions as Krafla is doing. This raises more questions about how much Taco actually cares who gets lynched. And then we have these back-to-back posts. Holy Shit Hypocrisy. On March 08 2013 10:35 MeatlessTaco wrote: Why are you bandwagoning on NW while your only contribution is couple of trite posts about your lurker policy? On March 08 2013 14:06 MeatlessTaco wrote: You are right. His behavior is unacceptable so far. You got anything to add Chew? ##Vote: ChewOnStu His FIRST real vote is a complete sheep with nothing to add about why Chew is scum. Does he really care who gets lynched? This doesn't take away from the good points he's made and some of his questions have been really good... but the inconsistency is there. | ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
On March 08 2013 01:25 ChewOnStu wrote: Lynch All Lurkers can be a pretty scummy tactic as it gives scum an excuse to kill off town. PRESSURING lurkers on the otherhand... However I believe its still a little early to consider someone lurking at the moment. Also going to withhold my vote until i have more to go on. Ok, you believe that pressuring lurkers is good, but you're hesitant, since it's early game. So valid, yet you never pressure anyone. You're just content to sit back. As town, why would you do so? As scum, it's a perfect justification for lurking and waiting. On March 08 2013 02:20 ChewOnStu wrote: @OmniEulogy I meant that lynching purely for posting little/not posting at all could be bad. However simply voting for a lurker can put pressure on them to talk and then if the person voting is satisfied with said lurkers answer they should remove their vote, so i agree with this. However, putting pressure on a lurker and not having a response by near the end of the day then a prod/replacement could be potentially needed. Although to completely answer your question: Lurkers could be questioned for reads, opinions etc as well as being voted for. This is so wishy-washy, your logic is confounded by however this, however that. Make a stand 1. Lynch lurkers maybe bad 2. Vote lurker may put pressure, I agree 3. If pressured lurker replies, then good 4. you summarize: lurkers could be questioned for reads, opinions? with pt 4, I'm wondering why don't you pursue lurkers then. You should some of questioning for reads, opinions and voting. All these actions contrast with your sudden vote on me On March 08 2013 03:08 ChewOnStu wrote: Im finding nobodywonder scummy too for complaining about lurkers not contributing yet he's barely contributed anything himself. ##vote: nobodywonder @nobodywonder what do you make of the game so far? Any suspicions other than bduddy's lack of posting? You reserved so much judgment about getting lurkers, yet you are so eager to simply follow, at that time's Taco's vote on me. Hardcore sheep. If you're town, the only explanation is that you're a noobie, but I doubt it because I believe if you're town, you would show your thought process. Against me your only evidence is that I am scummy because I complain about lurkers and I have no contributions. But you, yourself, reserved judgment lurkers and have few contributions. Why are you so against my complaining? 1. Your sudden reversal from no lynch but pressure lurkers to vote me feels scummy. I feel it's a too convienent way for you to stay away from attention with your reserved judgment on lurkers. That combined with your lack of following your own policy seems very contradictory and if not scummy, is poor town play. 2. You havent actively contributed, and have only replied to questions. As town, why? You need to be proactive and get going. Stick your neck out. 3. Attacking me is an easy and convenient way out and is not consistent with your 1) lurker policy 2) lack of active contributions 4. Lastly you poked me with a question, I answered it. That would have a great moment for you to contribute and say what you feel about my then scumread Krafla to show your towniness. Why would you ever avoid an opportunity to contribute to the discussion. and now you have fell off the face of the earth after this vote. Rainbow and Meat called you out on this. I call out you too, you are one of my top scumreads. Explain yourself ##Unvote ##ChewOnStu | ||
|
nobodywonder
United States848 Posts
@WoS Yep coaching helped. There was some great advice. Before I thought I was okay, I just read the Newbie guides and to me, it seemed the main point on Day 1 was to get the ideal atmosphere, which included prodding lurkers. But I was too tunneled onto it and I didn't contribute myself, putting myself in a contradictory and scummy-looking position. but after coaching, I learned that I would also have to actively participate in discussions, look for scum and pressure lurkers. And so now, I am just doing that. | ||
|
Frorgon
United States146 Posts
As everyone is bandwagoning on nobodywonder, bduddy is able to sit back and not do anything. Still nothing from him since I last posted hours ago. Therefore, ##Vote: bduddy | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
Your cases, while good are a little too easy to make this early in the game. That goes for OE's Frorgon case too, though he made a commitment at least; you have now flip-flopped between two cases of your own in less than three hours. To me this make it seem as you're trying very VERY hard to remove people's suspicions of you. Now, most of the time when scum make cases just to remove suspicion, they don't add any real content, but your cases are not lacking in this regard. The quick change of mind and lack of commitment to the Luneth case make it seem like you're scrambling to find something that the rest of town can sheep onto and leave you alone though, and since these cases are on lurkers they're real easy to make since they're not exactly arguing with you..... | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
Uh...NW.... If you receive coaching, don't tell town about it. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
| ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31494 Posts
On March 09 2013 05:10 Frorgon wrote: I don't really consider myself to be lurking; when I post I try to add good reasoning to my thought process. Some of you are posting quite a lot more than me, I will admit that is true. But there are plenty of others who have posted about as much as me. Waveofshadow, and Matriarch for example. Meanwhile, people like Arctic and bduddy have contributed far less. As everyone is bandwagoning on nobodywonder, bduddy is able to sit back and not do anything. Still nothing from him since I last posted hours ago. Therefore, ##Vote: bduddy Sorry for the spam, but are you actually comparing your posting level to mine? DId you even look at the filters and the content within? And Matriarch who hasn't done anything all game yet? REALLY? I expect you to have something a little better to go on with your vote. After OE's case you've got some pressure on you that you've done nothing to alleviate thus far. | ||
| ||
StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
