TL Mafia LXI - Page 3

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 02:13 GMT

#606

Yeah, that and the fact that he didn't vote for Oats in the first place (when he posted last time - his three point post). Suddenly Oats has become a good enough candidate to vote for now, when he has not posted between those posts. I'm interested in knowing what made him change his mind.

Let's talk about WoS. Just read his filter and he is not really seeming to have any strong opinions about anything, just commenting on stuff.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 02:21 GMT

#610

On April 22 2013 11:17 kushm4sta wrote:
rayn.. not every player is tunnel central like you.
Oats and Hopeless are who I would lynch at this point I guess... The problem is that they ALWAYS look scummy to me.

Your filter is nearly as long as mine and you have not done shit besides telling the thread why some people are in your opinion town and acting as GiygaS' lawyer. Call my play tunneling or whatever you want to, but you really should start doing something to find mafia soon..

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 02:51 GMT

#615

Sharrant are you still here?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 02:55 GMT

#619

Did you take a look at WoS? You asked me to give us someone to talk about, i responded:

On April 22 2013 11:13 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Yeah, that and the fact that he didn't vote for Oats in the first place (when he posted last time - his three point post). Suddenly Oats has become a good enough candidate to vote for now, when he has not posted between those posts. I'm interested in knowing what made him change his mind.

Let's talk about WoS. Just read his filter and he is not really seeming to have any strong opinions about anything, just commenting on stuff.

What do you think?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 03:28 GMT

#639

Wait what Sharrant.. Are you seriously saying that i'm trying to gain credit from town!TRN lynch on D1 as mafia? That's your conclusion?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 03:33 GMT

#641

Yes Sharrant, where are the other mafia players voting for TRN so that i can gain credit from the lynch?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 03:40 GMT

#643

Ace thoughts about this:

On April 22 2013 12:24 Sharrant wrote:

Show nested quote +

He realized that Rayn could be setting him up to give him town cred when he flipped. When Rayn stepped in to defend him I was sure TRN was either lynchbait, or one of Rayn's teammates. It seems more likely at this point he is lynchbait. TRN only had a small chance of actually being mafia, but a very good chance of attracting mafia attention either by virtue of A) being a weak player which they can use as town credit or to manipulate or B) was a weak mafia player who they could protect while looking like they're just trying to help out the new player.

Rayn came in with a town read on him whose strength did not match what I had read in TRN's filter, so he was the person I was looking for.

I find it interesting you see nothing at all to discuss between Rayn and Hopeless.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 03:56 GMT

#652

I fail to see how Sharrant can possibly think i am taking his "bait" and defending town!TRN (as he's now saying) as mafia. If TRN was my lynchbait, i would need my teammates to vote for him to gain the credit, otherwise defending him is useless for me. There is/was noone else voting for TRN.

That's the worst reasoning to backpedal from a scumread i have ever heard. On top of that, Sharrant obviously hasn't even read why i think TRN is town. Hint: The post where i answer OO about him.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 04:03 GMT

#661

On April 22 2013 12:59 kushm4sta wrote:
SHARRANT and RAYNE plz stfu talking to each other / about each other. i think i speak for everyone when I say this...tldr for realz

Can you stop making these nonsense shit comments you have been doing all game and maybe tell us who do you want to lynch and why?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 10:22 GMT

#704

First of all:

##Unvote: Bill Murray
I really hate your play. I agree with BC you should be vigged asap.

Then. This is the post where Sharrant votes for me:
+ Show Spoiler +

On April 22 2013 07:45 Sharrant wrote:

Show nested quote +

On April 22 2013 07:31 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Sharrant:

I did reach a conclusion about policy lynching BM: " I'd rather spend today's lynch on scum, and I need to see more from BM to know if he is."

And about millers in general: "At this point I would say that miller's should claim if they feel that they're in danger of wasting a detective action (and not before that point), but that all miller claims should be treated as a mark against the player, rather than a scum claim."

I am not trying to "policy lynch" BM. I think BM is scum. Bringing up the miller policy into this discussion adds nothing, because it's irrelevant regarding my reasons for wanting to lynch BM.

The last part of your case is even weaker, I don't think it even needs to be touched upon.

So you really think it's TRN's job to find all his games to you? Do you want him to analyze them for you aswell?

