|
11589 Posts
On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good.
Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it.
|
On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it.
You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN.
|
On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:06 BloodyC0bbler wrote:On April 27 2013 07:04 VisceraEyes wrote:
Ace why are you focusing on the wagons? Why not outlying voters? I recognize i am not ace. However I would hazard a guess its this. By focusing on the wagons and clearing them of the mafia on them you end up with a list of confirmed or semi confirmed players as town. IE it does two things at once. BC, what do you say to my response? Since you're obviously here, reading.
still mulling it over. I am happy I waited to let you respond rather than trying to lynch you while you were gone however.
|
On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it.
Well to be fair I didn't exactly agree with your tunneling of VE. Who is your lynch of choice atm? Clarity/Shiao or someone else and why?
|
11589 Posts
On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN.
I'm no longer accusing BC of anything.
I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol.
|
On April 27 2013 07:02 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 06:59 Ace wrote:
no prob VE. I just think you're on the wrong path with respect to Shiao. But lynching Clarity and viging yamato looks like a real option right now. Why do people act like I should be vigged? If you can't push for my lynch, stop saying dumb bullshit.
didnt you promise cases vs BC and VE? if you were town wouldnt you go write them instead of arguing about shit that doesn't matter?
|
On April 27 2013 07:12 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN. I'm no longer accusing BC of anything. I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol.
Ugh this is like exactly the problem I have with the approach as well. :/
|
11589 Posts
On April 27 2013 07:12 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. Well to be fair I didn't exactly agree with your tunneling of VE. Who is your lynch of choice atm? Clarity/Shiao or someone else and why?
Let me filter them and finish rereading the thread.
|
11589 Posts
On April 27 2013 07:13 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:02 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 06:59 Ace wrote:
no prob VE. I just think you're on the wrong path with respect to Shiao. But lynching Clarity and viging yamato looks like a real option right now. Why do people act like I should be vigged? If you can't push for my lynch, stop saying dumb bullshit. didnt you promise cases vs BC and VE? if you were town wouldnt you go write them instead of arguing about shit that doesn't matter?
You're not even reading my posts.
Why do people think you're town?
|
On April 27 2013 07:12 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN. I'm no longer accusing BC of anything. I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol.
I honestly don't like confirming people via voting wagons unless we have a list check dt. I was answering the question asked (although to ace) because it was something that I wanted a potential viewing of how I see it out there in case he answers differently.
I would say the most damning thing against shiaopi at this point in time is his angry post calling out tube. People who would be most angry specifically at tube is a mafia imo although thats an insane stretch and even i realize that
|
On April 27 2013 07:13 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:12 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN. I'm no longer accusing BC of anything. I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol. Ugh this is like exactly the problem I have with the approach as well. :/
At least as we can't know yamato's alignment from D1, and we can't know if Clarity / ShiaoPi are both mafia.
That's a hella lot of WIFOM there in the wagons.
|
On April 27 2013 07:13 VisceraEyes wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:12 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN. I'm no longer accusing BC of anything. I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol. Ugh this is like exactly the problem I have with the approach as well. :/
And this is why I asked Ace my question earlier. I want to find out what he thinks it means specifically, otherwise it just looks like a derailing attempt.
|
I think the most damning is him lying about reading the thread. I can't see a townie motivation for saying, explicitly, that he's read the whole thread - to the point of complaining about how long it took - when it's clear that he didn't at all.
This is a thread action that has no townie motivation and plenty of scum motivation.
I'm leaving my vote guys.
|
On April 27 2013 07:06 WaveofShadow wrote:
Ace you make an interesting point but I just don't feel good about a Clarity lynch. How many of those 6 matching voters would you say are scum, and what would it mean if Shiao does turn out to be scum?
*nods at the conclusion BC has drawn
WoS I honestly don't know yet. I've got a few players I'm leaning Scum on but I won't say because I'm not 100% sure and it doesn't make sense to start more wagons and finger pointing. Lets solve one thing at a time.
if Shiao does turn out to be Scum AND clarity doesn't then the matching voters look real townish and I'm just wrong. Why does a clarity lynch feel uneasy to you?
|
On April 27 2013 07:18 Ace wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:06 WaveofShadow wrote:
Ace you make an interesting point but I just don't feel good about a Clarity lynch. How many of those 6 matching voters would you say are scum, and what would it mean if Shiao does turn out to be scum? *nods at the conclusion BC has drawn WoS I honestly don't know yet. I've got a few players I'm leaning Scum on but I won't say because I'm not 100% sure and it doesn't make sense to start more wagons and finger pointing. Lets solve one thing at a time. if Shiao does turn out to be Scum AND clarity doesn't then the matching voters look real townish and I'm just wrong. Why does a clarity lynch feel uneasy to you?
For reasons I explained here:
On April 27 2013 01:06 WaveofShadow wrote:Alright I read through Clarity; I have to ask, is he a new player or has he been around a while? His play of 'posting something so I get something in before the hammer' seems like the kind of thing I did when I was knew; self preservation when none was necessary at all, and I was called scum for it multiple times when in fact I was town. Like...his posting is awful and after having been around a little while I see exactly why now: Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 00:09 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 23:49 Vivax wrote:On April 23 2013 11:39 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 11:34 Bill Murray wrote:On April 23 2013 10:34 Clarity_nl wrote:
I am here now and catching up, did not expect this game to start so soon, sorry. one hour later has read the entire game and made a case on sharrant? his case is really tunnely, and reaching, as well FoS Clarity Yeah okay I might have started reading and then figured I would read the last two pages and see palmar talking about possibly being the hammervote so figured I'd show my face. interested why you think my case is reaching, though. I find this quote interesting. Clarity apparently was afraid of not posting anything before the hammer fell, and here he is admitting that his case on Sharrant was something done in haste, and to "show his face", not cause he found the reasons good enough to post them so quickly. Hi Vivax. When you say interesting, what do you mean? Because pointing out something as interesting and seeing if anyone else jumps on it is interesting. Erm, yes I wanted to get a couple of posts in before day 1 ended, and I didn't just want it to be "I'm here guys", I do possess some self preservation. I figured if I showed my face maybe people would hold off on hammering and give me a chance to catch up. Turns out palmar wasn't even close to hammering but w/e, I wasn't sure. And I did find reasons, maybe the case isn't well worded or convincing but it is in essence why I believe he's scum. Just weak as hell case which I called him out on to start and he admits at the same time he did it 'self-preserve' but also to prevent people from hammering? Just seems so fishy but knowing my own play I can't necessarily call it scummy per se. Show nested quote +On April 23 2013 16:02 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 13:18 WaveofShadow wrote:On April 23 2013 12:16 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 12:06 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Why is there a case on Sharrant by some guy that randomly got into the thread.... Why not? Maybe instead of asking a question that has no answer you could comment on the case I made? I'll comment on it. I already forget who said it but it screams to me of reaching. I have a very strong townread on Sharrant right now and nothing you bring up in your case on him strikes me as scummy at all---how is providing 'easy outs' as you call them an anti-town thing to do? What is inherently scummy about the way he has presented himself? I will agree that his methodology isn't necessarily great but it certainly doesn't look scummy. For example in the first example you gave he provides Rayn with an out because they had already been arguing for fucking ages and shitting up the thread; it's entirely possible that he wants the argument to end as well and just wants to get a clear read, which certainly seems likely as he encourages Rayn to continue the discussion on another subject. I don't see anything wrong with his asking questions of others; everybody in here does that and you're really reaching with his talking about how he has to go eat makes him look insecure. You say that he just asks shallow questions to look involved? He's been plenty involved and has had plenty opportunity as scum to just blend it or let something go and make it seem as though he has contributed. Your case is bad and I urge you to look over something else if YOU want to make it seem like you're contributing. Providing easy outs isn't anti-town so much as it is pro-scum. It's very easy to say "do this or I'll lynch you!!!!" because your target will do what you ask. This is fine if you are asking for something that may result in anything but