|
On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
lol 10/10 conspiracy theory of the century
Now explain to me why this master scum plot is more likely than us both being town.
It is a conspiracy theory, which we both know means that I have a lot riding on it as I stand to look like a fool if it all goes wrong.
I started out by coming to the conclusion that you were either both town or both scum. Aqua's first post looked like a weak poke on a Chrom that he perceived to be town. It was like he had already decided that you were of the same alignment as he was, so I thought he either had a town read that he was trying to confirm, or he knew that you were scum. I already thought that the first part of Aqua's post was a bit scummy, so I hoped to see some interaction between you and him.
Your first post in response contained this:
On June 24 2013 20:43 Chromatically wrote:
If you wanted to know about someone, you could just asked me. I'm not just going to randomly post reads if I'm not going to push for their lynch, but I'll definitely tell you what I think of someone or who my scumreads are. Why wouldn't you ask me for my scumreads if you wanted them?
Probably because that's not actually what you want at all. Someone else asked me for scumreads, and I posted mine right below your post, but you haven't reacted to that at all. Does this point still stand even after I've posted my scumreads? Or did your opinion not change at all for some reason?
In the above quote you referred to your previous post here:
On June 24 2013 13:29 Chromatically wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 13:12 Hurricane Sponge wrote:
Chromatically, do you have any scumreads? Right now, I'm looking at Xzavier and hzflank. Both have posted a bit, but neither have been scumhunting. hz's recent post makes me feel a little better, but it did only come when I specifically asked him and I don't really agree with it. That doesn't necessarily make him scum though. There are also some other small things that bother me, but I'll elaborate on those later.
Now, at this point what do you think Aqua's reply should be? Your scum read post did not really contain anything substantial and in fact I would say that I was in fact scum hunting (I had poked several people). I thought to myself: If Aqua takes his vote off of Chrom before asking Chrom for more info on his reads, then it is because Aqua does not need to know Chrom's reads.
Aqua even says this himself in his next post:
On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
Those reads were pretty weak, I'd like to see more from you.
And then in that same post he says:
On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
tl;dr I had uneasy feelings about you but I feel a lot better after reading this post
So Aqua does not get what he wants from you, but for some reason feels better about you, which is why I do not think that you are both town. If you were both town then that exchange should not of ended so easily.
On June 25 2013 04:27 Chromatically wrote:Your explanation's fair. It still doesn't excuse the large amount of fluff and general bad feel I get from your early posting (not that's really explainable). I assume that you're busy right now answering my other questions about your case, so in addition: Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 04:17 hzflank wrote:On June 25 2013 04:06 FirmTofu wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
What's really bizarre is how quickly Tofu agreed with this case. You'd better explain yourself too. I agreed with it in the sense that it was a plausible theory, not that it was particularly likely. For the record I have you both pegged as town and I think you are both wasting precious time accusing one another. His conspiracy idea arose mainly because you accused him of being scum. I see his post as a long-winded retaliation against your credibility to ensure that no one bandwagons him to oblivion. While I may obviously be incorrect, it was not retaliation. Before Chrom voted for me I had already decided that if Aqua moves his vote off of Chrom and then Chrom makes a case against me then they are working together. When did you decide this? Right when you saw Aqua's case on me?
Right when Aqua said he felt better about you (above). I read that at the same time as I read your previous post. The exchange just did not go as I would expect it to between two town members.
|
Chromatically, if you are indeed town, what possible reason could hzflank have to tunnel you if he was scum?
1) It draws attention to himself.
2) You flip town, everyone automatically blames him
The only possible explanations are either that you are both town, or that Chromatically is scum and hzflank is town. In my opinion, hzflank would be taking an extremely risky move as scum that is far too risky to take. For that reason, he remains innocent in my eyes.
|
On June 25 2013 04:10 Chromatically wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 04:06 FirmTofu wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
What's really bizarre is how quickly Tofu agreed with this case. You'd better explain yourself too. I agreed with it in the sense that it was a plausible theory, not that it was particularly likely. For the record I have you both pegged as town and I think you are both wasting precious time accusing one another. His conspiracy idea arose mainly because you accused him of being scum. I see his post as a long-winded retaliation against your credibility to ensure that no one bandwagons him to oblivion. Why do you think that he is town? Did you read my case? Where's the town motivation in making up a story purely to hurt my credibility?
Your case was good. However, in light of recent developments, I consider hzflank to be solidly town. Read my previous post for an explanation.
A townie's motivation to hurt your credibility is to draw attention off of himself and onto his accuser. If he knows he is town, and some idiot is tunneling him, he is likely to see the idiot unfavorably, no?
|
On June 25 2013 05:06 hzflank wrote:
I started out by coming to the conclusion that you were either both town or both scum. Aqua's first post looked like a weak poke on a Chrom that he perceived to be town. It was like he had already decided that you were of the same alignment as he was, so I thought he either had a town read that he was trying to confirm, or he knew that you were scum. I already thought that the first part of Aqua's post was a bit scummy, so I hoped to see some interaction between you and him.
Why would Aqua make a case on me and put down the first vote if he thought that I was town? Or at least, why don't you think that he thought I was scum?
It was weak, yes, but he pursued it for a bit and asked others what they thought of it.