Now see, in that quote you actually say "I didn't mean he is trying to find mafia". But wasn't part of your case on me that " It's Sharrant's job to find out TRN's affiliation and TRN wasting time on telling him about his last games is a waste of time that does not help TRN find mafia. Seems like Sharrant is lazy and does not want to find out things on his own. Townies should not do that."

So you say he is actually not attempting to discern who in the thread are the mafia, but you still have a town read on him. Townies should scum hunt, yes?

I don't see how you can view him as townie while acknowledging that he is not scum hunting and still try and make the case on me that you did. Your reads do not match up. There is something wrong here.

There are a lot of players who have not done scumhunting. TRN posted a comment on the game start -> people started question him -> he went defensive. I don't see how that is scummy for a new player whose first non-newbie game this is.

My scumread on you is not strong at all, at least you did point him into doing something productive, asked him about who he does want to lynch and about Oats. So we'll see whta he answers.

This needs pointing out. One: I did not accuse you of trying to policy lynch Bill Murray. What you quoted at the top there, that is about you saying I did not come to a conclusion about policy lynching miller claims. It's interesting that you feel the need to be defensive about that.

Two: You are hilariously hung up on me asking for his games. If he's a townie, then he should be all for establishing his townieness. I am not going to search through other forums to try and find where he may have possibly played, especially given he could have played under any name he wanted. You think that asking that automatically means that I have not looked at his games on TL. I'm still interested on why you think this is so scummy? It's actually gotten to the point I find this hilarious.

Three:

Show nested quote +

You're definitely right, you have a big case on BM, and it has nothing to do with policy.

I had no opinion of you trying to lynch Bill Murray, I have no idea yet if he's a good lynch or not. But how do you explain that? The thing you have posted about most in this game, is policy lynching BM and anyone else who does what he did.

##unvote:TheRavensName
##Vote:Raynepelikoneet

And his post where he explains his scumread on me:
+ Show Spoiler +

On April 22 2013 13:26 Sharrant wrote:

Show nested quote +

It was part of the thought process that got me to look at you in the first place. Obviously TRN is not getting lynched so there is no credit for you to gain from it anymore. It is even, apparently, something you told TRN that you would do as mafia (though you did not state you would do it specifically to him).

Show nested quote +

You seem to be misinterpreting my definition of small chance. Small chance of being mafia still meant a greater chance than anyone elses actions in the thread. At that point I figured he probably had about a 40 percent chance of being mafia, if I were to assign a value to it. A small chance, but still greater than I felt anyone else had.

So I went after him because he was the strongest scum read I had. When Rayn made these two posts:

Show nested quote +

On April 22 2013 06:35 raynpelikoneet wrote:

On April 22 2013 05:48 ObviousOne wrote:
One more filter then I'm going to go level my Priest some more.

Oh. My. God. Tube is in this game. LOL. HI TUBE! (we played in a newbie together, my first game! He hasn't posted anything so skipping for now.)

Raynpelikoneet, sorry to pick on you again for like the third straight game in a row together. You want to lynch the "claimed miller" Bill Murray, you have made your stance on lynching millers abundantly clear, but I don't see anything that looks like it's developing into an actual scum read. Why are you leaning so heavily on your policy lynch when there are mafia to be lynched? Also, assume BM isn't here for a moment, who do you lynch?

I read BM's post as a miller claim. If it wasn't, he needs to explain this:
- What was the purpose of making that post? There is no reason for a townie to say anything that does not lead into finding scum or proving their towniness. I don't see that post achieving either of those things.

If the claim was actually real, i want BM to explain why he thought it was a good idea to claim miller D1. Millers should not claim. All it does is that it tells the thread that they will give out a red result if checked by a cop. Why would you be a good cop check in the first place if you are town? You should prove you are town by your actions so that there is no reason for anyone to assume you are mafia, and the cops should check suspicious people instead. Claiming miller on D1 is extremely suspicious because it already shows you are afraid of being checked by a cop. If you are a miller, and are checked, so what? Tough luck, then you claim and town will believe you or not. But the place to claim is not the start of D1.

This is not a policy lynch, BM's miller claim post is scummy.

