|
I'm going to bed - I'm reading from 82 tomorrow, but my vote stands unless I see someone slip worse than I accused Sharrant of. Good night, gents. Sorry to be a ballbuster, I'm just big on policy... I want to not lynch clarity though, and considering I was the first to grill him... which I wouldn't do to my scumbuddy... and I haven't lawyered/white knighted anyone this game, as a scummy defense attorney... heed my advice: clarity is a bad lynch today. I have gotten nothing out of him, but if you realize that 2 of the better players 1 i know to be town (me) and 1 i believe to be town (ace) ... and im dying to catch ace as scum.... just dont think he is... we have both analyzed the oats wagon... just remember the blatant bandwagonning with 0 reasoning + bad voting positioning being more important than me than someone lying for self preservation... i dont know clarity's meta. If I caught BC, for instance, piddling around... that would be different... i want to be sure to get a scum lynch today, or someone who isn't going to provide anything substantial.... before i go im going to filter kush to see if he has been posting more than i remember
On April 25 2013 14:52 kushm4sta wrote:hi ace. you aren't town this game so i'm not listening to your suggestions and nor should anyone else. VE is town. He is town from his first post in the game. Show nested quote +On April 21 2013 23:02 VisceraEyes wrote:
THANKS FOR MAKING ME HAVE TO READ THE DAMNED OP BH THAT WAS COOL OF YOU NOT
Sup guys I'm here and I'm very town. So whazzup? only town would complain about having to read the op (because the role names weren't colored) I am gonna vote for shiaopi. I don't want to go for clarity because now Ace is pushing it. A very similar thing happened yesterday. Yamato was the popular lynch, then Ace pushed Oats, claiming the case on Oats was really good (even though in retrospect it sucked).
attacking a townreads viability? check against him
promoting a scumread as town? (VE) check against him
blaming the Oats wagon on Ace? Well, more than Ace deterred the Yamato lynch. I deterred it a bit through providing Yamato with answers to my pressure, but he didn't buckle. That was the key. Yamato would still be a good lynch, and eventually we're going to have to lynch him, but not yet. We got a lot of analysis over those competing wagons yesterday, and that is why *I* have a lot of thread-cred, except to idiots like ObviousOne who will constantly be flip flopping on their "gut read" of me after one fucking game... hahahahaha
anyways, I nearly completely disagree with this post. The only thing I agree with is Ace shifting the lynch, but what else is new. The way Oat was playing, it was actually for the best. You have to cut the cancer out of the town.
On April 25 2013 14:59 kushm4sta wrote:honestly i figured you wrote a guide so you must know wtf you are talking about. you said the case was good so i was like hmm maybe it is good
yeah he's mudslinging, but he is caught up, and backtracking, like i said. this is terrible, considering what he just posted made me forget he was even on the wagon, and ace called him out for it. this is actually a town-scum interraction. one of these two guys will be scum... ace or kush... and my vote is on kush
On April 26 2013 05:44 Ange777 wrote:~~~ Vote Count ~~~
VisceraEyes (3): Palmar, raynpelikoneet, yamato77, ObviousOne, getmoript, Bill Murray
GiygaS (1): grush57
Palmar (1): VisceraEyes
ShiaoPi (3): VisceraEyes, Ace, kushm4sta, yamato77, GiygaS, Mr. Cheesecake
Clarity_nl (3): Sharrant, Ace, Bill Murray
Stutters695 (1): Tube
Ace (1): GiygaS
yamato77 (1): BloodyCobbler
Remember, this Day ends when a majority is reached. As soon as a majority is reached, please stop posting until the Night Post has been posted. Only votes in the voting thread will be counted! The voting thread can be found here: (link)
With 23 alive it takes 12 votes to lynch.
so kush unvotes, which makes the 3rd person on the shiaopi wagon to come off their vote
VE and Ace are both looking bad right now to the thread (Ace shouldn't be) if you have any sense.. Ace is just really scummy as town sometimes, but then he will deliver 3 scum on a silver platter... you get used to it.
oh, hey, look... kush YET AGAIN is a 3rd voter... and he must feel the heat... because he's hopping BACK WITH VE AGAIN.