when you ask a question with only one possible answer regardless of your targets alignment then it is just a waste of space. If you are town and you are scumhunting you do NOT want to give whoever you're pressuring the "how-to-get-rid-of-me guide" Asking questions is fine, it generates discussion even when you do it as scum, but when there is no clear motivation NOR follow-up behind the questions then I begin to wonder why the question was asked at all, and I can only see it as feigning to contribute which is obviously a scum trait. Although I don't agree with defending a townread day 1 at all unless they are at risk of being lynched (which he is clearly not) you do make a valid point concerning the first post I addressed. I still believe I am on to something but I can see with the current thread sentiment and the fact that I am in no strong position (showing up way late >.<) that this lynch isn't happening. A weak case is still a case and it could have sparked some discussion that's not centered around oats and yamato which are as far as I'm concerned both policy lynches at best. He calls this rebuttal to his case a hard defense of Sharrant later on (which it may well have been) but aren't hard defenses in general seen as a little bit scummy? Why just accept it not call me out on it? Why back down so feebly in the end if he believes in it so strongly? It just screams to me of my play in like the first couple games I ever played where anyone could make me back down from my own cases and I was completely unsure of myself. Again, objectively his posting looks awful and somewhat scummy, but knowing the kind of stuff other people called me out for in the past when I was town I just don't know if I can see it as such. Including the stuff BM thinks Clarity is flat-out lying about. The post where he says "I don't care" seems more out of frustration than anything else....ugh. I REALLY want to hear more from him and don't like the idea of a Clarity lynch....yet.
|
On April 27 2013 01:06 WaveofShadow wrote:Alright I read through Clarity; I have to ask, is he a new player or has he been around a while? His play of 'posting something so I get something in before the hammer' seems like the kind of thing I did when I was knew; self preservation when none was necessary at all, and I was called scum for it multiple times when in fact I was town. Like...his posting is awful and after having been around a little while I see exactly why now: Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 00:09 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 23:49 Vivax wrote:On April 23 2013 11:39 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 11:34 Bill Murray wrote:On April 23 2013 10:34 Clarity_nl wrote:
I am here now and catching up, did not expect this game to start so soon, sorry. one hour later has read the entire game and made a case on sharrant? his case is really tunnely, and reaching, as well FoS Clarity Yeah okay I might have started reading and then figured I would read the last two pages and see palmar talking about possibly being the hammervote so figured I'd show my face. interested why you think my case is reaching, though. I find this quote interesting. Clarity apparently was afraid of not posting anything before the hammer fell, and here he is admitting that his case on Sharrant was something done in haste, and to "show his face", not cause he found the reasons good enough to post them so quickly. Hi Vivax. When you say interesting, what do you mean? Because pointing out something as interesting and seeing if anyone else jumps on it is interesting. Erm, yes I wanted to get a couple of posts in before day 1 ended, and I didn't just want it to be "I'm here guys", I do possess some self preservation. I figured if I showed my face maybe people would hold off on hammering and give me a chance to catch up. Turns out palmar wasn't even close to hammering but w/e, I wasn't sure. And I did find reasons, maybe the case isn't well worded or convincing but it is in essence why I believe he's scum. Just weak as hell case which I called him out on to start and he admits at the same time he did it 'self-preserve' but also to prevent people from hammering? Just seems so fishy but knowing my own play I can't necessarily call it scummy per se. Show nested quote +On April 23 2013 16:02 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 13:18 WaveofShadow wrote:On April 23 2013 12:16 Clarity_nl wrote:On April 23 2013 12:06 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Why is there a case on Sharrant by some guy that randomly got into the thread.... Why not? Maybe instead of asking a question that has no answer you could comment on the case I made? I'll comment on it. I already forget who said it but it screams to me of reaching. I have a very strong townread on Sharrant right now and nothing you bring up in your case on him strikes me as scummy at all---how is providing 'easy outs' as you call them an anti-town thing to do? What is inherently scummy about the way he has presented himself? I will agree that his methodology isn't necessarily great but it certainly doesn't look scummy. For example in the first example you gave he provides Rayn with an out because they had already been arguing for fucking ages and shitting up the thread; it's entirely possible that he wants the argument to end as well and just wants to get a clear read, which certainly seems likely as he encourages