EPTI hate the roleplayer and I want to find out who it is so I don't have to play with him again. But I don't think he's conclusively scum based on that one post.
Smurf Mini Mafia - Page 10
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Let's play a game... | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
I hate the roleplayer and I want to find out who it is so I don't have to play with him again. But I don't think he's conclusively scum based on that one post. | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
On May 31 2013 08:52 TomB4 wrote: What policy am I lynching him on? Lynch all trolls? Lol. I don't even know why you are trying to lynch DrT-at least my reasons are clear. Your reasons and confidence don't make any sense. Your reasons so far have been policy, others have thrown in other reasons like: - didn't read thread - didn't comment on someone into the mix. You didn't. Here, let me summarize your reasons for going after him. IIRC you were the first to do that. I'd much rather get PTroughton to say something worthwhile. I expect players in this game to avoid bullshitting and roleplaying given that it's a smurf game and it's in our best interest to get things organised rapidly. Trolling around is in direct opposition to that goal, particularly as we are at a huge disadvantage to a normal game in which we can use meta-analysis to determine whether behaviour of a certain type is to be expected. ##vote PTroughton2 It's not null when he's done nothing else. Is he Chezinu? Is he Foolishness? Is he Palmar? We don't know. Identity matters when someone does something like this. Context matters, simply dismissing someone because of trolling is a great way to find yourself saying in lategame "if this guy is scum he deserves to win" and then losing to him. Everyone is worth analysing, and your dismissive attitude is disturbing in the sense that you don't seem to understand this. (not to mention you have simply ignored my question about DrT, or do not care enough to explain that position of yours I suppose?) and for the record, I'm not suggesting we figure out who he is, I'm saying that because we don't know the identities of players in this game we absolutely cannot tolerate such behaviour. Finding scum is that much harder when you have a player who is purposely an impedance to town efforts. How is a "playful" post helpful to us? How is that at all indicative that he is town? At best, you can argue that what Troughton has said is null, but even that is stretching. In a game like this, all of the town should be acutely aware of the fact that each player's presence is vital in attaining opinions and organising a good scumhunting effort. Being present but not caring about scumhunting is actually much worse than simply not being present at all, because there is standing evidence that a player has at least taken the time to read and post, but still is not contributing. That's far from "null" in my opinion. What a wonderful world we'd live in if we could just win games by letting the scum stand around and troll us all day and not actually lynch them for it. Then you proceeded to threaten me for my confidence into DrT being scum, and now you deny that your reasons for wanting to lynch trout are policy. What's worse, you keep attacking the arguments used against DrT when he has not been doing that himself (he didn't respond to a multitude of them) and instead of waiting to see what he has to say, you prefer to take his spot and speak up for him, going all-in on your bet that he's town. You could be doing analysis on players who are a better lynch in your opinion, instead you try to sidetrack a strong wagon in the hope that people switch to a more-policy-than-not lynch. Your lack of suspicion of DrT is what's looking unnatural, when at least half the thread should have recognized that he is at the very least someone who deserves a lot of scrutiny. As such, your prime interest should lay into luring more information out of him, not do his work. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ I'll get to this point you were mentioning since it's relevant in the arguments against DrT . and you are trying to misrepresent it: Oh please. Are you incapable of understanding context? McCoy calls him scummy for doing something that is not scummy. If you actually read the exchange you'd see that, while McCoy is probably more articulate than DrT, his response to DrT makes no sense. He bolded the rhetorical question and pushed the suspicion off himself onto DrT. DrT rightfully rebutted with the correct assessment that it's far more likely for townies to change their minds on a whim than scum, because scum are aware of the problems of changing their opinion, and are very wary of doing so because of the attention it draws. How many scum do you know are willing to openly admit they made a mistake and backtrack on something they said earlier? Generally when scum change opinions they purposely try to hide it-that's why finding contradictions is so useful. Something like that is not a contradiction nor a scum tell if the thought process is open and transparent or if the change in opinion is blatant and attention-grabbing. Represent what you're saying, with quotes and all, cause I don't think you will be able to. I bolded everything which is wrong. Bold #1: I called him scummy for multiple reasons, display the argument you think is not valid. Bold #2: Doesn't make sense. How is him arguing that quick judgments are townie a defense of his loaded question? I mentioned something entirely different which triggered that response. It's in this post. The last part of that post is about scum not being willing to change their opinion easily. What does that have to do with anything? What's the point of mentioning it? It neither helps your policy lynch nor is it a valid defense of what DrT did, he never has been accused of changing his opinion. | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
Sadly, the correctness of that statement is completely unrelated to the arguments brought against him. He's not scum for being right or wrong about that, he's scum for being defensive when he had no reason to Funny that you even bring unrelated stuff up just to defend him. Baker, what do you think is Tom trying to achieve here? | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
I'm kinda taking the "sweep it under the rug" approach with Tom now. | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
On May 31 2013 19:25 Eccleston wrote: Can you explain to me why you think that these points are exclusive to a scum mindset? For example, point three could be explained from a town perspective too; if DrT is a townie being tunneled, trying to shift the attention toward the lurkers is a perfectly valid thing to do if he thinks that the mafia are lurking. Before, you dismissed his "overdefense", as brought up by MSmith1 here (it's point two in his post), saying that "2 people are searching for something to talk about early game. This is true of both town and scum." What made you change your mind? You can explain all this stuff from a town mindset if you try really hard (see tom's posts). You can more easily explain it from a scum mindset though. If you want to make a better case on someone else I am all ears, but as of now the only alternative is a policy lynch on PT rper. | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
| ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 31 2013 05:00 HartnellWill wrote: ##Vote DrTennant. Other than skimming the thread, Tennant's filter is surprisingly empty of anything that would contribute to town. Mostly asking others to do work for him while he sits and waits and gets his postcount up. And while I'm reading PT2's case right now, it wouldn't be a surprise to see both of them role scum. DrT votes him without saying another word. Sheeping the wagon that isn't him because it isn't him that will get killed if it goes through. I think this post is written by a townie. the "fuck it they're all scum" attitude looks pretty good. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:51 Hurndall3 wrote: 53% You do realize you're awful at the "I'm a dick and I post oneliners" attitude? | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:42 SMcCoy wrote: Can everybody read through JPertwee and give me their chances that he's scum please? JP is the hardest call in the game at the moment, probably along with eccleston. There's probably 2, if not 3 scum in this list DrT JP Eccleston PT Tom Hurn I just need to weed out the townies. | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:57 Hurndall3 wrote: i was answering smccs question is all dont get mad at me I'm just pointing it out. The entire point of playing like you're playing is to antagonize someone to make him mad until he just snaps and does something stupid, revealing his alignment. You're just being useless. also, fuck Flood Control. | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
DrTennant
31 Posts
| ||
A McGann
81 Posts
On May 31 2013 21:56 Baker1986 wrote: JP is the hardest call in the game at the moment, probably along with eccleston. There's probably 2, if not 3 scum in this list DrT JP Eccleston PT Tom Hurn I just need to weed out the townies. I've liked what I've seen out of Eccleston as of late. His confusion and questioning of Hurndall's wagon hopping antics feels legitimate. This post in particular, I like. Having the presence of mind to admit when you're reaching and making a crappy post shows a more care-free nature than id expect from scum. I'd be comfortable taking him off the table. JPertwee on the other hand, I am not so sure. This post bothers me. JPertwee says that Dr. Tennant is a good lynch today for the reasons everyone else has brought forward, yet wants to derail that lynch in favour of killing the RP'er with a single post. Further on JPertwee backtracks his initial verdict on Dr.Tennant saying that the case on Dr.Tennant isn't a slam dunk and the points against Dr.Tennant are not exclusive to a scum mindset. I particularly don't like the way JPertwee states 'I'll consolidate on Dr.Tennant if it comes to that' - If the case has merit and you agree that he is a good lynch (as he seems to), then no one should have to twist your arm to get you to vote your scum read. I'm suspicious on the push on PTroughton. He looks like the kind of bait that scum usually latch onto and try to vilify as anti-town. That said, he could stand to voice some more opinions and preferably leave the flavour text to the hosts. | ||
|
A McGann
81 Posts
On May 31 2013 22:36 DrTennant wrote: This is bs Don't pout. Start posting some reads with a bit more substance than "he's voting me, therefore scum". | ||
|
SMcCoy
228 Posts
Instead he did what you mentioned with something that might look like a weak bus of DrT , but a contemporary attempt to move attention towards Trout. It might be too early to make connections though, so it's important to stay focused on the most probable lynch candidate lest we risk to derail discussion to a point where a quick change of sentiment could happen and people end up doing hasty things close to deadline. It's useful to discuss other candidates for later but I would not opt for a lynch of anyone else but DrT at this stage. | ||
|
A McGann
81 Posts
Being an Extended Majority Lynch setup, we need 7 votes for a successful lynch. As we are only just achieving a majority now, I'd not like to risk the no-lynch with a last minute swing. Dr.Tennant, if you're town, your time is not yet up. Post a list of reads, a paragraph on everyone. Give us every chance to see what you see. | ||
|
JPertwee
27 Posts
Troughton comes in claiming that H3 has been lurking. He does this on May 30th at 10:57. By this point H3 has posted in the thread 13 times. This means H3 has had TWENTY PERCENT of the posts in the game. Yet Troughton claims "he's lurking". Troughton has one other point in his case: The bluntness of H3's posts. He tries to spin this as being scum oriented, when the best you could possibly argue is that it's completely null. And quite honestly, with how open and blunt H3 is being, I see him (even at that point in the game) as a decent town read. The points against Troughton you're not considering is this: Troughton came into the thread, had the time and desire to post. He wrote up a post that is 90% fluff, 10% lies. He made it clear he didn't read, he just latched onto a player whose abrasive style was likely to bring him up as a lynch candidate. His reasons for wanting him lynched were both false, and conflicting (Troughton had not posted, H3 had 13 posts, yet Troughton wants to lynch H3 for lurking when Troughton is in fact the lurker). Troughton claims H3's blunt posts stop discussion, while Troughton designed his entire post to be undiscussable. I don't care about the fact that he hasn't been back to the thread since, I don't care that he was roleplaying in that post. The reason he is scum is out lined above, those show a scum mindset completely. There is no possibility of a town making that post. So those are the reasons why Troughton is a 100% through the legs 360 slam dunk lynch. Why is he a better lynch than Dr. Tennant? For starters, I still have some doubt about Tennant being scum. Like I said, his posts do LIKELY indicate a scum mindset, but do not prove it conclusively like with Troughton. However, there's still a better reason. Dr. Tennant was handed the perfect opportunity if he were scum, I dropped the case on Troughton. Now there's only two scenarios I can really see in this case because of his reactions: Scenario 1: Dr. Tennant is town, Troughton is scum. Tennant sees the case on Troughton, is not completely convinced by it but it gets him thinking. After taking a minute to think about it, decides that the case is good enough that Troughton should be the lynch for today. The point here is that he takes the time to consider whether Troughton is right lynch for today. Scenario 2: Dr. Tennant is scum, Troughton is scum. Dr. Tennant is given the option of himself swinging, or the inactive role player on his team swinging. His first instinct is to not be commital enough to kill his scum buddy despite the case. He realizes after a few minutes that it really is going to be him or his useless teammate, so he gets on the bandwagon for credit. I am 100% sure about Troughton being scum, but if we examine the scenario where Troughton is town and Tennant is scum, why would Tennant not immediately slap his vote down onto Troughton once the case popped up? He still took a bit of time to think about it. Because of that, if we lynch Troughton first his flip reveals things either way: If he flips scum, Tennant is still a decent lynch for the next day. If Troughton flips town, then Tennant is most likely town for not immediately hopping on and pushing the bandwagon as hard as he could. Troughton's flip is sure to both flip scum, and tell us about Tennant's alignment. While Tennant's flip would tell us nothing about Troughton's alignment, and isn't guaranteed to be flipping red. | ||
|
A McGann
81 Posts
What I would like from you is assuming we lynch Trout today, he flips scum, where do you look tomorrow? Obviously this is going to be subject to change from how D1 finishes, but work with what you have now. | ||
| ||
