EPTSmurf Mini Mafia - Page 6
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Let's play a game... | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
MSmith1
59 Posts
On May 30 2013 12:58 Hurndall3 wrote: also I still want someone to explain SIMPLY the case on DrTennant that everyone is sheeping. @H3 Okay I will summarize the points that smcc made against DrT as I see them. On May 29 2013 22:17 DrTennant wrote: Why so wishy washy? You scum? 1) This quote from DrT, addressed towards smcc, doesn't seem genuine. Let's say that as a townie you read someone's post and get the feeling that they might be scum. You would probably ask questions trying to get in your suspect's head and understand why they posted what they posted, right? On the contrary, DrT just pulled out a "uscumbro?" which isn't a real question and shows hostility without doing anything productive. On May 29 2013 23:31 DrTennant wrote: Well i don't know about you but i'm suspicious of everyone. i didnt take it as you saying you were suspicious of Eccleston i took as complete filler post that said absolutely nothing really and i took it as wishy washy and posting for the sake of posting by not taking a stance. I dont understand why making early judgements could be seen as bad i change my mind on things all the time based on new information and flip floping being scummy is a lie pushed by scum. Its only scummy when its convenient. So i dont understand your worry about making snap judgements. 2) In this post, DrT justifyied his own play and explained in some detail why what he posted isn't scummy. But nobody asked him to do this. Nobody was even calling him scum at the time. So in this post DrT betrays a defensive mindset. 3) And finally, smcc had a problem with the way that DrT attacked smcc's first post for being ambivalent and inconclusive, but chose to pass over Eccleston's equally ambivalent and inconclusive post about my alignment. This is slightly inconsistent. I think all of the points are valid. I don't believe any of them are completely damning, but I think that these three points combined with some of the recent points made by Baker/AMG/myself subsequent to DrT's response comprise the strongest case in the thread thus far. So what do you think H3? | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
"uscumbro?" is null possibly leaning town. I know you don't like it because of how it effectively accomplishes nothing, but town does it all the time. 2 people are searching for something to talk about early game. This is true of both town and scum. DrTennant is not a scumread and I think there are already a bunch of better lynch candidates out there: Eccleston PTroughton2 JPertwee Actually rereading all those filters I am gonna unvote TheDavison. His response to my OMGUS looks marginally genuine: On May 30 2013 03:21 TheDavison wrote: + Show Spoiler + That is indeed my first post, I have been absent from the thread until now. Upon reading the thread I found you scummy. Instead of doing anything to refute that you have instead reinforced my belief that you are an alien monster who must be purged by our security forces. ##unvote JPertwee might be a too scummy to be scum scenario. He is overly agreeable, wishy washy, and constantly asking people to expand on things they've said rather than contribute his own original thought. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 30 2013 11:12 DrTennant wrote: wat i dont know what baker does maybe baker can enlighten us. all i see from you is just calling the person who i think must be town and sheeping his incorrect case. That is what i see and that is scummy because it seems like your just jumping on me with no reasoning to get a mis lynch. If I am sheeping a case, I cannot by definition be jumping on it with no reasoning. The reasons are literally there, in that case? I don't even understand what you're saying. On May 30 2013 12:11 DrTennant wrote: because it looks like to me hes just hoping on without reasoning. like he had very little interaction with me a big case comes and he just hops on. scum have a hard time explaining their actions so it seems like a good ploy to just sheep a townie with a wrong case hop on the wagon and probably just call me bad after i flip. I hate arguing with scum, but let me try to explain. I immediately disagreed with your reasons for calling out SMcCoy. I explained why his logic and conclusion was sound. Attacking a solid thought process like you did does not give me warm and fuzzy feelings about you. Slightly later, you and I agree that SMcCoy has established his innocence quite strongly in the thread, so I don't think that needs any further explaining to you. And it's not as if my suspicions of you were only brought on after McCoy's case. These posts were both made prior to it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18745605 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18746042 So what you have to demonstrate is why it's scummy for me to sheep a case given the following parameters. 1. I already have suspicions of you and I have already disagreed with you 2. The person writing the case is almost certainly town. Now explain to me why me sheeping this case makes me scum. You have to prove that if I was town I would have done something else, and only if I am scum I would have done what I did. If you cannot do that, which I know you cannot, you're full of shit. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
Town heroes: McCoy Baker Townies: Msmith McGann Useless: TheDavison JPertwee Modkill-land: TomB4 HartnellWill Someone who thinks he's funny but he isn't, also his RP is awful PTroughton2 Scummy fuckers: Eccleston Hurndall3 Scum: DrTennant | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
| ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
| ||
|
Oatsmaster
United States16628 Posts
SMcCoy (0): TheDavison (0): DrTennant (3): SMcCoy, Baker1986, MSmith1. Hurndall3 (1): PTroughton2. DrTennant is set to be lynched. Votes without ## will not be counted | ||
|
Eccleston
75 Posts
Baker, I like your post about DrTennants read being shit, however, I am curious as to why you agree with MSmith1's read on me, because I think what he brings up is trash. Is your thought process similar to Smith's or do you agree with his read but not with his reasoning? Regarding DrTennant: McCoy's case on DrTennant isn't conclusive, but I think there's a fair chance of DrTennant being scum. The inconsistent suspicion toward ambiguous opinions and his defensive reactions could be scum indicators. I feel that point one would be a null tell if it wasn't for his strange justification about not being suspicious of me. It would be understandable if he said something like "Eccleston was asked to provide his opinion, but you were not." or that my post seemed less serious, but his "Yes eccelstone did have what could be interpreted as a wishy washy post but right before that he essential through out a town read for no reason. To me your post was devoid of actual content." sounds more like an after-the-fact justification (and a very bad one at that), especially since he said before that that my aggression was likely more of a town tell than a scum tell. Why didn't he touch on that again if that was what he thought? His recent posts about Baker being scummy and about thriving in the spotlight leave much to be desired. It's mostly rhetoric with little of essence. @DrTennant You said that you thrive in the spotlight and it helped you make reads, but you've yet to share them with us. Do you think that all the mafia players are lurking? | ||
|
DrTennant
31 Posts
| ||
|
DrTennant
31 Posts
On May 30 2013 21:38 Eccleston wrote: Sorry for my absence. Have been busy. Baker, I like your post about DrTennants read being shit, however, I am curious as to why you agree with MSmith1's read on me, because I think what he brings up is trash. Is your thought process similar to Smith's or do you agree with his read but not with his reasoning? Regarding DrTennant: McCoy's case on DrTennant isn't conclusive, but I think there's a fair chance of DrTennant being scum. The inconsistent suspicion toward ambiguous opinions and his defensive reactions could be scum indicators. I feel that point one would be a null tell if it wasn't for his strange justification about not being suspicious of me. It would be understandable if he said something like "Eccleston was asked to provide his opinion, but you were not." or that my post seemed less serious, but his "Yes eccelstone did have what could be interpreted as a wishy washy post but right before that he essential through out a town read for no reason. To me your post was devoid of actual content." sounds more like an after-the-fact justification (and a very bad one at that), especially since he said before that that my aggression was likely more of a town tell than a scum tell. Why didn't he touch on that again if that was what he thought? His recent posts about Baker being scummy and about thriving in the spotlight leave much to be desired. It's mostly rhetoric with little of essence. @DrTennant You said that you thrive in the spotlight and it helped you make reads, but you've yet to share them with us. Do you think that all the mafia players are lurking? ive made reads you must not be reading my posts. | ||
|
DrTennant
31 Posts
On May 30 2013 18:45 Baker1986 wrote: If I am sheeping a case, I cannot by definition be jumping on it with no reasoning. The reasons are literally there, in that case? I don't even understand what you're saying. I hate arguing with scum, but let me try to explain. I immediately disagreed with your reasons for calling out SMcCoy. I explained why his logic and conclusion was sound. Attacking a solid thought process like you did does not give me warm and fuzzy feelings about you. Slightly later, you and I agree that SMcCoy has established his innocence quite strongly in the thread, so I don't think that needs any further explaining to you. And it's not as if my suspicions of you were only brought on after McCoy's case. These posts were both made prior to it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18745605 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18746042 So what you have to demonstrate is why it's scummy for me to sheep a case given the following parameters. 1. I already have suspicions of you and I have already disagreed with you 2. The person writing the case is almost certainly town. Now explain to me why me sheeping this case makes me scum. You have to prove that if I was town I would have done something else, and only if I am scum I would have done what I did. If you cannot do that, which I know you cannot, you're full of shit. i didnt see that you had suspicions of me. Just that you disagreed with my point. town members cant disagree on a post? Or are you the one that is full of shit? | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
On May 30 2013 19:05 Baker1986 wrote: Here's a list. Town heroes: McCoy Baker Townies: Msmith McGann Useless: TheDavison JPertwee Modkill-land: TomB4 HartnellWill Someone who thinks he's funny but he isn't, also his RP is awful PTroughton2 Scummy fuckers: Eccleston Hurndall3 Scum: DrTennant Wait, so I'm useless but my thread contribution has been to make a case on the kill it with fire/stab it in the face scum player. How do you reconcile those two opinions? DrT, you seem a little defensive, you've said you thrive in the spotlight and that helps you form reads but you don't actually have reads. You are calling PT shit and saying Mccoy's case is trash but you are not calling either scum. If you are indeed town and you 'thrive in the spotlight' I'd rather like to hear about the reads you've gotten by being the centre of attention. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 30 2013 22:15 DrTennant wrote: i didnt see that you had suspicions of me. Just that you disagreed with my point. town members cant disagree on a post? Or are you the one that is full of shit? Any time someone calls another player out for something using invalid reasons that's suspicious. But hey, keep dodging the explanation. | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 30 2013 22:28 TheDavison wrote: ##Vote: H3 Wait, so I'm useless but my thread contribution has been to make a case on the kill it with fire/stab it in the face scum player. How do you reconcile those two opinions? DrT, you seem a little defensive, you've said you thrive in the spotlight and that helps you form reads but you don't actually have reads. You are calling PT shit and saying Mccoy's case is trash but you are not calling either scum. If you are indeed town and you 'thrive in the spotlight' I'd rather like to hear about the reads you've gotten by being the centre of attention. You're useless because you've made a grand total of one post, and you have had no success pushing the idea that he's scum. This doesn't help us get a read on you, and your case isn't worth jack shit if you can't convince others with it. | ||
|
TheDavison
157 Posts
This is a game where none of us, even you, can make people listen to them based on their names so each of us should be evaluating individual cases on a merit basis and I should not have to be in thread actively pushing for it to be considered. Because I could be anyone from Grush to Syllo I expect you to look into my cases as if they come form someone worth listening to. If it wasn't my case that convinced you that H3 was scum what was it? | ||
|
Hurndall3
237 Posts
On May 30 2013 22:39 TheDavison wrote: I shouldn't need to push it. If GM made sure that only reasonably good players got into this game making the original case and allowing other to draw their own conclusions should mean that I don't have to create the giant push onto H3 when instead I can simply show all of you why he is scum and you can decide whether to believe me or not. This is a game where none of us, even you, can make people listen to them based on their names so each of us should be evaluating individual cases on a merit basis and I should not have to be in thread actively pushing for it to be considered. Because I could be anyone from Grush to Syllo I expect you to look into my cases as if they come form someone worth listening to. If it wasn't my case that convinced you that H3 was scum what was it? 1 why are you assuming that gm was selective? I think he took every player that pmed him an /in. 2 are you convinced that I am scum? because I made a bunch of useless posts in the beginning? That case is terrible. | ||
|
TomB4
61 Posts
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 | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 30 2013 22:39 TheDavison wrote: I shouldn't need to push it. If GM made sure that only reasonably good players got into this game making the original case and allowing other to draw their own conclusions should mean that I don't have to create the giant push onto H3 when instead I can simply show all of you why he is scum and you can decide whether to believe me or not. This is a game where none of us, even you, can make people listen to them based on their names so each of us should be evaluating individual cases on a merit basis and I should not have to be in thread actively pushing for it to be considered. Because I could be anyone from Grush to Syllo I expect you to look into my cases as if they come form someone worth listening to. If it wasn't my case that convinced you that H3 was scum what was it? This is off-topic but it's so dumb I'm going to have to explain. Everyone here is a no-name. People are sheeping ont McCoy's case and not yours. The reason is he has more actively presented the case. He is doing a better job than you at convincing town his case is correct. So if you happen to be right and McCoy is wrong, you're terrible because you managed to get out-argued by someone using a bad case. That's on you. God, I hate it when people think things just happen in mafia, you always have to work for it. I don't care who you are, I have no clue who you are. You have no clue who I am and neither does anyone else, that's completely irrelevant. The reason McCoy's case is being considered and yours isn't is because you are bad. Anyway, your attitude towards the whole thing makes me feel slightly better about your chances of being town. I have my own reasons for thinking H3 might be scum. I actually think (assuming the inactives just get modkilled or pick up their game) that he's a very good vigilante shot. He's made several bad calls so far in this game, but not enough for me to conclusively call him scum, even if it's likely. Will you look into what we've posted about DrT and consider moving your vote onto him? | ||
|
Baker1986
217 Posts
On May 30 2013 23:01 TomB4 wrote: can someone explain to me their reasoning for voting DrTennant? Having read over his posts and the posts of others several times now, I still don't understand why he's receiving votes. Someone explain it to me like I'm brain-dead or a five year old-exactly why he is the best lynch for today. 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 While I agree with you, trolling and roleplaying is something just as likely to be done by a townie as by scum. If you think a bit you will realize that this idea of pressuring him into playing is not going to fly right now, because town is actually considering scum-lynches based on objectively scummy reason. IE: we're discussing killing people, not pressuring them. The guy is a boring unfunny troll, that doesn't make him scum. It's null. Move on to people actually worth analysing please. | ||
| ||