About Sharrant. Sharrant accuses TRN of things. The case in itself is not scummy and i could see someone seeing TRN's posts in that light, i just don't get the same feeling from TRN's posts. Having played with him on NMXXXIX, i can tell that he has no idea how to act in the start of the game. Here he seems to be trying to figure out things and share his thoughts about stuff he is asked about. Fine, why is Sharrant scummy?

- He's discussing the "policy lynch BM" matter but does not reach any kind of a conclusion that points towards this particular situation.
- Asks TRN about his last games. It's not TRN's job to find those games to him. It's Sharrant's job to find out TRN's affiliation and TRN wasting time on telling him about his last games is a waste of time that does not help TRN find mafia. Seems like Sharrant is lazy and does not want to find out things on his own. Townies should not do that.

Show nested quote +

On April 22 2013 06:53 raynpelikoneet wrote:

On April 22 2013 06:43 Vivax wrote:

On April 22 2013 06:35 raynpelikoneet wrote:

Where does TRN try to figure out things? Tbh I kinda have you both as scummy along a few others, so your defense of TRN strikes me especially. I don't really see anything that could give me a reason to think he's town, but if you're so kind, could you point it out?

Particularly this post of his:
+ Show Spoiler +

On April 21 2013 23:19 TheRavensName wrote:

Show nested quote +

On April 21 2013 23:09 Vivax wrote:

On April 21 2013 23:01 TheRavensName wrote:

On April 21 2013 22:52 Vivax wrote:

On April 21 2013 22:48 TheRavensName wrote:

On April 21 2013 22:42 Vivax wrote:

On April 21 2013 22:38 TheRavensName wrote:
Huh... I was curious to see how big boys start playing the game... and less then a page's worth of posting totals I see an OMGuS. I feel somewhat surprised; apparently the way newbies open mafia games is the right way?

PS: Bill Murray yelling indoors is really mean.

Oooo, an omgus, interesting.
Are you okay with the way Oats is playing the game?

I'm not a 100% sure what hes doing, but if you want to call it playing then... maybe? Truth be told the fact that palmer just randomly takes offense to a baseless acucsation in a game that just started doesn't make a lot of since to me.

He's asking for a base to the accusation, precisely.
Do you have any ideas to get some discussion started? Your entrance kinda looked like you tried to downplay what's going on in the thread, which in turn makes me think you're trying to communicate reasons for not doing anything.
Do you think this description fits your play or did your posts have other purposes?

I thought it just genuinely showed disapointment. I've always had difficulty understand what to do at the start of day 1, and I see that there really is no good way to start day 1 in a purely productive way. So I suppose your right, I'm trying to downplay what happens because it doesn't seem productive, unless of course we need to know why Yamato has many weapons that arn' t guns.....

And I think its more suspicious to ask in that way rather than, just ask.... seeing as how he didn't even vote baselessly or hasn't made an ssue out of it yet. If we went after everyone who accused someone day 1 just kinda in passing, we'd never get anything resembling a case or something.

I don't think Oats would answer even if Palmar just asked, cause Oats rather seems to be trolling and careless about getting something productive out of this day.
P said he would vote for him until he heard a proper motivation from Oats to call him scum, nothing followed, so Oats seems to oppose discussion and doesn't want to show his townieness through cooperation.

The question is: How do we handle people who don't want to cooperate? Do we threaten Oats with a lynch? Do we ask him nicely to play like someone that puts thought into his posts?

/shrug And what will we get out of threatening him at all? What does either lynching him for not liking a posted policy(? (Thats what that was right?)) or becase he just decided to troll actually accomplish (I think this one is more likely)? These are literaly the only responses he could make (That make any logical since and any others should count as trolling really) and I just don't see how either could prove guilt or innocense. But if you feel so strong on making him talk, why arn't you voting for him since apparently one vote isn't going to cut it?

I didn't mean he is trying to find mafia. I meant he is trying to find out how to play @ the game start, what to look for and what to call people out for. If you read his exchange with yourself, you should easily figure out he has no clue how to act in the beginning of the game. This does not make him 100% town but i doubt he would be openly expressing his thought about that matter if he was mafia, i think he would be far more cautious about what he says.

What makes me scummy in your eyes?