Ace isn't noob-scum enough to blatantly bandwagon with his buddies
but kush is
and he's following VE
VE + kush are maf
|
so i posted about drazak
On April 24 2013 06:57 tube wrote:
Where's drazak?
Inactivity should be pushed.
then he posts this, parroting me. I always knew I should follow that tell. GiygaS has been parroting, too, and I was pleased to see a vote on him... so add GiygaS to that scum list I'm leaning on him... tho.... I'm pretty dang sure on kush right now.
FoS GiygaS for the parroting like Tube did... think it was Giyg
On April 26 2013 07:22 tube wrote:
Tunneling VE- his activity shift under suspicion gives me a blue read.
Largest threats are those who gradually shifted away from posting once people started attacking them, as if waiting for the suspicion to tide over. Stop defending them in their absence or you're scum.
Personally I think we should start voting Stutters until he posts.
so VE is scum
if he was REALLY THINKING HE WAS BLUE he wouldnt tell the town that
This cements VE as scum... the bolded above. see this and read it FOR SURE.
#analyzingTubeposts
#guiltypleasure
#sorrytospambutimputtinginwork
On April 26 2013 07:24 tube wrote:
He posted, vote TheRavensName guys.
This is either semi clearing of TRN or a modkilled gambit... I've been feeling theravensname is town, so I'm going to look at this as being semi-clearing. Tube voted him, too, but it could just be distancing, so don't get too confirmation biased off of this...
Really this just makes it
1) kush - Jeeps tell x2, backtracking
2) VE - associative tell, scum ve is lazy ve, no zest for pressure/scumhunting like i see from him as townie
3) clarity - lynch all liars
4) giygas - parroting in a similar sense that i saw from tube
^would like to lynch
|
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
|
.
i was a bit busy with something unimportant, and a few important things. I haven't gotten to catch up properly. However, expect a wall post shortly.
|
On April 27 2013 11:40 raynpelikoneet wrote:
WoS waiting for a modkill is not a reason to not vote for someone who is scummy.
i agree with this line of reasoning
it's not like we're going to get a replacement this far into the game, or a restart. If he's not here, and he's on most everyones scum lists (he's definitely on mine, and I will hammer on him the moment I can - I pretty much called out his case as being reaching... not that others wouldn't have without me... but I was def. a crucial part of Clarity's pressure/disappearing act)
|
On April 27 2013 09:18 Ace wrote:
VE how about we lynch clarity first. If he flips Town, then we just vigi ShiaoPi. If he flips Scum we can all reconsider our reads on ShiaoPi and look at who didn't want clarity dead and voted for Shiao after this discussion popped up. What do you think about taking this set of actons?
lets just do this
##vote clarity
|
OO i was about to vote him
but you make me lazy
perhaps later
ill vote him baby
|
|
|
we know what you are, and you know that we know what you are
|
|
|
finally
but yamato "but I saw it mentioned that we've only really talked about lynching between him/Clarity today, "
totally untrue
i have provided multiple lynch candidates, and have some I HAVE EVEN MENTIONED YET.
You bring up one, coincidentally: Sylencia. Dude parroted me, and is scummy as fuck. Would love to lynch him, but he's sitting around the 5th - 6th "love to lynch the most" on my list. Clarity is higher than that.
Palmar gave my reasoning, when I first attacked the case: the timing of it is suspect. "oh i was reading 70 pages an hour before that" "oh i had time to filter dive" "oh i went back and read the 2 pages randomly" yeah, no.
##
|
WoS next. He slipped earlier.
100% agree
since i pressured Clarity,
you all should listen to me
|
On April 28 2013 05:59 Artanis[Xp] wrote:I was gonna say WoS looks better since the flip as he defended Sharrant from Clarity's case, but Sharrant was never in danger of getting lynched so it'd be easy to defend. He also has no real reason for not suspecting Clarity. Show nested quote +On April 25 2013 00:51 WaveofShadow wrote:On April 24 2013 23:11 Sharrant wrote:Okay, let's get this started with the most important part: Clarity should be lynched tomorrow, a few people have made cases on why, and they're quite right. He apparently spent 4 hours reading the thread and came up with not even half a case on me, and refused to comment on the lynch that was happening right in front of his eyes all the while flip flopping on the amount of time and effort he supposedly put in. He's obvious enough at this point that everyone should be on board with his lynch, I don't think there's more that needs to be said about him. Responses to cases and stuff: @ClarityThere's nothing in your case to respond to. You obviously just skimmed my filter and tried to pick out what you could skew to look mafia oriented, and you failed miserably at that. @Rayne+ Show Spoiler +On April 24 2013 15:57 raynpelikoneet wrote:About Sharrant:First he makes a case on TRN. The case in itself is not bad if you have never seen how TRN plays. But there is this question: I call him out for this question which i find to be scummy. Sharrant's answer is: Show nested quote +The last part of your case is even weaker, I don't think it even needs to be touched upon. Sharrant later on calls me out for saying; "So you say TRN 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?". This is correct, mainly because Sharrant and Vivax both attacked TRN early on in the game, after that TRN went defensive and answered their questions. Sharrant is even adding more fuel into the fire by asking TRN to point him to his games on TL. Why do you think it is TRN's (or anyone other than yours) job to guide you into his past games? And why do you call me out for poining out the fact (as i have witnessed it myself) that TRN is easy to sidetrack from what he is supposed to do -> find mafia?Next thing. Sharrant's case on me. His points against me are; BM-policy lynch discussion (understandable as i failed to explain myself clearly enough) and that i called him scummy for asking TRN to point him to his last games. Which i still think is scummy. Next i explain him my BM vote, he is pleased with my answer, at least that reads so to me. + Show Spoiler +On April 22 2013 08:40 Sharrant wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 08:33 raynpelikoneet wrote:Sharrant:What is your exact reasoning for voting for BM. Give me one paragraph, with your thought process. If it's policy, tell me it's policy and the exact policy. If you have other reasoning for it, please detail that reasoning to the best of your ability. I think there is no reason for a townie to claim miller for the reasons i explained before. If BM was not in fact claiming miller, he should have a damn good reason why he decided to post what he did, because posting (joking?) that as town does not make any sense. I see. I'll wait until Bill Murray is back in the thread before I say anything more about this then, if I feel the need to say anything more.Let's give ourselves another topic then. Pick a player who you would like to discuss with me, and I will read their filter while I cook and eat. I would suggest Mr. Cheesecake, but I would prefer it if you picked the candidate for discussion. In the same quote he asks me to pick a player to discuss. Why do you want me, your scumread to pick a player to discuss? If i thought you were scum i would be damn sure i wanted to pick the people we discuss (other scummy people).After that we discuss WoS and GiygaS. I also ask him about geript. I am the one asking all the questions. Note that Sharrant would have liked to discuss Mr.Cheesecake. If i am your scumread, why do you allow me to drive the discussion between us? Why do you not want to find out my scumbuddies when talking with me?Then Sharrant suddenly changes his scumread on TRN into null/leaning town. The reason is TRN saying i have told him i would use weak townies as town-credit-collectors by defending them. Sharrant takes this at face value. TRN was your scumread at that time, why didn't you take any action to figure out if he was telling the truth or not, as he wasn't?Then comes in his theory (based on what TRN said) about me trying to gain town-credit for TRN's lynch. The theory is ridiculous in the first place, if people can't see why idk what to say. He also makes a big post about it: + Show Spoiler +On April 22 2013 13:26 Sharrant wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 12:28 raynpelikoneet wrote:
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? 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 +On April 22 2013 12:32 ShiaoPi wrote:On April 22 2013 12:24 Sharrant wrote:On April 22 2013 12:07 ShiaoPi wrote:On April 22 2013 12:05 Sharrant wrote:On April 22 2013 11:59 ShiaoPi wrote:
Oh if you have paid close attention to TRN then what is your stance on him now?
I am calling you scummy That he's fairly unimportant in the grand scheme of things, and most likely town. What made you change your mind? This response is terribly lacking.... 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. At least more content than your last answer. If TRN only had a small chance of actually being mafia, why did you vote him? Isn't that fulfilling your own conclusion that you are mafia, by virtue of going after the lynchbait? What the fuck dude? Now what do you make of all the others who also defended TRN? All team mafia?? What do you say about Ace and others who also had a townread (or at least null) on TRN? 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: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. 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? At the end of that post he also says his scumread on me has weakened. After that i vote for Sharrant. This is his answer to the case: + Show Spoiler +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. Now, suddenly i am 100% scum again. But no more is my town-credit-gaining a reason why i am scum. It's all back to the point that i "disguised my policy lynch vote on BM into something else". But he was already okay with my answer. Hell, he does not even answer anything to my case. Why did you make a big post about the theory of me trying to gain credit from defending town!TRN, if it isn't even part of the case against me, what's the point?
TLDR;1) Why did you not answer me clearly when i asked you why should TRN point you to his past games? And he never did, why didn't you follow it up in any way, if you think that was scummy from him? 2) Why did you say you were pleased with my answer on the BM matter and later on said your whole case against me is based on that? 3) Why did you not want to find out who my "scumbuddies" are when we were discussing people, and why did you let me drive the discussion? 4) Why did you take TRN's words about my "scum strategy" at face value as at that time he was your scumread? 5) Why did you even discuss your theory about me trying to gain credit from TRN when it had apparently nothing to do with your scumread on me and was based on false premises in the first place which you were too lazy to check out and which came from you scumread? And for the record this is basically everything Sharrant has done this game besides one post where he answers Vivax about Hopeless and couple of posts questioning people with no follow ups at all. I don't see how this is anything near townie behaviour. 1. It's laughable that yous till think that asking for games is a scum tell, but run with it if it makes you happy. He did point me to his games, just not linked them. Not as helpful as I would have hoped he would have been, but he didn't mention any games off site which was the concern. 2. I never stated I was pleased with your answer. I asked you to restate so everyone would see that your answers still did not match up with what you had said earlier in the thread. Pushing that singular point any more would just make the thread more of a mess than it was starting to be, and the whole point would get lost and thus once I had you restate it again clearly there was no more value to be gained from going after you on that point at that time. So instead, I wanted to move you onto topics that would be helpful regardless of whether I was wrong or right about your alignment. 3. The choice of who to talk about is as telling as the choice of who not to talk about, I'll learn more about your alignment from you picking who you want to discuss then I will from giving you the topics I want you to discuss. It tells you too much about how I already lean on those topics, and having you drive the discussion lets me get a better feel for you. 4. I'm really surprised you don't get this part. Lots of newer scum buddy people, especially people that defend them. Here he shows that he's suspicious of the fact that you defended him, regardless of whether the fact he stated was misremembered (apparently someone else in that game had said it) he showed that his thought process went "Hey! This guy has taken up a shield for me" -> "Wait, why did he do that?" When as a new scum scared to be in his first big game would have been more hesitant to put any tarnish on his knight's armour. 5. You're mixing up your time periods so bad that this question is just a jumble of words. Your staunch defense of him got me to check out your filter. His subsequent "Hey, why are you defending me?" moment made him more than likely town. @WaveofShadowsOn April 24 2013 06:27 WaveofShadow wrote:
Hey Sharrant, where you at bro?
Any thoughts on yamato/Oats since you seem to have conveniently missed it entirely?
Updated thoughts on Rayn/Shiao? I think Oats was a good lynch because of how useless he was being, it's a shame he turned out to be town, but at least he was a non-self aware miller. That said, I think there were better lynches for that day, Clarity and Rayne being two I think would have been better lynches. Yamato is almost definitely town, everything about his posts on the second half of day one scream town yamato in a way I don't think he knows how to replicate as scum. Last time I played with him when he was scum I caught him (but was not able to get him lynched before I was killed) because of how glaring the difference is between him being the townie, headstrong Yamato and him trying to emulate the townie headstrong Yamato. I hope that satisfies your curiousity. If there was one or two things in particular that lead you to have such a strong town read on me, what would they be? I'm going to be around for a while doing some filter diving in, so I'm available for questions. It is very likely that I will be unavailable for Thursday, and possibly some or all of Friday (excepting phone posting which I hate hate hate doing). There will be 0 posts from me between midnight tonight, and Thursday night. For starters just the fact that you cared enough to respond to my buried, 'inane' line of questioning that Rayn and TRN seem to hate so much further cements my townread on you. Also wtf I don't think I read the flip, just looked at the colour---he WAS a fucking miller. I agree with your thoughts on Oats and feel a little better about being wrong. Yes you've definitely satisfied my curiousity. Now you mention a Clarity lynch... I agree that his entry into the thread was very scummy-looking but he just doesn't feel like a good lynch to me for reasons that I can't remember right now. I have a bunch of re-reading to do and an eventual case to post...when is frigging Daypost?
BUT WHEN HE DEFENDED SHARRANT HE WAS LARGELY PARROTING ME
|
ok, ace, bc, sharrant
good town guys here
voting bloc?
|
add palmar to that list obv
|
On April 28 2013 06:01 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2013 05:58 WaveofShadow wrote:
Haha knew this was coming. You're welcome to vig me if it will clear up your suspicions; it appears I've been wrong a lot of this game. Just make sure you vig me and don't waste the lynch I suppose. Oh and don't bother not vigging and trying to DT check me because I'm self-aware miller. You guys need to decide if you don't trust me and want me gone or not.
yeah... no
you claim town-impediment WHEN YOU GET YOUR ROLE
you don't do it when you're up against the wall
vig shot plz
|
yo
On April 22 2013 01:16 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 01:11 Vivax wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 22 2013 01:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 00:30 raynpelikoneet wrote:On April 22 2013 00:08 Vivax wrote:
Not sure what to make of BM "claiming" snape like that. If I were to make a crazy guess, he's checking whether the real snape shows up contesting the claim, then say he posted some random shit cause he was drunk (cause that's what his posts look like ). And if the real snape doesn't show up, he will claim he's snape.
That'd be pretty ballsy, but effective scumplay. Let's see what BM has to say regarding this. What's in your opinion the point of doing this as we can't know how many of each roles are in the game? If there is someone who claims snape, why can't BM be another one? Vivax could you answer this? I don't think there can be two self-aware millers. Don't see much point in discussing that atm, why does it concern you at this point? BM didn't even answer yet. Because the OP clearly states there can be multiple number of same roles, so discussing if there are one or more self-aware millers in stupid in the first place. Anyone who claims miller on D1 should be lynched. ##Vote: Bill Murray
anyone remember this post? all i said was "sheverus shnape"
i didnt claim ANYTHING
town vivax is wanting to question me
scum rayn is wanting to push a mislynch on a vet
FoS rayn
On April 22 2013 01:23 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 01:11 Vivax wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 22 2013 01:06 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 00:30 raynpelikoneet wrote:On April 22 2013 00:08 Vivax wrote:
Not sure what to make of BM "claiming" snape like that. If I were to make a crazy guess, he's checking whether the real snape shows up contesting the claim, then say he posted some random shit cause he was drunk (cause that's what his posts look like ). And if the real snape doesn't show up, he will claim he's snape.
That'd be pretty ballsy, but effective scumplay. Let's see what BM has to say regarding this. What's in your opinion the point of doing this as we can't know how many of each roles are in the game? If there is someone who claims snape, why can't BM be another one? Vivax could you answer this? I don't think there can be two self-aware millers. Don't see much point in discussing that atm, why does it concern you at this point? BM didn't even answer yet. What concerns me about you on this is the following: You state that there is no reason to discuss this atm, yet you are giving BM an out in the first place by discussing the matter and saying this kinda stuff: Show nested quote +he posted some random shit cause he was drunk (cause that's what his posts look like ).And if the real snape doesn't show up, he will claim he's snape. Why are you so eager to give BM the "right" answers if you want him to expalin himself?
attacks vivax when i dont need an out due to the wording, hell, the LETTERING being an obvious joke......
trying to make an associative tell and chainlynch on d1.... scummy scummy scum
On April 22 2013 01:25 raynpelikoneet wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2013 01:23 kushm4sta wrote:
WE knew that's what VE meant because we are town. Scum prob didn't know what he meant. Now you just explained it to them. I think that ship sailed already.
this interaction with another scumspect of mine, kush, makes him look awful
im saying kush, rayn, and WoS are maf
how many are left? brb once i find if WoS chimed in on this
|
On April 28 2013 06:40 Sharrant wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2013 06:40 yamato77 wrote:On April 28 2013 06:37 Sharrant wrote:On April 28 2013 06:35 yamato77 wrote:
Vick Ace for obvious on clarity
proceed to win game
GG What are you even saying? Vigi Ace for obvibus on Clarity And here's where you tell me that's a joke, right? Right?
1) i figured that's what he was saying
2) i dont think he's joking
3) ignore him; he's a vi
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
