EPTI've already called out Rayn for being scummy, at least that has some decent thinking behind it. I call him out and then he goes afk. Coincidence? I think not.
RED Team's Prize - Page 10
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
I've already called out Rayn for being scummy, at least that has some decent thinking behind it. I call him out and then he goes afk. Coincidence? I think not. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18247 Posts
On March 26 2013 08:09 Hapahauli wrote: 1) I policy lynch people who don't read their role PM because it's incredibly anti-town. 2) My name is Hapa. 3) I am a pink unicorn. ##Vote ObviousOne Wait. This is something I do NOT understand. Why is not reading your role PM anti-town? It is stupid. Yes. But: If town, you are, at worst, missing out on a blue role. Given that town should never rely on blue roles (they are helpful, but what should win the game for town is the lynch) and assuming you play as a townie, if you haven't read your role PM, you are still contributing your most important contribution to town. If scum, you are not town. Therefore, if you are playing like a townie, you are (potentially) playing against your own wincon. That is fucking fantastic for town. The downside, of course, is that you are not playing like scum, and it is therefore hard for townies to find you. But a D1 policy lynch sounds pretty stupid. If 3P, you are not town, so if you are playing like a townie, that is great for town, and possibly not so great for you (depending on wincon) Therefore, if Hapa BELIEVES OO is not reading his role PM, then he should NOT be trying to lynch him. The reason for wanting to lynch someone who claims not to have read his role PM, is because you don't believe him (and the only reason to lie about not having read your role PM is because you're scum trying to spread chaotic misinformation). Hapa should know this. Hapa, explain why you are policy voting OO? | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:15 raynpelikoneet wrote: S&B: I never said i wasn't serious with my vote. I asked marv why does he assume i am serious. Something he also failed to answer. Don't split hairs. You never said your case wasn't serious but by jumping to its seriousness as soon as Marv criticized it you quite strongly implied it wasn't serious. | ||
|
strongandbig
United States4858 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:16 cDgCorazon wrote: It's my opinion that we shouldn't read too much into OO's role pm crap. I've already called out Rayn for being scummy, at least that has some decent thinking behind it. I call him out and then he goes afk. Coincidence? I think not. Answer my questions about meta reads | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
On March 26 2013 08:11 marvellosity wrote: Just curious how you'd react given you totally overreacted to prplhz. I can join Hapa on his policy lynch though, so you're in luck ^^ ##Unvote ##Vote: ObviousOne He had voted me because i "overreacted" to prplhz. How does me asking "what's with the ninja vote?" make him change his vote to a stupid policy lynch? | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18247 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:14 strongandbig wrote: If he was going to be true to his ideal, he should either have apple posting and waited until someone said something he could comment on in a worthwhile way, or he should have made an effort to do some legitimate analysis on something that was in the thread. You should always be making the best case you can make, even if best isn't very good yet. 2 posts into the game, prplhz should be making cases... right. I believe the aim for the first few pages of D1 is always to create discussion. Different people do that differently. I see nothing inherently scummy about the way prplhz did that this game. As for going against his own advice: we can sit here and debate prplhz, but I have never seen him spam up the thread. Chances are we'll be calling him a borderline lurker before too long. So a few fluff posts at the start of the game don't contradict his wish for a short and well-reasoned-out thread. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:25 raynpelikoneet wrote: On top of that marv & Keir seem to be quite defensive about prplhz. Why not let the guy answer himself? There's nothing to "answer". S&B pushed a case on prplhz. I disagree with his conclusion, and I said so. No reason to keep it to myself when I believe someone is pushing a bad case. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18247 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: And given that you don't (at least you should not) know prplhz's alignment how exactly is it not beneficial to see how he reacts to the case first? No. There is NEVER a reason to allow bad reasoning to run rampant in the thread. | ||
|
Hapahauli
United States9305 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:16 Acrofales wrote: Wait. This is something I do NOT understand. Why is not reading your role PM anti-town? It is stupid. Yes. But: If town, you are, at worst, missing out on a blue role. Given that town should never rely on blue roles (they are helpful, but what should win the game for town is the lynch) and assuming you play as a townie, if you haven't read your role PM, you are still contributing your most important contribution to town. If scum, you are not town. Therefore, if you are playing like a townie, you are (potentially) playing against your own wincon. That is fucking fantastic for town. The downside, of course, is that you are not playing like scum, and it is therefore hard for townies to find you. But a D1 policy lynch sounds pretty stupid. If 3P, you are not town, so if you are playing like a townie, that is great for town, and possibly not so great for you (depending on wincon) Therefore, if Hapa BELIEVES OO is not reading his role PM, then he should NOT be trying to lynch him. The reason for wanting to lynch someone who claims not to have read his role PM, is because you don't believe him (and the only reason to lie about not having read your role PM is because you're scum trying to spread chaotic misinformation). Hapa should know this. Hapa, explain why you are policy voting OO? Sure it is. It means that you can post without being held accountable for anything that you post. It provides a ton of misleading information and promotes people trolling for the hell of it. I've had to deal with this in the last few games I've played and quite frankly I'm sick of it. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: And given that you don't (at least you should not) know prplhz's alignment how exactly is it not beneficial to see how he reacts to the case first? Because it doesn't matter a single bit how he reacts because the case was built on false information. Hell, if I was scum, I would love nothing more than for someone to make a case on me that I could so easily refute just by posting a few quotes from my previous games that wouldn't even be hard to find. The point of making "cases" isn't to convince the person they are scum. They are to convince everyone else that someone is scum. Plus, S&B was asking for opinions about his case. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:31 Acrofales wrote: No. There is NEVER a reason to allow bad reasoning to run rampant in the thread. That's such a generalization. I'd say it borders on discrimination. Not every Bad Logic is a dirty illegal immigrant, even though they all speak and look like dumb. | ||
|
Grackaroni
United States9856 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:29 raynpelikoneet wrote: And given that you don't (at least you should not) know prplhz's alignment how exactly is it not beneficial to see how he reacts to the case first? The case is so weak that there wouldn't be any reaction worth watching. if it were me I would probably just ignore it. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:34 Hapahauli wrote: Sure it is. It means that you can post without being held accountable for anything that you post. It provides a ton of misleading information and promotes people trolling for the hell of it. I've had to deal with this in the last few games I've played and quite frankly I'm sick of it. I detect unnecessarily large quantities of mad. Might be colored in red. Or purple. Maybe a dash of yellow in there. Can not be sure yet. | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:15 raynpelikoneet wrote: S&B: I never said i wasn't serious with my vote. I asked marv why does he assume i am serious. Something he also failed to answer. I never said you were serious. Also I'm not defending prplhz at all, he could be mafia, he could not, but if he is it's certainly not for the reasons that s&b keeps pushing in an extremely odd manner. | ||
|
Corazon
United States3230 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + On March 26 2013 09:42 Acrofales wrote: Lets put it this way: the only people with any reason to lie about not having read their role PM are scum. However, given my experiences, the 2 previous times I encountered this phenomenon, the player had in fact not read his role PM. Once was Drazerk, so good luck figuring out his motives. And the other was Ver in Personality 2, who was trying some new and improved way of playing, which failed miserably due to time constraints. In both cases, lynching them would have been equivalent to a random lynch. I don't feel like random lynching, so lets find scum instead and IGNORE OO until he starts playing the damn game like a normal player. I don't think ANYTHING that has happened so far says anything about anybody's alignment... except Marv, whose very existence proves he's scum. I've been saying the whole time that the whole thing about OO was silly. It was relevant when I said it, and it was relevant when I read a few more posts and saw people still talking about it. I'm trying to get people to actually take this seriously. Unlike Rayn, who made a joke vote but called it serious and has gone on to attack 3 separate people and back down when they decide to actually put up a fight against Rayn. It's timid scummy play. @Rayn: Who is the scummiest player here so far and why? | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43270 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:34 Keirathi wrote: Because it doesn't matter a single bit how he reacts because the case was built on false information. Hell, if I was scum, I would love nothing more than for someone to make a case on me that I could so easily refute just by posting a few quotes from my previous games that wouldn't even be hard to find. The point of making "cases" isn't to convince the person they are scum. They are to convince everyone else that someone is scum. Plus, S&B was asking for opinions about his case. The problem with meta in this prplhz case is that it's the easiest thing in the world to fake. Even the dumbest idiot could probably fake their "town meta" by posting some general advice as their first post. Other than that part, you are right. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:42 raynpelikoneet wrote: The problem with meta in this prplhz case is that it's the easiest thing in the world to fake. Even the dumbest idiot could probably fake their "town meta" by posting some general advice as their first post. Other than that part, you are right. It is entirely irrelevant how "easy" something is to do. What matters are the hard things. | ||
|
Keirathi
United States4679 Posts
On March 26 2013 10:42 raynpelikoneet wrote: The problem with meta in this prplhz case is that it's the easiest thing in the world to fake. Even the dumbest idiot could probably fake their "town meta" by posting some general advice as their first post. Other than that part, you are right. I agree with you. I never said "yea, prplhz's first post makes him town. He never does that as scum." I just said that S&B's terrible reasoning didn't make prplhz scum, because it can be demonstrably shown that prplhz makes the same kinds of posts as town *AND* scum. | ||
| ||