That was a lot more effort than anyone took to explain TRN. Everyone that commented on him, or I asked to comment on him, just stated they thought he was a noob town, but generally people had to be prodded into action.

Rayn came in attacking me with a very weak case because of my case on TRN. At this point, I am very happy because I am sure I have at least one mafia in these 2 players. I am sure after that attack and defense that Rayn is mafia either defending a mafia to deflect a bandwagon before it can start, or defending someone he sees will be lynched later and thus he would be able to go "Hey look, I knew he was town allt he way back then and I defended him!" regardless of whether he was lynched today, or tomorrow, or a week from now. At this point I am 100% sure of Rayn, and 50/50 on TRN.

When TRN came in and said that he had a town read on Rayn despite the inconsistincies myself and others had pointed out, I had TRN down as very likely to be scum. But when he later mentioned how Rayn had told him that he planned to do this exact same thing as scum before, and subsequently moved him to a null read, that was when I was pretty sure that TRN was town.

At this point I am less sure about Rayn being scum than I was then, because his conversations with other players has generally been good since that time, but he's still in my top 3 to lynch. I just haven't decided if there's someone I'd rather lynch more, like say Hopeless.

Any more questions?

Now, what do we have here? Look at the posts very closely. There is nothing, absolutely nothing in his first post that in any way implies this is actually why Sharrant thinks i am scum (as his theory suggests in the second post i quoted). There is nothing between these posts that suggests Sharrant thinks this is why i am scum. This is a bullshit theory in the first place.

If he did actually have this theory at that time, who are the people Sharrant should have been looking into between these posts? People who did support his TRN vote. Those people are no other than Vivax. What are Sharrant's interactions with Vivax during this time. He agreed with Vivax that Hopeless is an okay lynch. Makes any sense? Because to me it doesn't.

Sharrant's read on TRN quickly changes from possibly scum to likely town when TRN says "Rayn had told him that he planned to do this exact same thing as scum before". First of all i would like to know what this means, that i would defend a newbie townie to gain town credit when he is lynched as me being mafia? Second of all, i have never said anything like that to TRN.. ever.. I fucking went through my own filter from NMXXXIX to see if i had actually said something like that, i havn't. Sharrant however believes his scumread instantly when they say something like that, doesn't want TRN to explain exactly where i have told him so. Seems like he knows TRN is town in the first place, or for some other reasons does not want to question TRN's statement and takes it as face value.

##Vote: Sharrant

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 12:05 GMT

#713

On April 22 2013 19:47 Vivax wrote:
Sharrant has actually pointed out how you came up with saying that you don't want to policy lynch BM, but lynch him cause he's scum, whereas in earlier posts you kept saying "lynch everyone who claims miller".

Yes but in the latest post of his that's no longer a reason for me to be mafia (as he between those posts i quoted said he agreed with my explanation). The reason for me being mafia suddenly changes into "rayn is trying to gain credit by lynching town!TRN" which definitely does not hold water. Can you read Sharrant's filter and tell me how do you think he could possibly have ended up into that kind of a conclusion? I can't see it, there is nothing that points in that direction before him flat out saying so to ShiaoPi.

Same question could be asked from kush. Discretit my case if you think it's bad, don't discredit me without saying why you think my case is bad.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 12:15 GMT

#716

TRN:

Looking back at it the Meta defense was pretty terrible, seeing as how in the same game he said that defending noob towns that would flip such was an easy scum tactic and one he had his partner use.... so yay... unsure what to think again.

Point out to me where i have ever said so.

For the record, Sharrant turned this into:

It was part of the thought process that got me to look at you in the first place. Obviously TRN is not getting lynched so there is no credit for you to gain from it anymore. It is even, apparently, something you told TRN that you would do as mafia (though you did not state you would do it specifically to him).

First of all, this is a straight out twisting TRN's words. TRN has not said i have done something like that, he said i had my partner do so. Second, i have not said so, ever, and Sharrant is trusting his scumread TRN (at that time) without wanting to know where i have said so.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 12:16 GMT

#717

kush, how about you just answer this:

Can you read Sharrant's filter and tell me how do you think he could possibly have ended up into that kind of a conclusion?