Rayn to continue the discussion on another subject. I don't see anything wrong with his asking questions of others; everybody in here does that and you're really reaching with his talking about how he has to go eat makes him look insecure. You say that he just asks shallow questions to look involved? He's been plenty involved and has had plenty opportunity as scum to just blend it or let something go and make it seem as though he has contributed. Your case is bad and I urge you to look over something else if YOU want to make it seem like you're contributing. Providing easy outs isn't anti-town so much as it is pro-scum. It's very easy to say "do this or I'll lynch you!!!!" because your target will do what you ask. This is fine if you are asking for something that may result in anything but when you ask a question with only one possible answer regardless of your targets alignment then it is just a waste of space. If you are town and you are scumhunting you do NOT want to give whoever you're pressuring the "how-to-get-rid-of-me guide" Asking questions is fine, it generates discussion even when you do it as scum, but when there is no clear motivation NOR follow-up behind the questions then I begin to wonder why the question was asked at all, and I can only see it as feigning to contribute which is obviously a scum trait. Although I don't agree with defending a townread day 1 at all unless they are at risk of being lynched (which he is clearly not) you do make a valid point concerning the first post I addressed. I still believe I am on to something but I can see with the current thread sentiment and the fact that I am in no strong position (showing up way late >.<) that this lynch isn't happening. A weak case is still a case and it could have sparked some discussion that's not centered around oats and yamato which are as far as I'm concerned both policy lynches at best. He calls this rebuttal to his case a hard defense of Sharrant later on (which it may well have been) but aren't hard defenses in general seen as a little bit scummy? Why just accept it not call me out on it? Why back down so feebly in the end if he believes in it so strongly? It just screams to me of my play in like the first couple games I ever played where anyone could make me back down from my own cases and I was completely unsure of myself. Again, objectively his posting looks awful and somewhat scummy, but knowing the kind of stuff other people called me out for in the past when I was town I just don't know if I can see it as such. Including the stuff BM thinks Clarity is flat-out lying about. The post where he says "I don't care" seems more out of frustration than anything else....ugh. I REALLY want to hear more from him and don't like the idea of a Clarity lynch....yet.
slip
he typed "knew" instead of new
FREUDIAN SLIP
|
|
|
On April 27 2013 01:37 WaveofShadow wrote:
What is it people find scummy about Giygas again? That he's opportunistic or something? I dunno once again I don't think I have enough to go on here...in fact probably even less than Clarity because many of Giygas's reads and thoughts coincide somewhat with mine. He said he was going to look into me though so I'm interested to hear what he comes up with. Also looking through his filter I saw CC's massive reads list post.
CC still think I'm scum, breh? If so, why? Hell, if not, why?
"why me, fry me"
##vote WoS
|
On April 27 2013 07:16 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2013 07:13 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:12 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:10 VisceraEyes wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 yamato77 wrote:On April 27 2013 07:08 WaveofShadow wrote:
You guys are heading into preflip assumption territory and its not good. Yeah, they're being bad. Ignore it. You know you're accusing BC of shitting all over town atmosphere yamato. JUST SAYIN. I'm no longer accusing BC of anything. I'm just saying, this voting analysis of wagons is inconclusive at best. Mafia vote for mafia, town vote for town, and his list of "confirmed" players may not even be accurate, lol. Ugh this is like exactly the problem I have with the approach as well. :/ And this is why I asked Ace my question earlier. I want to find out what he thinks it means specifically, otherwise it just looks like a derailing attempt.
yea I am trying to derail the wagon. A wagon I helped start and now realize may be flawed.
Respond to the scenarios I made instead of blanket statements. You guys want to lynch Shiao so like I did - assume he is Scum. Look at the list of events that happened and see how a Scum Shiao fits in. I'm not only using voting wagons as I outlined the Palmar sheeping too. From both angels, added in with Sharrant's case on Clarity ShiaoPi is a weaker lynch. He's just clueless townie.
|
lulz@BM
I agree that it's entirely possible Shiao is bad town, but Clarity does not look worse to me. But if I were to switch over to Clarity for any reason (I don't want to right now) I'd definitely have to hear from him first. The fact that Shiao came back and his response to being under the gun makes him kinda look worse than a guy who has fucked off after being active in this thread once says something to me.
I am in no hurry to end this day, btw; VE I am fine with the people who haven't voted holding off for now as long as they make their intentions clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