Now, at this point what do you think Aqua's reply should be? Your scum read post did not really contain anything substantial and in fact I would say that I was in fact scum hunting (I had poked several people). I thought to myself: If Aqua takes his vote off of Chrom before asking Chrom for more info on his reads, then it is because Aqua does not need to know Chrom's reads.Aqua even says this himself in his next post: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
Those reads were pretty weak, I'd like to see more from you.
And then in that same post he says: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
tl;dr I had uneasy feelings about you but I feel a lot better after reading this post
So Aqua does not get what he wants from you, but for some reason feels better about you, which is why I do not think that you are both town. If you were both town then that exchange should not of ended so easily.
This is a fair point, but I'm not sure how it applies to me instead of just Aqua.
Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 04:27 Chromatically wrote:Your explanation's fair. It still doesn't excuse the large amount of fluff and general bad feel I get from your early posting (not that's really explainable). I assume that you're busy right now answering my other questions about your case, so in addition: On June 25 2013 04:17 hzflank wrote:On June 25 2013 04:06 FirmTofu wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
What's really bizarre is how quickly Tofu agreed with this case. You'd better explain yourself too. I agreed with it in the sense that it was a plausible theory, not that it was particularly likely. For the record I have you both pegged as town and I think you are both wasting precious time accusing one another. His conspiracy idea arose mainly because you accused him of being scum. I see his post as a long-winded retaliation against your credibility to ensure that no one bandwagons him to oblivion. While I may obviously be incorrect, it was not retaliation. Before Chrom voted for me I had already decided that if Aqua moves his vote off of Chrom and then Chrom makes a case against me then they are working together. When did you decide this? Right when you saw Aqua's case on me? Right when Aqua said he felt better about you (above). I read that at the same time as I read your previous post. The exchange just did not go as I would expect it to between two town members.
When did your read on Tofu change from scum to strong town? Is your town read on him totally dependent on associations between me and Aqua?
|
On June 25 2013 05:23 Chromatically wrote:
When did your read on Tofu change from scum to strong town? Is your town read on him totally dependent on associations between me and Aqua?
When I was making my case post against you. I was not sure for a while and if I realised that if I thought Toku scummy then it was highly likely that you were town. Then I got to these posts:
On June 24 2013 15:21 Aquanim wrote:
@FirmTofu: What is your read on Chromatically?
On June 24 2013 16:26 Aquanim wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 24 2013 16:09 FirmTofu wrote:
I know Aquanim wanted me to comment on Chromatically, but I would rather address his suggestion to have the NN roleclaim.
Let's have a look at how a roleclaim would play out for scum and town separately so it is easier to visualize.
Event: NN roleclaims
Scum Information Set: Know who the NN is with a rather high degree of certainty
Town Information Set: Could be an NN or could be scum faking NN. Learn absolutely nothing.
Just based on the information that each side gains, we can see that scum takes a clear lead instantaneously. They will choose to avoid the NN if they have a Tracker and can proceed to eliminate one person from the long list of priority targets.
Town remains confused as to the NN's alignment and ends up in a shitty situation.
If you can find a way to resolve this issue, Aquanim, I would love to hear it. Otherwise, I have you pegged as scum. First, scum is unlikely to claim NN day 1 for fear of being counter-claimed. Somebody who claims NN is obviously not confirmed town, but they're considerably more likely to be town. I have personally never seen a day-one miller claim (analogous to a NN, with different investigative rolls) end up being scum, and plenty end up being town. A miller/NN who is thus likely town and can thus play a strong, town-leading role is a HIGHER PRIORITY for scum to kill than a possible bluesnipe. Also, a day-one NN claim avoids two possibly disastrous situations later on: 1) An actual NN being seen visiting someone and being lynched for it. 2) Mafia fake-claiming NN after being seen visiting somebody. Auto-lynching any NN claim is bad for in the first case, treating NN as town is bad in the second case. A day one claim, before there's any desperate need for a scum to fake-claim it, fixes both of these. The gain in information which scum gets from a day-one NN claim IS NOT SIGNIFICANT. Even IF scum has a tracker, a NN claim reduces their pool of players to track by something like 10% (I haven't done the math but it's about that). And like I said, if the NN plays a good town game he becomes EVEN MORE IMPORTANT for scum to shoot. Scum knowing not to track the NN is less valuable than town knowing not to track him. I'm tired of trying to beat sense into y'all about this, and I'm tired of y'all calling me scum over a difference of opinion about game theory. Someone man up and vote me over this trash or start playing the game properly.On June 24 2013 16:15 Onegu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 16:09 FirmTofu wrote:
I know Aquanim wanted me to comment on Chromatically, but I would rather address his suggestion to have the NN roleclaim.
Let's have a look at how a roleclaim would play out for scum and town separately so it is easier to visualize.
Event: NN roleclaims
Scum Information Set: Know who the NN is with a rather high degree of certainty
Town Information Set: Could be an NN or could be scum faking NN. Learn absolutely nothing.
Just based on the information that each side gains, we can see that scum takes a clear lead instantaneously. They will choose to avoid the NN if they have a Tracker and can proceed to eliminate one person from the long list of priority targets.
Town remains confused as to the NN's alignment and ends up in a shitty situation.
If you can find a way to resolve this issue, Aquanim, I would love to hear it. Otherwise, I have you pegged as scum. I agree with this the first person who wrote about NN made me feel noob town, but the second person to post after hearing what was said against it is very odd/scummy. The other guy's plan was bad for other reasons. In this case, however, I am right, the rest of you are wrong, and I am trying to persuade you of that. I'm starting to feel like this is a waste of time though.
Aqua asked Tofu twice for his opinions on you. This means that if I assume that you and Aqua are scum, then Tofu must be town. There is no way that one scum would insist on an opinion of another scum from the third scum. Also, I would think that Aqua and Toku are not scumbuddies, since Tofu's opinion on you seemed important to Aqua.
My take on the reason for that was to establish that Tofu thinks you (Chrom) town. Since Tofu is one of the more active posters so far, if he thinks you town he would be easier to get on my wagon and may even make some good posts to convince others.
So as you suggested, my strong town read on Tofu is dependent on my scum read on you and Aqua.
|
Okay, last question:
On June 24 2013 12:07 hzflank wrote:
Can I change my TL post timestamps to EST, so they match with the ones from previous QTs? If so, how?
Why do you want your timestamps to match QTs?
|
I would like to switch gears into a more constructive discussion.
My Case Against SpicyDinosaur
Play-by-play:
Spicy starts off with an innocuous "Hey everyone", but is met with an immediate (harmless) accusation by Chromatically.
On June 24 2013 11:09 Spicydinosaur wrote:Please point out and explain exactly what you think is scummy.
Here we can see him blowing it out of proportion. With this, we can deduce that he is probably a blue role, alignment unclear OR that he has a overly defensive personality. I have stated this sentiment earlier in the thread.
On June 24 2013 11:17 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:13 Chromatically wrote:On June 24 2013 11:02 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Hey everyone Well, it's hard to decide whether the "hey" part or the "everyone" part is scummier. Really a toss up. What could you possibly expect me to explain? You're taking this awfully seriously. Why did you take so long to reply if you were in the thread? Not taking it super seriously, just busting you back. I posted in the thread then went back to reddit. Checked the thread again after a few minutes. I'll be around tonight and early tomorrow morning. And hey Xzavier.
Here we see Chromatically respond to Spicy's defensive post. Spicy downplays his actions as mere friendly banter and continues on his way. This is consistent with his previous post and is mostly harmless.
After a few hours, Hurricane shows up and posts his "Case for Spicy"
On June 24 2013 12:28 Hurricane Sponge wrote:The Case for Spicy: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:09 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 24 2013 11:04 Chromatically wrote:
Why so scummy, Spicy? Please point out and explain exactly what you think is scummy. Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:17 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 24 2013 11:13 Chromatically wrote:On June 24 2013 11:02 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Hey everyone Well, it's hard to decide whether the "hey" part or the "everyone" part is scummier. Really a toss up. What could you possibly expect me to explain? You're taking this awfully seriously. Why did you take so long to reply if you were in the thread? Not taking it super seriously, just busting you back. I posted in the thread then went back to reddit. Checked the thread again after a few minutes. I'll be around tonight and early tomorrow morning. And hey Xzavier. He later comes in with some actual(if not elegant) points on the game, but they're both just him defending his play in previous games: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:42 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 24 2013 11:36 Chromatically wrote:
Alright, I see. What do you think of Xzavier so far? Spamming more than I like. Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:53 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 24 2013 11:43 hzflank wrote:On June 24 2013 11:25 Chromatically wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 24 2013 11:17 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:13 Chromatically wrote:On June 24 2013 11:02 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Hey everyone Well, it's hard to decide whether the "hey" part or the "everyone" part is scummier. Really a toss up. What could you possibly expect me to explain? You're taking this awfully seriously. Why did you take so long to reply if you were in the thread? Not taking it super seriously, just busting you back. I posted in the thread then went back to reddit. Checked the thread again after a few minutes. I'll be around tonight and early tomorrow morning. And hey Xzavier. Hmm. In both other newbie games, you started out with a policy post about lurkers. Any particular reason why you changed for this game? I noticed that too. This is Spicy's first post in his previous game, where he was town: On June 06 2013 10:47 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Hey everyone, I'll get the ball rolling. One of the most important things I've learned about day 1 is to make sure that town is active and posting USEFUL information and not just fluff. Lurkers do nothing to help town and are scummy. As such, I will and I encourage others, to pressure lurkers to post. That is quite a lot more content than his first post in this thread: On June 24 2013 11:02 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Hey everyone Sheeping off of others opinions already? Also heres the QT chat i was referring too. Though i dont know how to post to a specific QT box Heres the QT: http://www.quicktopic.com/50/H/YXgCU77iVMsaand its posts: 11, 16, 21. Spicydinosaur http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=18810769
Fluffity fluff fluff fluff, I will, Fluffity fluff.
vote spicy as not the towniest MOFU in thread.
umasi xzav and yvanna are town
random guy that thinks hes better than he is and fferyl are probably town but not that much
i'd lynch firere and spicy for now
not sure about the third
spicy should be killed with fire
Furthermore you should look back at my other 2 games if you want to see what my openings were. They too were different. Not my favorite play in the world, but at least it's content.
Honestly, this isn't much of a case. What is interesting however, is Spicy's disproportionate response to it.
On June 24 2013 12:30 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 12:10 Hurricane Sponge wrote:
Alright, it appears that my plan has oversights that are unacceptable risks at this juncture. Thank you to the veteran players (or just simply better players) who found them so quickly. Personally, I'm more concerned about Chromatic's point (regarding letting mafia call their shot on blues) than the risk of a mafia-tracker claiming NN, but I will not protest if we continue the scum-hunt without regard for my posted plan.
To me, everyone who is posting one-liners looks spammy to me, but I think the 'everyone is scum until they convince me otherwise' mentality isn't the worst thing in the world. Spicy and Xzavier are on my radar for the fluff and nonsense at the beginning. Chromatically and FirmTofu seem the most town as they were very quick to point out what were (in their view) flaws in a plan to move forward that may have compromised the town. An intro post saying hi and then answering questions is now fluff? If you want to talk about fluff then look to your first post. Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 11:46 Hurricane Sponge wrote:
Ugh, let's avoid the 'should we lynch lurkers talk' shall we?
I'm gonna go ahead and post the play I had written earlier this week analyzing this game from a pro-town perspective. If any of my analysis is off-base, please jump in and steer me back on track.
Pre-written segment starts now:
Alright, chums. First let me state that in NO WAY is the following message a call for a mass claim. If you are the Parity Cop (assuming you even exist), DO NOT SAY SO. In fact, if you're our town's parity cop, it's probably better if you appear to ignore what I'm about to say completely. Same goes for Trackers and Watchers. DO NOT CLAIM. But read carefully, because you are a big part of whether we succeed or fail (whether we follow my plan or not). Nothing useful. All you say is dont claim or dont listen to you. Show nested quote +
Now everyone, pay attention: Looking over the roles, the extremely juicy pro-town potential jumped right off the page at me, as I hope it did to many of you. Trackers can tell us if a person visits someone. Pretty good, but not nearly as good as the Watcher, who can pick a person and sees all who visit them. Obviously, this means we can try to guess the guy who's going to be mafia-killed, and we have a couple shots at seeing if he either gets visited, or manage to Track the mafia member who happens to be tagged to do the deed. Not great odds on either, but still better than nothing.
My plan utilizes each role to their maximum potential. Because we are not guaranteed to have a Tracker, Watcher, or even a Parity Cop, it's important that for the roles we DO get, we use them efficiently. The Watcher needs to guess the target they think will be mafia-killed tonight. This is up to your judgement, but I'll make a recommendation later today.
Just restating whats in the OP. spam Show nested quote +
The fun part comes with the Tracker and the Nosy Neighbor (and by extension Parity Cop). The Tracker should secretly track the Nosy Neighbor. AGAIN, MR. OR MRS. TRACKER: DO NOT CLAIM NOW. If we have a Nosy Neighbor, they should claim IMMEDIATELY. Once the Tracker can confirm that the Nosy Neighbor is in fact moving around at night, but not visiting the person who got Mafia-killed, WE CAN ESTABLISH HIM AS TOWN. This is a big deal. The Parity Cop can then tag the confirmed Nosy Neighbor as Town and start measuring up suspects against them. If he gets a 'Different' claim, the other person is Scum. If he gets 'Same', they are town.
Horrible idea for someone to claim at all this early. Show nested quote +
I can elaborate further, but I feel like you can all piece together whatever holes are out there without me holding your hand even further. This is an extremely pro-town set-up (assuming there aren't a bunch of red herrings in which case, Hi I'm sponge, and I just gave you all the book on me.) and I'd like to move fast before mafia can organize their thoughts in their private little forum. If we move fast, and force independent action, they lose one of their many advantages.
More fluff with nothing of substance.
Scum Radar: BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP
Holy bananas, did Spicy go full ad hominem today! Resorting to cheap personal attacks to discredit Hurricane's arguments(or lack thereof), further reinforces the fact that Spicy is extremely afraid of dying. A blue town member would try to dissect the argument and point out its flaws.Spicy makes no attempt to contribute to the discussion at all.
After posting a bit further and defending himself from some of my accusations, he takes an 8 hour hiatus; I would assume he slept.
He returns with his case against me. (Not going to quote it because it messes up my bbcode)
As I have already refuted all his points, I will not do so again. The important point to note is that he seems to be fishing for scum in me where there is none. This makes it seem as though he wants to discredit me so that others will stop listening to what I have to say.
Most of the issues he has with me are shared between various other people as well. It is truly odd that he chooses me as a target instead of the others. Am I dangerous to him in some way? If so, how?
Another issue that may be useful later is his subtle defense of fyfy that worked wonders to nail me as an idiot for having voted him. Everyone fell for it, but for the time being, I have linked Spicy and fyfy as possible teammates.
On June 25 2013 02:12 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 01:23 Chromatically wrote:I've been feeling Tofu as town. His opinion about meta is really wierd, but I think it's town-based. Would scum be willing to stand out and draw so much attention to themselves for no reason by espousing an unpopular opinion? I don't think so. I don't like how conciliatory he is about his read on you ("I am not saying you are definitely scum or anything like that."), that feels like he's trying not to cause waves.In general though, he seems comfortable in-thread and he's freely posting. Also, On June 24 2013 12:36 FirmTofu wrote:
I actually do believe Spicydinosaur is scummy, but not for the reasons that Hurricane Sponge states.
In all of his posts, he is extremely defensive. At the slightest mention of someone accusing him of anything, he flares up in his own defense. This could be due to his personality or it could be that he is extremely afraid of getting lynched. If it is indeed the latter, he is likely to be a powerful role, town or mafia. This is my preliminary assessment.
(It's funny that this real analysis is in agreement with my fluff analysis at the beginning of the game)
I think the first sentence shows a clear town urge to find scum. As scum, it would be easy to sheep Sponge's read on you. He feels that it's necessary to clarify his personal reasoning, though, which means that he's honestly thinking about who is scum. The bolded part what bothers me. Trying not to make waves is a perfect way to go unnoticed in a game. Too much activity and everyones looking at you, too little and your a lurker who gets a big spotlight on you.
This is the nail in the coffin. Chromatically sums up succinctly why the town aspects of me outweigh the scum aspects, but Spicy deliberately highlights the scum aspects and emphasizes them to justify his reasoning. His silence on the town aspects of me indicates that he cannot refute those points, but he still refuses to take his vote off of me.
Whether it be arrogance or a scum-tell, Spicy is definitely a suspicious individual that needs to be looked into.
##Vote: SpicyDinosaur
|
On June 25 2013 05:54 Chromatically wrote:Okay, last question: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 12:07 hzflank wrote:
Can I change my TL post timestamps to EST, so they match with the ones from previous QTs? If so, how? Why do you want your timestamps to match QTs?
I was looking into the previous mafia game and trying to line up the times of the QT posts with the time of the thread posts. I was looking specifically at Spicy's opening that game. Fwiw, when I had finished I did not have a scum read on Spicy.
|
I am far more comfortable with hz now.
His theory is really quite ridiculous, and I had a hard time thinking that he actually believed in his case. This post is so, so town, though:
On June 25 2013 05:06 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
lol 10/10 conspiracy theory of the century
Now explain to me why this master scum plot is more likely than us both being town. It is a conspiracy theory, which we both know means that I have a lot riding on it as I stand to look like a fool if it all goes wrong. I started out by coming to the conclusion that you were either both town or both scum. Aqua's first post looked like a weak poke on a Chrom that he perceived to be town. It was like he had already decided that you were of the same alignment as he was, so I thought he either had a town read that he was trying to confirm, or he knew that you were scum. I already thought that the first part of Aqua's post was a bit scummy, so I hoped to see some interaction between you and him. Your first post in response contained this: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 20:43 Chromatically wrote:
If you wanted to know about someone, you could just asked me. I'm not just going to randomly post reads if I'm not going to push for their lynch, but I'll definitely tell you what I think of someone or who my scumreads are. Why wouldn't you ask me for my scumreads if you wanted them?
Probably because that's not actually what you want at all. Someone else asked me for scumreads, and I posted mine right below your post, but you haven't reacted to that at all. Does this point still stand even after I've posted my scumreads? Or did your opinion not change at all for some reason?
In the above quote you referred to your previous post here: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 13:29 Chromatically wrote:On June 24 2013 13:12 Hurricane Sponge wrote:
Chromatically, do you have any scumreads? Right now, I'm looking at Xzavier and hzflank. Both have posted a bit, but neither have been scumhunting. hz's recent post makes me feel a little better, but it did only come when I specifically asked him and I don't really agree with it. That doesn't necessarily make him scum though. There are also some other small things that bother me, but I'll elaborate on those later. Now, at this point what do you think Aqua's reply should be? Your scum read post did not really contain anything substantial and in fact I would say that I was in fact scum hunting (I had poked several people). I thought to myself: If Aqua takes his vote off of Chrom before asking Chrom for more info on his reads, then it is because Aqua does not need to know Chrom's reads.Aqua even says this himself in his next post: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
Those reads were pretty weak, I'd like to see more from you.
And then in that same post he says: Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 21:08 Aquanim wrote:
tl;dr I had uneasy feelings about you but I feel a lot better after reading this post
So Aqua does not get what he wants from you, but for some reason feels better about you, which is why I do not think that you are both town. If you were both town then that exchange should not of ended so easily. Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 04:27 Chromatically wrote:Your explanation's fair. It still doesn't excuse the large amount of fluff and general bad feel I get from your early posting (not that's really explainable). I assume that you're busy right now answering my other questions about your case, so in addition: On June 25 2013 04:17 hzflank wrote:On June 25 2013 04:06 FirmTofu wrote:On June 25 2013 03:41 Chromatically wrote:
What's really bizarre is how quickly Tofu agreed with this case. You'd better explain yourself too. I agreed with it in the sense that it was a plausible theory, not that it was particularly likely. For the record I have you both pegged as town and I think you are both wasting precious time accusing one another. His conspiracy idea arose mainly because you accused him of being scum. I see his post as a long-winded retaliation against your credibility to ensure that no one bandwagons him to oblivion. While I may obviously be incorrect, it was not retaliation. Before Chrom voted for me I had already decided that if Aqua moves his vote off of Chrom and then Chrom makes a case against me then they are working together. When did you decide this? Right when you saw Aqua's case on me? Right when Aqua said he felt better about you (above). I read that at the same time as I read your previous post. The exchange just did not go as I would expect it to between two town members.
The logic is convoluted and wrong, but I have a hard time believing that scum hz made it all up. A scum hz would have to:
1) come up with this theory (even though they're not scumhunting)
2) explain his reasoning in a clear way that "makes sense" from a town perspective
I can't see a way that scum hz develops this reasoning, so clearly from a town perspective, while actually being scum.
His next post:
On June 25 2013 05:37 hzflank wrote:
Aqua asked Tofu twice for his opinions on you. This means that if I assume that you and Aqua are scum, then Tofu must be town. There is no way that one scum would insist on an opinion of another scum from the third scum. Also, I would think that Aqua and Toku are not scumbuddies, since Tofu's opinion on you seemed important to Aqua.
My take on the reason for that was to establish that Tofu thinks you (Chrom) town. Since Tofu is one of the more active posters so far, if he thinks you town he would be easier to get on my wagon and may even make some good posts to convince others.
So as you suggested, my strong town read on Tofu is dependent on my scum read on you and Aqua.
This is some of the most convoluted association logic I've ever heard (coming from me). Once again, I can't see scum coming up with this reasoning just in order to justify their read change. A scum hz could have just said that "it was the only way my theory worked" or something and been fine, but this logic is done from a town perspective, I think.
##Unvote
However, I encourage you to look through XXXIII if you have the time (my profile). I tunneled two townies all game long and lead a voteswitch off of the GF because I was convinced that they were scum together. Not so much based on their individual actions, but more on the preflip associations I thought that I saw. The lesson I learned was that preflip association cases are really, really, bad. Your case is 100% preflip associations, but they never work out.
I would be very interested in hearing a case on Aqua based on his actions alone, if you really think that he's scum. If Aqua flips red, then that's a good time to go look for his associations to others.
|
Tofu, I'm not going to quote your argument against me as there are too many quotes to deal with but I will refute it point by point.
1. You claim my first response was blown out of proportion and in the very next post i did i said i was joking back with him which you said was consistent. I clearly said i was busting him back so i dont see how this is an issue.
2. How is my quoting of hurricane a personal attack. Look at what he wrote. I deconstruct his post paragraph by paragraph and show how its mostly fluff and doesnt tell us anything. There was nothing new except for his theory on NN claiming. This wasnt a response to his posting of me but something i observed in the thread. Furthermore I discredited the theory in another post. So this is another example of you ignoring things i posted.
QUOTE]On June 24 2013 20:38 Spicydinosaur wrote:
Even if there is a NN are we guaranteed to have a watcher? Or vice versa? There is also the possibility of the SK (if we have one) claiming to be the NN. I still think the best thing we can do right now is NOT to have the NN claim. A confirmed (or at least believed NN) is just one less person for scum to worry about that night as others have said. Also if someone does claim it... would we actually want a watcher to waste a night confirming it?
[/QUOTE]
3. I dont see how i defended fyfy as i was more saying that stim's post made him more suspicious. This wasnt a major contention and just an observation.
4. We may agree to disagree on your meta argument but its still valid as you dont want to look at evidence that shows im defensive by nature.
5. As for the quoting of the player list, that wasnt because of the bbcode but because you were saying "hey look these guys arent posting" which everyone already knows.
6. I don't have my vote on you and never did. I don't know where you are getting this from. It seems you are so dead set now to get me lynched that you are making things up or simply imagining them.
7. Chrom did bring up some townie points on you and I dont have my vote on you because I wasn't convinced you were scum, otherwise it wouldn't be on it.
You seem to be trying to nitpick an argument while simultaneously attempting to make yourself look like some important role because I thought you were scummy. And you thought I was over defensive...this feels like a retaliation vote that is grabbing straw.
Also if you think someone is a blue, keep that to yourself. No good can come from saying so.
|
Yay! Chromatically, could you have a look at Spicy's filter for me and strongly consider voting him? Thanks!
|
EBWOP: 7. Chrom did bring up some townie points on you and I dont have my vote on you because I wasn't convinced you were scum, otherwise it would be on it.
|
I'll look at it when I get back, as well as finish another reread. I think that we're looking in the wrong place,
I'm looking more towards the Xzav/Alaka/Stim/Meow semi-/lurker area.
|
@Spicy
2) You aren't deconstructing his argument paragraph by paragraph, you are just stating that he is full of shit without giving any explanation as to why. Where is the substance? Please point me to the post where you discredited his theory, because I think you might be making things up here.
3) You defended fyfy while accusing me of not voting for Stim instead of fyfy. There was no reason to say that when both were perfectly good lurker targets that were largely interchangeable.
4) Fair enough
5) Sometimes someone needs to point out the obvious when no one is actually discussing it. If anything, this is a town move, not a scum move.
6) My mistake. I mistakenly assumed you had voted me, so that point of mine is void. However, I will address some of your counter-arguments.
7) Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day.
|
On June 25 2013 06:42 Chromatically wrote:
I'll look at it when I get back, as well as finish another reread. I think that we're looking in the wrong place,
I'm looking more towards the Xzav/Alaka/Stim/Meow semi-/lurker area.
They are potential scum, sure, but it's always harder to convince people that semi-lurkers are scum because they don't post enough to allow us to get a good read off of them. Have a look at Spicy, let me know your thoughts on some other people, and we can agree to vote on someone.
|
On June 25 2013 06:49 FirmTofu wrote:
@Spicy
2) You aren't deconstructing his argument paragraph by paragraph, you are just stating that he is full of shit without giving any explanation as to why. Where is the substance? Please point me to the post where you discredited his theory, because I think you might be making things up here.
I failed quoted it in my post i dont see how you missed it. Additionally whats there to discuss when he was simply restating what the roles were and what they did.
3) You defended fyfy while accusing me of not voting for Stim instead of fyfy. There was no reason to say that when both were perfectly good lurker targets that were largely interchangeable.
I stated exactly why there was a reason. because stim posted right at the start of d1 then lurked. I felt the lurkers were not equal at the time (before fyfy started posting) so it was a curious choice.
5) Sometimes someone needs to point out the obvious when no one is actually discussing it. If anything, this is a town move, not a scum move.
In the games ive played its always seen as a scum move even if done by a townie.
7) Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day.
If i thought you were scum i would have no hesitation to vote you first. Like i said before i found your play scummyish and this vote felt very retaliatory which isn't a scum move.
|
Xzavier, I still don't like your filter. Practically just setup speculation, no scum hunting or reads. I want to lynch you.
I'm not all that comfortable with lynching hzflank, in fact I'd rather not. I read him as town-ish.
StiMaDDict, start participating in some way. Who's your top scum read, why?
fyfy, you say you'd "rather lynch someone scummier", tell me who'd that be?
##Vote: Xzavier
|
On June 25 2013 06:58 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 06:49 FirmTofu wrote:
@Spicy
2) You aren't deconstructing his argument paragraph by paragraph, you are just stating that he is full of shit without giving any explanation as to why. Where is the substance? Please point me to the post where you discredited his theory, because I think you might be making things up here. I failed quoted it in my post i dont see how you missed it. Additionally whats there to discuss when he was simply restating what the roles were and what they did. Show nested quote +
3) You defended fyfy while accusing me of not voting for Stim instead of fyfy. There was no reason to say that when both were perfectly good lurker targets that were largely interchangeable.
I stated exactly why there was a reason. because stim posted right at the start of d1 then lurked. I felt the lurkers were not equal at the time (before fyfy started posting) so it was a curious choice. Show nested quote +
5) Sometimes someone needs to point out the obvious when no one is actually discussing it. If anything, this is a town move, not a scum move.
In the games ive played its always seen as a scum move even if done by a townie. Show nested quote +
7) Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day.
If i thought you were scum i would have no hesitation to vote you first. Like i said before i found your play scummyish and this vote felt very retaliatory which isn't a scum move.
2) That quote was referring to Aquanim's suggestion to get the NN to roleclaim, not Hurricanes'. Are you trying to deliberately mislead us?
3) My point is your reason is stupid. What difference does one line of posting make? Seriously? Accusing me of being scum based on one line that someone else wrote?
5) What...? Just...what? WHO CARES HOW IT'S ALWAYS SEEN!?!!? If a townie is known to do something like it, why in the world would you see it as a scum move??? If anything, you should see it as a neutral move because both scum and town are known to do it.
7) You aren't even responding to what I said. The fact that you didn't vote me is indicative of the fact that you are scum! To clarify, I'm not voting you because you accused me and didn't vote me. I'm voting you because of the reasons I have stated throughout this thread that suggest that you are scum. Whether you vote me or not is largely irrelevant, so trying to justify your actions isn't helping you at all.
|
On June 25 2013 07:13 FirmTofu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 06:58 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 25 2013 06:49 FirmTofu wrote:
@Spicy
2) You aren't deconstructing his argument paragraph by paragraph, you are just stating that he is full of shit without giving any explanation as to why. Where is the substance? Please point me to the post where you discredited his theory, because I think you might be making things up here. I failed quoted it in my post i dont see how you missed it. Additionally whats there to discuss when he was simply restating what the roles were and what they did.
3) You defended fyfy while accusing me of not voting for Stim instead of fyfy. There was no reason to say that when both were perfectly good lurker targets that were largely interchangeable.
I stated exactly why there was a reason. because stim posted right at the start of d1 then lurked. I felt the lurkers were not equal at the time (before fyfy started posting) so it was a curious choice.
5) Sometimes someone needs to point out the obvious when no one is actually discussing it. If anything, this is a town move, not a scum move.
In the games ive played its always seen as a scum move even if done by a townie.
7) Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day.
If i thought you were scum i would have no hesitation to vote you first. Like i said before i found your play scummyish and this vote felt very retaliatory which isn't a scum move. 2) That quote was referring to Aquanim's suggestion to get the NN to roleclaim, not Hurricanes'. Are you trying to deliberately mislead us? 3) My point is your reason is stupid. What difference does one line of posting make? Seriously? Accusing me of being scum based on one line that someone else wrote? 5) What...? Just...what? WHO CARES HOW IT'S ALWAYS SEEN!?!!? If a townie is known to do something like it, why in the world would you see it as a scum move??? If anything, you should see it as a neutral move because both scum and town are known to do it. 7) You aren't even responding to what I said. The fact that you didn't vote me is indicative of the fact that you are scum! To clarify, I'm not voting you because you accused me and didn't vote me. I'm voting you because of the reasons I have stated throughout this thread that suggest that you are scum. Whether you vote me or not is largely irrelevant, so trying to justify your actions isn't helping you at all.
Now you are going with personal insults that you claimed i did on someone else? The quote was talking about the same issue... ie NN.
As for fyfy...You claimed there was no difference in the lurkers, i pointed out that there WAS a difference now its a stupid reason? I didnt accuse u of scum off of one line, thats why it was included in a whole post of other reasons.
You voted for me when you thought i had voted you. you were wrong then. You cant go back and change your rational for voting me saying its now because i DIDNT vote you and the fact that i didnt vote you is somehow now irrelevent
The fact that you didn't vote me is indicative of the fact that you are scum! To clarify, I'm not voting you because you accused me and didn't vote me. I'm voting you because of the reasons I have stated throughout this thread that suggest that you are scum. Whether you vote me or not is largely irrelevant, so trying to justify your actions isn't helping you at all.
the bolded is contradictory and makes no sense.
The fact that you are not quoting 1/2 of my counterpoints from my original reply means you conceded them and it shows how weak your argument is on a whole. You are constantly changing what your argument is about me just to fit your narrative that you have in your head.
|
On June 25 2013 07:28 Spicydinosaur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2013 07:13 FirmTofu wrote:On June 25 2013 06:58 Spicydinosaur wrote:On June 25 2013 06:49 FirmTofu wrote:
@Spicy
2) You aren't deconstructing his argument paragraph by paragraph, you are just stating that he is full of shit without giving any explanation as to why. Where is the substance? Please point me to the post where you discredited his theory, because I think you might be making things up here. I failed quoted it in my post i dont see how you missed it. Additionally whats there to discuss when he was simply restating what the roles were and what they did.
3) You defended fyfy while accusing me of not voting for Stim instead of fyfy. There was no reason to say that when both were perfectly good lurker targets that were largely interchangeable.
I stated exactly why there was a reason. because stim posted right at the start of d1 then lurked. I felt the lurkers were not equal at the time (before fyfy started posting) so it was a curious choice.
5) Sometimes someone needs to point out the obvious when no one is actually discussing it. If anything, this is a town move, not a scum move.
In the games ive played its always seen as a scum move even if done by a townie.
7) Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day.
If i thought you were scum i would have no hesitation to vote you first. Like i said before i found your play scummyish and this vote felt very retaliatory which isn't a scum move. 2) That quote was referring to Aquanim's suggestion to get the NN to roleclaim, not Hurricanes'. Are you trying to deliberately mislead us? 3) My point is your reason is stupid. What difference does one line of posting make? Seriously? Accusing me of being scum based on one line that someone else wrote? 5) What...? Just...what? WHO CARES HOW IT'S ALWAYS SEEN!?!!? If a townie is known to do something like it, why in the world would you see it as a scum move??? If anything, you should see it as a neutral move because both scum and town are known to do it. 7) You aren't even responding to what I said. The fact that you didn't vote me is indicative of the fact that you are scum! To clarify, I'm not voting you because you accused me and didn't vote me. I'm voting you because of the reasons I have stated throughout this thread that suggest that you are scum. Whether you vote me or not is largely irrelevant, so trying to justify your actions isn't helping you at all. 1) Now you are going with personal insults that you claimed i did on someone else? The quote was talking about the same issue... ie NN. 2) As for fyfy...You claimed there was no difference in the lurkers, i pointed out that there WAS a difference now its a stupid reason? I didnt accuse u of scum off of one line, thats why it was included in a whole post of other reasons. 3) You voted for me when you thought i had voted you. you were wrong then. You cant go back and change your rational for voting me saying its now because i DIDNT vote you and the fact that i didnt vote you is somehow now irrelevent Show nested quote +
The fact that you didn't vote me is indicative of the fact that you are scum! To clarify, I'm not voting you because you accused me and didn't vote me. I'm voting you because of the reasons I have stated throughout this thread that suggest that you are scum. Whether you vote me or not is largely irrelevant, so trying to justify your actions isn't helping you at all.
the bolded is contradictory and makes no sense. 4) The fact that you are not quoting 1/2 of my counterpoints from my original reply means you conceded them and it shows how weak your argument is on a whole. You are constantly changing what your argument is about me just to fit your narrative that you have in your head.
1) I think it's fairly obvious to a third party that you were referring to Aquanim's post when you quoted the quote and that you are trying to draw attention away from your response to Hurricane.
2) For fyfy, I still hold that there is no difference between the lurkers and you claimed that there is a difference. I think your reasons for claiming that there is a difference are stupid and make no sense because only one line separated one from the other. Why do you continue to defend fyfy? It's quite intriguing.
3) NO. I did not vote for you because I thought you voted for me. I voted you because you accused me. I was under the assumption that you had voted for me, but I have already acknowledged that that was a mistake.
Remember this post, where you said, "Chrom did bring up some townie points on you and I dont have my vote on you because I wasn't convinced you were scum, otherwise it wouldn't be on it. "
Then I said, "Okay sure, but this is still standard procedure for scum. Scum wouldn't want to be the driving force behind a lynch that they know to be town because they would have to deal with the consequences of the flip the following day."
When I said that, I meant that it would still make sense for you to be scum when you have accused me but have not voted me because you want me dead, but don't want to be regarded as the cause of my death. Therefore, you being scum is perfectly compatible with you not voting for me. The fact that you have since backed off of your accusations against me is only furthering my suspicions that you are scum because you know that pursuing a lynch against me would lynch a townie and would ultimately end with your demise.
In other words, all of your actions are still compatible with you being scum, so my vote remains.
4) What? I quoted everything and responded to everything you said. Now you are just plain lying to discredit me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