..and not just flip-flop around the question and the case.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 12:39 GMT

#720

My case is nowhere near OMGUS. Stop using words you can't use in the right context. You also conveniently do not tell why my case is bad, just quote a couple of posts that were purely reactionary to Sharrant's horrible theory. Then you quote another post where i explain why the theory is horrible, and you don't have anything to say about it other than "blabla". You have clearly not read why i voted for BM and why i thought he was scum. What the fuck are you doing?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 12:40 GMT

#722

EBWOP: Above was to Hopeless.

I really need some people who can actually think here. I'm not interested in continuing this discussion with kush/Hopeless/Sylencia because they clearly can't read.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 16:41 GMT

#753

On April 23 2013 00:02 Sharrant wrote:
It's a good try, Rayne, but no.

Let's get this out of the way quickly because I have to leave, and there's more important things to do when I'm back.

The reason I looked into you is because of your chainsaw defense of TRN. That fit exactly what I was looking for, so I went through your filter.

I am not trying to lynch you on the merit of you defending TRN, get that through your head. I am going to get you lynched because you are scum. You claim that after posting several times about how miller claims should be a policy lynch, you say that it's not a policy lynch you're pushing on BM. The closest you come to make to a case is "This isn't a miller lynch policy, I'm lynching him because he claimed miller which is scummy" which is exactly the same as saying "No, this isn't a lurker lynch, I'm just lynching because his low activity is scummy". It's just attempting to disguise that you were trying to policy lynch him.

The post I voted for you details exactly why I have you as a scum read. The possibility that you were a townie who made some crazy defense on TRN went out the window when I read through your filter.

If you can't understand that, I can't help you.

Ahh so you went back on the policy lynch thing. Then why did you say you agreed with me?

I will deal with this post after BM gets back, but as I have agreed with Rayne I will not discuss this any farther until such time.

I did not know if BM claimed miller or not, that's the sole reason why it can't be a policy lynch. Yes, i would lynch anyone who claimed miller on D1, but i can't policy lynch BM because i didn't know if he claimed miller or not, so this particular situation is not a disguise to policy lynch someone because it CANNOT BE SO IN THE FIRST PLACE!
Fuck, why is reading so hard for you guys?

- Why did you agree with your scumread TRN about me saying stuff that i have never said?
- Why did you make a big post focusing on entire different things on me being scum than in the post you voted me on?
- Why did you agree with me and now again backpedal from your latest theory?

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 16:42 GMT

#755

Vivax:

I'll probably take hopeless out of my scumspects for now. Not every bad idea is necessarily a scum agenda, meh. I do hold in high regard that he actually goes against Rayn, as he's another guy I'd lynch.

That doesn't tell shit because i'm town.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 16:48 GMT

#757

Yes and right after:
"If it wasn't, he needs to explain this:"

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 18:31 GMT

#772

On April 23 2013 02:03 Hopeless1der wrote:

Show nested quote +

You didn't give a shit when you voted him

Show nested quote +

Note that your vote post cites a lynch all miller claims as a policy for your vote.

raynpelikoneet, Do you disagree? This is a 'yes' or 'no' question specifically referencing whether or not you used a policy to justify your initial vote on Bill Murray.

If you call it a policy that is attached only to this particular situation (meaning this game, with this setup where we do not know how many of the roles are in play) then no, i don't disagree. I hate that this discussion has come to the point if my understanding of a "policy lynch" is the same or different than for other people and if you are really going to lynch me for that i suggest, when i flip town, that you take a deep look in the mirror and think about who was arguing about semantics without looking into my explanation for my vote, and who did actually look at it and still went with this stupid shit.

I'm done with this issue, i'm not going to expain over and over again for my reasons for voting BM in the first place. If you lynch me for it, fine. If you don't, i hope you never bring this point up again so i can do something productive instead.

Vivax:
I don't like lynching Hopeless anymore. His explanation about his behaviour early in the game is well enough justified for me. I'm okay with lynching Oats or yamato. Oats does not look anything like his usual town play and yamato is not doing shit. I would not oppose GiygaS either.

raynpelikoneet

Finland43268 Posts

April 22 2013 18:33 GMT

#773

Yeah Sharrant is prolly not scum, just being wrong about me.
##Unvote: Sharrant

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 14 15 16 Next All

Please or register to reply.

TL Mafia LXI - Page 3

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming