On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
Rrgh
Yes I get it. I will be more concise when unsure and post better cases and stuff. And I know I'm not usually fun to have around at LYLO, so I will try and see if I can change that this game.
This is why please, guys, lynch for info- fine, but when it is clear someone is just playing badly... Lets not hasten to LyLo. (I hate Lylo in case you didn't notice). I think iVLosk! is a great guy to listen to in that case assuming he isn't scum. Doesn't look like scum so far- but skilled scum never do...
He has been helpful however, and I like the point about captain obvious-ing around. If someone asks by all means reply. But let us not waste time clearing up stuff like that, that people should know from reading guides or asking coaches.
So here I am! I'm here off & on for a bit, any questions? I mean, I know it's early but that is kinda my point.
Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said.
On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote: Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said.
From what I have seen any longer than 8 hours is definitely pushing it.
And I don't think town should lie anyway, truth is easy to remember and getting caught in a lie is tough to explain town or scum- and according to guides, finding scum is a high priority but Priority 1. is stated to be "proving your innocence". Since lying impedes that, no-go IMO. And in the situation where the caught liar implicates his target- no, not really. I say it's WIFOM.
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
Fellows, pleeeze!!
Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote: Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said.
From what I have seen any longer than 8 hours is definitely pushing it.
Wow, that's harsh. I guess you don't like sleeping in very much?-)
Personally, I think any hard deadline is a bit pointless and likely leads to zero content "I'm still here!" posts. In fact, I don't care so much at all about the post counts, it's the amount of content that really matters.
On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote: Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Oh, that's interesting, I'd like to hear your reasoning.
Personally, I'm pretty much null on everyone but slightly wary of iVLosK! - while his "policy" about posting obvious stuff indeed makes a bit of sense in late game it felt like he was trying to stifle what little conversation we were trying to get going at that point, which isn't very pro-town. I have a tendency of misreading players like him though, so I have to tread carefully here.
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
Fellows, pleeeze!!
Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Careful of posting pseudo lurker lists... Look. That is the easies thing for scum to do to try and look town, 1, and 2, if we have vigs, they can shoot into lurkers and we lynch other lurkers till there are none. So it is established that you can't lurk and get by this game. Stating their scumminess other than to explain a vote on them is now irrelevant, lets stick to discussion about actives. Then, before the deadline (close as you can get) vote for a lurker or someone you find scummy- who may have more of a chance turning out to be scum than someone who wanted blue or irl'ed or whatever causes people to do this stuff.
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
Fellows, pleeeze!!
Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Careful of posting pseudo lurker lists... Look. That is the easies thing for scum to do to try and look town, 1, and 2, if we have vigs, they can shoot into lurkers and we lynch other lurkers till there are none. So it is established that you can't lurk and get by this game. Stating their scumminess other than to explain a vote on them is now irrelevant, lets stick to discussion about actives. Then, before the deadline (close as you can get) vote for a lurker or someone you find scummy- who may have more of a chance turning out to be scum than someone who wanted blue or irl'ed or whatever causes people to do this stuff.
By the way, we don't have vigs. Read the game setup. Your point is valid though, discussing lurkers (especially this early) is pretty pointless.
On August 16 2013 12:03 Squibbles wrote: Right? Odd. Backtrackin a bit for Policy, even if you wanted to lynch lurkers, liars, and those who post pointless stuff, should there be a level at which the lynch begins. For example yalls version of Lurking could be completely different from each other, where one might thinking lurking is more than 12 hours another might think a day.... We should establish some context, As far as lying, in any sense what if they are lying because they are unsure about you? Wouldnt that make you both the suspects vs just the person that lied, i think depending on the question there should be a level limit there, and those who post pointless stuff, well if you're dodging a question, you're dodging a question, enough said.
From what I have seen any longer than 8 hours is definitely pushing it.
Wow, that's harsh. I guess you don't like sleeping in very much?-)
Personally, I think any hard deadline is a bit pointless and likely leads to zero content "I'm still here!" posts. In fact, I don't care so much at all about the post counts, it's the amount of content that really matters.
On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote: Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Oh, that's interesting, I'd like to hear your reasoning.
