|
On April 15 2013 15:41 SamuelLJackson wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2013 15:37 Hapahauli wrote:
Syllo - the issue here is that you (or sandro) left us promising to read through filters hours before the deadline, and did nothing instead, leaving your vote on what looks to be a guaranteed townie at this point. I didn't promise anything, I said I had 30 minutes and then went to bed. Sandro apparently had to go out for a dinner and it doesn't look like he promised anything either.
Whatever the reason is, it looks terrible.
That being said, we're willing to listen to what you have to say, and we're most interested in your reads. Floor is yours.
|
No it does not, unless you think I'm lying about being asleep and about Sandro's dinner (I can assure you I am not).
So just to keep record, so far the reasons for suspecting me have amounted to not understanding timezones, reading comprehension issues and me being slightly less active than usual. Not a single content based reason has been suggested by anyone. But keep pretending as if any of you had a reason for nuking me day 1
|
On April 15 2013 03:30 SamuelLJackson wrote:
Smurf: I've absolutely been useless, but that does not make me mafia. I joined the game with the assumption that I could just chat with sandro and not post much, but the game started earlier than expected and I ended up having to play the game solo so far.
I have a hard time reconciling this response with what you're saying now.
|
That's a meta reason, because townies are useless all the time, in particular on day 1. I'm using 'useless' as a relative, meta based adjective and not as an absolute, objective characterization of my play. If it wasn't me (and nominally sandro) playing, none of you would find me suspicious at all and I don't think that evaluation would be applicable.
|
Vatican City State88 Posts
On April 15 2013 16:33 SamuelLJackson wrote:
No it does not, unless you think I'm lying about being asleep and about Sandro's dinner (I can assure you I am not).
So just to keep record, so far the reasons for suspecting me have amounted to not understanding timezones, reading comprehension issues and me being slightly less active than usual. []redNot a single content based reason has been suggested by anyone. But keep pretending as if any of you had a reason for nuking me day 1 [/red]Well in fairness, we would firstly need content to judge.
|
Vatican City State88 Posts
On April 15 2013 16:33 SamuelLJackson wrote:
No it does not, unless you think I'm lying about being asleep and about Sandro's dinner (I can assure you I am not).
So just to keep record, so far the reasons for suspecting me have amounted to not understanding timezones, reading comprehension issues and me being slightly less active than usual. Not a single content based reason has been suggested by anyone. But keep pretending as if any of you had a reason for nuking me day 1 Well in fairness, we would firstly need content to judge.
EBWOP
|
On April 15 2013 16:44 SamuelLJackson wrote:
That's a meta reason, because townies are useless all the time, in particular on day 1. I'm using 'useless' as a relative, meta based adjective and not as an absolute, objective characterization of my play. If it wasn't me (and nominally sandro) playing, none of you would find me suspicious at all and I don't think that evaluation would be applicable.
I don't feel that's true at all.
You are applying to other people in your own post, how is it that I am only applying it to you based on meta?
Where do I even mention in my case that it's specific to your play, anyway? Not that it isn't a good point, because it is, but that the heuristic is UNIVERSAL.
|
There's content and it's day 1. If that's the standard, or excuse, you are going to use to lynch and nuke people on day 1, you aren't going to be winning many games.
|
It's the same fucking reason we were going to lynch Prom, by the way, so you can't just say that we're cherrypicking; we're not.
Also, you have yet to respond to Palmar's accusations.
|
False, I presented content based reasons for the lynch and someone even had noticed the same things (mockarmor). Perhaps that was your reason for finding him suspicious, but it was not mine. Palmar hasn't accused me of anything, just said that I'm "scum". How do you propose I respond to that?
|
On April 15 2013 16:56 SamuelLJackson wrote:
False, I presented content based reasons for the lynch and someone even had noticed the same things (mockarmor). Perhaps that was your reason for finding him suspicious, but it was not mine. Palmar hasn't accused me of anything, just said that I'm "scum". How do you propose I respond to that?
He accused of not regarding a town tell as such.
Are you reading closely, or not?
|
It's palmar not reading closely, because Sandro is the one who was open to lynching Vivax.
|
Vatican City State88 Posts
On April 15 2013 16:56 SamuelLJackson wrote:
False, I presented content based reasons for the lynch and someone even had noticed the same things (mockarmor). Perhaps that was your reason for finding him suspicious, but it was not mine. Palmar hasn't accused me of anything, just said that I'm "scum". How do you propose I respond to that?
Yes, though you would have been aware we were deeply entrenched with other scum pursuits; you still decided to throw that back at MA as suspicious.
|
Add that to the list, Palmar imagining I said a thing, when I didn't
|
Sammy you need to stop trying to defend yourself and call others bad etc. The most important thing you can be doing as town right now is giving out reads and putting us in the best possible position to win in your absence.
|
On April 15 2013 16:59 MockArmor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2013 16:56 SamuelLJackson wrote:
False, I presented content based reasons for the lynch and someone even had noticed the same things (mockarmor). Perhaps that was your reason for finding him suspicious, but it was not mine. Palmar hasn't accused me of anything, just said that I'm "scum". How do you propose I respond to that? Yes, though you would have been aware we were deeply entrenched with other scum pursuits; you still decided to throw that back at MA as suspicious.
I can not know if he had genuinely reached the same conclusion as I had or just claimed so afterwards.
|
On April 15 2013 16:52 SamuelLJackson wrote:
There's content and it's day 1. If that's the standard, or excuse, you are going to use to lynch and nuke people on day 1, you aren't going to be winning many games.
Your "content" boiled down to a lurker lynch.
This:
On April 14 2013 02:41 SamuelLJackson wrote:FondleMyButtocks looks suspicious. His bigger posts look constructed rather than free flowing and he isn't doing anything with his few other posts. Going after Vivax/kush hydra is fine, but his reasons look forced to me. Show nested quote +On April 13 2013 21:16 FondleMyButtocks wrote:On April 13 2013 08:40 VIVAX420 wrote:
##Unvote
##Vote MockArmor
Almost forgot that the guy found joining the pre-game banter funny but when the game started he didn't feel that much like joking. Must be discussing stuff elsewhere! the soft calling of someone as scum through the idea of 'posting somewhere else' of course they are posting somewhere else. I got a qt in my role pm. You got a qt too. We all did, its a hydra game! Stupid way to phrase this, it feels like over justification. It's not "soft calling" when you throw your vote down and stupid does not equal mafia. It was a short, semi serious early game vote post with only one justification. Not at all an "over justification", there was only one reason for the vote. His other reasons for finding vivax420 suspicious look similarly manufactured. The way he words his case and frames vivax420's posts overall does not feel genuine and open-minded (e.g. "supposed to be 420's concise thoughts", "even gives us a lynchable list"). The random comment about wanting to "almost" lynch GK for tradition's sake also looks like kind of fluff mafia likes to add to their post. Phagga are you going to write that mockarmor case?
Is highly subjective. You provide a lot of adjectives that describe FMB's play, but your only quote of them is essentially that you disagree with their analysis. You say it's "manufactured" but never provide context to this; you don't take the time to show what something that is "manufactured" looks like, in the strictest sense. How am I supposed to know how you got your read, from this? How can I hold you accountable for the analysis that you provide here when I have no context?
I'm talking so much about this single post because it is, in essence, the only post I need to look at in your entire filter to determine your level of contribution for the day. Aside from this read, your contributions to the game have not been very deep or thought-provoking whatsoever, so I expect a high standard. Did this meet my expectation? Not at all.
The entire basis of the rest of your reads of this game is a judgement of the worth of their contributions, so I feel like it's completely fair to apply it to you. I deem your case unworthy. If you are town, you are not trying very hard to seem it, and I will not suffer you calling the thread idiots in an attempt to bully them out of their read, or in the hopes that you scare a weak anti-nuker into saving you and giving you more time to look town.
The fact that you come in here berating me, Palmar, and the rest of the thread for logically concluding that a syllo that gives no fucks is a syllo we want dead, is abhorrent. People criticize my reads in that I generally hold people to a high standard of play, and call "bad play" scum in a lot of instances, but in truth it only reflects my view of the game. If you are town for how you've played this game, you should know that you are only giving a place in which mafia can hide. Your job, as town, is to LOOK town, and if you have failed to give me reason to think you are town, I will not assume responsibility for lynching you.
Unfortunately, you only have so much time to do so. It seems as if you've run out. I do think you had adequate time for a player of your capabilities to look town, however, so you have no one to blame for me nuking you than yourself.
|
But syllo knows all of that anyway, and would not be criticizing me for doing this; he would be providing what reads he could in the time he did have. He would know that it could only be through this path of action that an anti-nuker could feel comfortable enough to shoot down the nuke.
|
I have not called anyone an idiot, nor have I implied that either. I do not have a habit of doing that. Suspecting me is fine per se, I admit that there is semi-valid meta based evidence for that. If I'm berating you for something, it's for nuking me while I was asleep and for accusing me of fictional things and expecting me to not sleep. You are right that it would be better if I could provide context for this kind of reads, but it's not easy to explain why something feels faked. Sometimes just highlighting the fact is sufficient, nothing wrong with that.
It's an early day 1 case and a lot of other people were very content lynching purely based on a person lurking. Are they being held accountable? The point being, you can not expect a very throughout case on day 1 and it's not my style either. That does not prevent you from analyzing my play. Indeed, people are analyzed based on other aspects of their play all the time. "Accountability" for analysis isn't the main method, at least accountability in the sense that you have to understand why I reached the conclusion I did. In this case there is auxiliary evidence supporting the notion that the read was genuine because someone else had allegedly reached the same conclusion.
If you got the idea that I'm calling you or anyone else bad, you got it wrong. What I'm saying it that the decision was wrong, based on faulty evidence and there was NO NEED whatsoever to do that n1. I'm understandably angry.
|
If I had been alive tomorrow, you could easily have announced that you are nuking me if I don't make myself useful. That would have provided me the opportunity to shape up. Now that really only matters if there is an anti-nuker and I have much less time than I would otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