Personally, I'm pretty much null on everyone but slightly wary of iVLosK! - while his "policy" about posting obvious stuff indeed makes a bit of sense in late game it felt like he was trying to stifle what little conversation we were trying to get going at that point, which isn't very pro-town. I have a tendency of misreading players like him though, so I have to tread carefully here.
THANK YOO For elaborating the hidden point! You win a prize
An explanation from me; why did I spam it up all crazy? Because be gone for the first 7 hours of your first game, post photos of your actual dinner in thread to explain, and BAM- scummy lurker reputation and mislynch. Halloooo!
So. Now y'all can see. Lurking isn't cool, but give ppl a bit of a break.
On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
That being said keep an eye on him because I'd hate to be one of his targets...
And Ace, Chezinu, NWM- how they Svengali me! My reads are worth little... But not nothing
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
Fellows, pleeeze!!
Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Careful of posting pseudo lurker lists... Look. That is the easies thing for scum to do to try and look town, 1, and 2, if we have vigs, they can shoot into lurkers and we lynch other lurkers till there are none. So it is established that you can't lurk and get by this game. Stating their scumminess other than to explain a vote on them is now irrelevant, lets stick to discussion about actives. Then, before the deadline (close as you can get) vote for a lurker or someone you find scummy- who may have more of a chance turning out to be scum than someone who wanted blue or irl'ed or whatever causes people to do this stuff.
By the way, we don't have vigs. Read the game setup. Your point is valid though, discussing lurkers (especially this early) is pretty pointless.
Oh yeah, this isn't persona 4- herple diddly skerple xD
Well then yeah like u said its what, half of one real day in. Give them some moar time.
... Yeah. But also, iVLosk not trying to stifle talk, trying to improve talk. Read deus filter anyone?
Deus please elaborate, lurking > lying for scummy? Why should town bother with lies?
On August 16 2013 04:46 DeusXmachina wrote: Liars? Highly unlikely that you would every catch scum lying. Lynch lurkers over liars.
But is there any reason for town to lie? So in the unlikely situation that you DO catch someone lying, you'd still rather lynch a lurker?
If town is lying why would we want to lynch them? Like I said, you probably won't catch scum lying. Lying won't really tell you much. Lurkers > Liars.
Obviously lynching confirmed town because of a lie would be silly, but what about someone most have a weak scum read (or even null) on who's caught lying? Still prefer a lurker lynch over him?
While we're on the topic of lurking, do you think there's any real difference between lurking and posting but being useless? Would you (policy) lynch someone who posts but doesn't have any real content?
If you have a weak scum read on someone and they lie, well that might be evidence against them. I would try to understand the intentions behind the lie. Not crazy about the lynch liars policy.
I don't know how to define lurking, but people who are being useless are equally as bad as lurkers. In fact, in some situations, I think spammers can be more detrimental to town than lurkers. I equate non-contribution to scum. I am glad you brought this up. I was thinking about this a lot in my last game.
On August 16 2013 05:04 iVLosK! wrote: Yeah lynch all liars and no lurking! And anything else that sounds pro-town! C'mon guys. No fucking duh. I have a policy of lynching people who say stupid, obvious shit. What do you think of them apples, flare, deus, and LM?
Well this is a newb game. Hopefully players can read some of the initial policy and learn what not to do. Lynching people who say stupid stuff got me into a lot of shit my last game. That being said, I am all for aggressive play and doing whatever it takes to weed out scum.
Actually it was lynching the spammer- many of the things I said were trying to express my opinions, spamming was me trying to dick around. I promise not to do that anymore except maybe in spoilers if I can't help it.
Therefore I am really glad you laid this out. There may be people like me who just get the juices flowing and go nuts, they will disregard you until they are the scummy one tunneling the wrong guy at Lylo- then they will have to fight not to become stimaddict 2.0, (sorry bout that but u know its true ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this: Ivlosk! - town, he is bamcis for lookin so, especially so early, therefore keep an eye out for even more badass scum play later if I am wrong (and I am wrong often...) HolyFlare- kinda early. I'm null, in fact, I'm null on everyone but ivlosk! and myself. It's pretty early guys.
"Speak up!" -Seige Tank Driver (selected, Starcraft 2)
Fellows, pleeeze!!
Okay, sounds good. Biggest scum reads so far, Xzavier and reps. Lol at reps if he becomes a day 1 lynch again. Why am I suspicious? Well, they are lurking, and as I previously mentioned, lurking will not be tolerated. Pretty much neutral on everyone. Although, I am leaning slightly town on JAT.
Careful of posting pseudo lurker lists... Look. That is the easies thing for scum to do to try and look town, 1, and 2, if we have vigs, they can shoot into lurkers and we lynch other lurkers till there are none. So it is established that you can't lurk and get by this game. Stating their scumminess other than to explain a vote on them is now irrelevant, lets stick to discussion about actives. Then, before the deadline (close as you can get) vote for a lurker or someone you find scummy- who may have more of a chance turning out to be scum than someone who wanted blue or irl'ed or whatever causes people to do this stuff.
By the way, we don't have vigs. Read the game setup. Your point is valid though, discussing lurkers (especially this early) is pretty pointless.
Oh yeah, this isn't persona 4- herple diddly skerple xD
Well then yeah like u said its what, half of one real day in. Give them some moar time.
... Yeah. But also, iVLosk not trying to stifle talk, trying to improve talk. Read deus filter anyone?
Deus please elaborate, lurking > lying for scummy? Why should town bother with lies?
Bad town might bother with lies. Lets say they are about to be lynched, they lie and claim some blue roll to try and save themselves. You are more likely to catch a scum by focusing on lurkers than lie hunting imo, because you probably won't catch a scum lying. Really depends on the context too. For example, Gotard last game, fake copclaim last minute, to try and save himself. However, we were not suspicious of Gotard because we caught him lying, that was just the icing on the cake. We were suspicious of him because of his weird vote against infii and a good degree of lurking/not contributing.
On August 16 2013 14:13 Alakaslam wrote: On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
I actually do somewhat know his style, we were both in a game with him earlier, and that's why I said I need to be careful on how I read him, since he's a likely misread for me.
Since it seems to be just you and me here, let's talk about something. Your thoughts on Squibbles' first post?
On August 16 2013 14:13 Alakaslam wrote: On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
I actually do somewhat know his style, we were both in a game with him earlier, and that's why I said I need to be careful on how I read him, since he's a likely misread for me.
Since it seems to be just you and me here, let's talk about something. Your thoughts on Squibbles' first post?
Can you be a little more specific? I thought I addressed it right after it, above my Chloe post...
And I don't think town should lie anyway, truth is easy to remember and getting caught in a lie is tough to explain town or scum- and according to guides, finding scum is a high priority but Priority 1. is stated to be "proving your innocence". Since lying impedes that, no-go IMO. And in the situation where the caught liar implicates his target- no, not really. I say it's WIFOM.
There are plenty of reasons to lie as town. Part of this game is misleading scum about what your own abilities and intentions are.
On August 16 2013 14:13 Alakaslam wrote:
On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
A veteran, yes. One in possession of much skill, not quite. Much respect though, Slam.
On August 16 2013 14:13 Alakaslam wrote: On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
I actually do somewhat know his style, we were both in a game with him earlier, and that's why I said I need to be careful on how I read him, since he's a likely misread for me.
Since it seems to be just you and me here, let's talk about something. Your thoughts on Squibbles' first post?
Oh, cool.
Also that is squibs second post on the entire site, reps has taught me to not know what to expect when 100% fresh. That being said seeing iVLosk and knowing him offsite makes me understand that that could mean little with regard to being new.
And I don't think town should lie anyway, truth is easy to remember and getting caught in a lie is tough to explain town or scum- and according to guides, finding scum is a high priority but Priority 1. is stated to be "proving your innocence". Since lying impedes that, no-go IMO. And in the situation where the caught liar implicates his target- no, not really. I say it's WIFOM.
There are plenty of reasons to lie as town. Part of this game is misleading scum about what your own abilities and intentions are.
On iVLosk!- you don't know him, he's like that. He doesn't put up with BS. He is not actually a newb, this is like running into Plexa on some forum he has yet to visit- he looks new but he is an Internet veteran. iVLosk! Is a skilled player and I would hate to lose him as town.
A veteran, yes. One in possession of much skill, not quite. Much respect though, Slam.
Never even crossed my mind, and I think I see why...
Well ok then! That clears a growing FoS I had toward deus for now.
EPT
ing one) so like I say- rock and a hard place with "don't spam don't lurk" for me- so gimme a little grace and I will try to help out. For now, I have this:
