|
On August 20 2013 21:37 Holyflare wrote:DeusXmachinaLet's talk deus for a bit, barring the connections between people, I want to get to the nitty gritty bits. I want to point out his overall motives so far, his contributions and his inconsistences. You all basically know the story about him saying not to lynch all liars, but lurkers etc etc, it's the first thing in his filter so I will ignore it for now because I honestly do not think it is relevant at all. However, this is where we begin the journey into deus' mind. See this for example: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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. Show nested quote +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. . It has some policy crap still in it yes, but I'd like to draw your attention to where it says that he will lynch people that are detrimental to town, non-contributers, spammers and mentions how he likes aggressive play. Now this is around the time where I started to focus on IvLosK!, he hadn't given any contribution, was saying useless shit and wasn't helping us at all. I made my case against iV and then deus response was + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 09:38 DeusXmachina wrote:I am growing suspicious of iV. The way he handled holy's pressure seems scummy. He seemed more interested in discrediting Holy than actually contributing. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 09:09 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 08:51 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 08:49 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:00 justanothertownie wrote:
Hm? I meant the posts he listed.
Relying on modkills for lurkers is really scummy btw. Good thing you say you would vote them if they keep lurking Holyflare. D' Oh. On August 17 2013 07:51 Holyflare wrote:
All his posts are pretty much non contributory. I genuinely think reps is afk if he hasn't posted yet, no idea about xzavier but it frustrates me, if they don't talk at all it's a double modkill and therefore we should focus on the people who are talking. I swear to god if another bs lurker happens like last game with a post a day I'm voting them off straight anyway
I think this is the post JAT is referencing above. I noticed it too. I like you drawing attention to this, oh it's scummy to avoid lurkers but then say you want to do the anti lurker thing, seriously? I mean what the hell i don't know if you two are trying to set me up but until the lurkers actually do something talking about them is 100% anti town by way of wasting time. Of course we will lynch lurkers if nobody is under any real suspicion do not be stupid. I'm not sure I ever said it was scummy to avoid lurkers. So you've lost me. JAT is saying it's scummy and you said "i noticed it too"? "I noticed it" =/= "this is scummy". It's sorta more like what you're doing. Putting together a case on me without actually voting me. Read D1 of my first game on this site. I don't like that shit and happily lynch people who do it. This is a good example. Attacks holy and contributes nothing to town. which is fair enough, it made sense at the time. This is when shit gets confusing, with all the pressure on IvLosK! what would a scum do, try and deflect on another person right? His SECOND post after talking about IvLosK! then draws random light suspicion on squibbles + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 13:36 DeusXmachina wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:16 Squibbles wrote:
I can see where the suspicion might lie and the implications of me being a lurker. I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30, although I am reading up on all the posts throughout the day. If there are any questions of me feel free to ask, I am rather new so I getting use to all the terminology and what not. So far judging by the posts I am leaning town on deus but I cannot be certain and null for everyone else. It's too early for me to make an educated guess when the majority of people have yet to really reveal intentions. I'm thinking the larger players have been talked about a bit more, meaning they will always be under scrutiny, but that only helps them if they are scum. Only making that of note, not implying anything. I went back and read Squibb's posts and one line stuck out to me. This seems overly defensive. Slam passively called him a lurker but did not pursue it. There was not any real suspicion on Squibbs, yet he felt it necessary to defend himself. Squibb's could you elaborate on why you felt it was necessary to preemptively defend yourself, please. but that isn't the most shocking part, WITHIN 3 POSTS HE GOES AHEAD AND CHANGES HIS FUCKING MIND ON IVLOSK!???????? + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 13:55 DeusXmachina wrote:Last thing before I go to bed. I thought I would post my thoughts on day 1 so far. I peg iV for town because he seems aggressive, and antagonistic at times, and to me these are definitely town traits. In addition, I believe Slam is town because he is trying to promote dialog and cut down on spam. For example, + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:08 Alakaslam wrote:Ok at the computer is fun  Look the thread is only actually a few pages long- the game doesn't actually start until page 10. But here is what I notice, and think: iVLoski may be messing around some- I messed around a lot as town as well, so that's not enough for me but yes, I am aware he could be dangerous scum. I'm Watchin' him and Y'all should too. But I think your suspicion of him has brought out something interesting Holyflare; justanothertownie. look at this Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 06:51 justanothertownie wrote:
I'm around. JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:24 justanothertownie wrote:
Why do you ask me about those 2 specifically?
Ivlosk: I said earlier I liked his first posts. There isn't anything else to say for me right now. No idea about his alignment.
LoneMeow: Sounds reasonable to me. He brought up the policy thing but someone has to start discussion somehow. K look at this- What are your reads JAT?!? Holyflare has asked you for your reads, this isn't the clearest thing in the world and seems pretty reserved. I mean, I understand, I can be reserved, but make a stand- if you are wrong, or someone points out it doesn't make sense, admit it and move on- But don't sheep! Make a position and defense it. (<3 WhiteRa) Speaking of which, Yes Holyflare- I will work on my read on Deus in a minute. On August 16 2013 14:17 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 14:08 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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 14:17 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 14:08 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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? And finally, I like Holy for town, only slightly, because he was the first one to get some solid discussion going, other than the policy chat. That leaves 5 other people. Of which my favorite targets for scum and lynching day 1 are xzavier, reps, and squibbs. These lurkers on hindering discussion, they are not putting forth new ideas, and they are not scum hunting. I will continue my firm stance on this, lurking is scummy. Reps why did you poke in today but not really contribute? Xzavier why are you not posting? . YOU WANNA KNOW SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S FUCKING HILARIOUS? WITHIN 2 MORE POSTS THIS HAPPENS + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 02:48 DeusXmachina wrote:
[b]##Vote: iVLosK! Then the xzavier shit follows and you know the rest of that....
I was going to read this post. But then I saw it was a connection theory between 2 unflipped players.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 20 2013 22:39 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 21:37 Holyflare wrote:DeusXmachinaLet's talk deus for a bit, barring the connections between people, I want to get to the nitty gritty bits. I want to point out his overall motives so far, his contributions and his inconsistences. You all basically know the story about him saying not to lynch all liars, but lurkers etc etc, it's the first thing in his filter so I will ignore it for now because I honestly do not think it is relevant at all. However, this is where we begin the journey into deus' mind. See this for example: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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. Show nested quote +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. . It has some policy crap still in it yes, but I'd like to draw your attention to where it says that he will lynch people that are detrimental to town, non-contributers, spammers and mentions how he likes aggressive play. Now this is around the time where I started to focus on IvLosK!, he hadn't given any contribution, was saying useless shit and wasn't helping us at all. I made my case against iV and then deus response was + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 09:38 DeusXmachina wrote:I am growing suspicious of iV. The way he handled holy's pressure seems scummy. He seemed more interested in discrediting Holy than actually contributing. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 09:09 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 08:51 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 08:49 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:00 justanothertownie wrote:
Hm? I meant the posts he listed.
Relying on modkills for lurkers is really scummy btw. Good thing you say you would vote them if they keep lurking Holyflare. D' Oh. On August 17 2013 07:51 Holyflare wrote:
All his posts are pretty much non contributory. I genuinely think reps is afk if he hasn't posted yet, no idea about xzavier but it frustrates me, if they don't talk at all it's a double modkill and therefore we should focus on the people who are talking. I swear to god if another bs lurker happens like last game with a post a day I'm voting them off straight anyway
I think this is the post JAT is referencing above. I noticed it too. I like you drawing attention to this, oh it's scummy to avoid lurkers but then say you want to do the anti lurker thing, seriously? I mean what the hell i don't know if you two are trying to set me up but until the lurkers actually do something talking about them is 100% anti town by way of wasting time. Of course we will lynch lurkers if nobody is under any real suspicion do not be stupid. I'm not sure I ever said it was scummy to avoid lurkers. So you've lost me. JAT is saying it's scummy and you said "i noticed it too"? "I noticed it" =/= "this is scummy". It's sorta more like what you're doing. Putting together a case on me without actually voting me. Read D1 of my first game on this site. I don't like that shit and happily lynch people who do it. This is a good example. Attacks holy and contributes nothing to town. which is fair enough, it made sense at the time. This is when shit gets confusing, with all the pressure on IvLosK! what would a scum do, try and deflect on another person right? His SECOND post after talking about IvLosK! then draws random light suspicion on squibbles + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 13:36 DeusXmachina wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:16 Squibbles wrote:
I can see where the suspicion might lie and the implications of me being a lurker. I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30, although I am reading up on all the posts throughout the day. If there are any questions of me feel free to ask, I am rather new so I getting use to all the terminology and what not. So far judging by the posts I am leaning town on deus but I cannot be certain and null for everyone else. It's too early for me to make an educated guess when the majority of people have yet to really reveal intentions. I'm thinking the larger players have been talked about a bit more, meaning they will always be under scrutiny, but that only helps them if they are scum. Only making that of note, not implying anything. I went back and read Squibb's posts and one line stuck out to me. This seems overly defensive. Slam passively called him a lurker but did not pursue it. There was not any real suspicion on Squibbs, yet he felt it necessary to defend himself. Squibb's could you elaborate on why you felt it was necessary to preemptively defend yourself, please. but that isn't the most shocking part, WITHIN 3 POSTS HE GOES AHEAD AND CHANGES HIS FUCKING MIND ON IVLOSK!???????? + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 13:55 DeusXmachina wrote:Last thing before I go to bed. I thought I would post my thoughts on day 1 so far. I peg iV for town because he seems aggressive, and antagonistic at times, and to me these are definitely town traits. In addition, I believe Slam is town because he is trying to promote dialog and cut down on spam. For example, + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:08 Alakaslam wrote:Ok at the computer is fun Look the thread is only actually a few pages long- the game doesn't actually start until page 10. But here is what I notice, and think: iVLoski may be messing around some- I messed around a lot as town as well, so that's not enough for me but yes, I am aware he could be dangerous scum. I'm Watchin' him and Y'all should too. But I think your suspicion of him has brought out something interesting Holyflare; justanothertownie. look at this Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 06:51 justanothertownie wrote:
I'm around. JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:24 justanothertownie wrote:
Why do you ask me about those 2 specifically?
Ivlosk: I said earlier I liked his first posts. There isn't anything else to say for me right now. No idea about his alignment.
LoneMeow: Sounds reasonable to me. He brought up the policy thing but someone has to start discussion somehow. K look at this- What are your reads JAT?!? Holyflare has asked you for your reads, this isn't the clearest thing in the world and seems pretty reserved. I mean, I understand, I can be reserved, but make a stand- if you are wrong, or someone points out it doesn't make sense, admit it and move on- But don't sheep! Make a position and defense it. (<3 WhiteRa) Speaking of which, Yes Holyflare- I will work on my read on Deus in a minute. On August 16 2013 14:17 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 14:08 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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 14:17 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 14:08 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 13:05 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 05:14 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:58 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 04:54 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 04:51 LoneMeow wrote: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? And finally, I like Holy for town, only slightly, because he was the first one to get some solid discussion going, other than the policy chat. That leaves 5 other people. Of which my favorite targets for scum and lynching day 1 are xzavier, reps, and squibbs. These lurkers on hindering discussion, they are not putting forth new ideas, and they are not scum hunting. I will continue my firm stance on this, lurking is scummy. Reps why did you poke in today but not really contribute? Xzavier why are you not posting? . YOU WANNA KNOW SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S FUCKING HILARIOUS? WITHIN 2 MORE POSTS THIS HAPPENS + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 02:48 DeusXmachina wrote:
[b]##Vote: iVLosK! Then the xzavier shit follows and you know the rest of that.... I was going to read this post. But then I saw it was a connection theory between 2 unflipped players.
Or pointing out shitty inconsistencies, not connections, I never said you 2 were connected scum at all.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I don't actually think you understand what connection theories are at all tbh
|
On August 20 2013 22:41 Holyflare wrote:
I was going to read this post. But then I saw it was a connection theory between 2 unflipped players.
Or pointing out shitty inconsistencies, not connections, I never said you 2 were connected scum at all.
[/QUOTE]
Jesus Christ, get rid of the imbedded quotes if you're not using them, people.
I was going to go through and bold everytime that you stop just short of saying "Deus is scum and iVlosK! are scum together." Don't play dumb, you know that's what the implication is when you say "Deus wrote whole pages on x and y but 3 lines on iVlosK!" and "Deus deflected attention away from iVlosK!"
|
I was going to do that. But that post is a clusterfuck of spoilers and imbedded quotes and I said fuck it.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Who is to say that you could be town and he knew it so wanted to get on your side? There are a myriad of possibilities and I did not draw any conclusions from it other than his inconsistencies, I am pointing out the shit posts for other people to read. Whether you take from it that you are also scum is up to you, I do not give a shit.
|
On August 20 2013 23:01 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 22:41 Holyflare wrote:
I was going to read this post. But then I saw it was a connection theory between 2 unflipped players. Or pointing out shitty inconsistencies, not connections, I never said you 2 were connected scum at all.
Jesus Christ, get rid of the imbedded quotes if you're not using them, people.
I was going to go through and bold everytime that you stop just short of saying "Deus is scum and iVlosK! are scum together." Don't play dumb, you know that's what the implication is when you say "Deus wrote whole pages on x and y but 3 lines on iVlosK!" and "Deus deflected attention away from iVlosK!"[/QUOTE]
and "iVlosK! is the only person to have a town read on Deus."
|
On August 20 2013 23:07 Holyflare wrote:
Who is to say that you could be town and he knew it so wanted to get on your side? There are a myriad of possibilities and I did not draw any conclusions from it other than his inconsistencies, I am pointing out the shit posts for other people to read. Whether you take from it that you are also scum is up to you, I do not give a shit.
You did point out that I am the "only" player who has a town read on Deus.
|
Vote Count
DeusXmachina (2): OmniEulogy, Alakaslam, Holyflare
Justanothertownie (1): DuexXmachina
Not Voteing (4): iVlosK!, Alakaslam, Justanothertownie, LoneMeow
DuesXmachina is set to be lynched.
Of there any mistakes let me know.
Voting is mandatory. Deadline is at Tuesday, Aug 20 6:00pm GMT (GMT+00:00) 4Hours from now
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 20 2013 23:09 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 23:07 Holyflare wrote:
Who is to say that you could be town and he knew it so wanted to get on your side? There are a myriad of possibilities and I did not draw any conclusions from it other than his inconsistencies, I am pointing out the shit posts for other people to read. Whether you take from it that you are also scum is up to you, I do not give a shit. You did point out that I am the "only" player who has a town read on Deus.
think you are referring to this, good observation skills
On August 20 2013 22:06 LoneMeow wrote:
I can't get a read on Alakaslam. He's been town in all previous games, so no meta to compare. The Xzavier vote shenigans make him look bad but that's basically all I can get on him.
An interesting point to think about: The only player to give a town read on Deus is iVLosK!.
Going to go back and re-read some filters.
|
I think iVLosk knows this and more.
Y u all Chezinu me
You all look town now when only yesterday you were all scummy...
What to say, mayhap I am more omgusy than the react-reading folks, if that is possible.
Lone, iVLosk has seen my scum game. He and the rest of town saw through within hours. However if you are super interested you can ask him, he is mod over where that went down.
Oh, iVLosK- Chezinu rule/House of Chezinu is the philosophy of TL that a few subscribe to that is basically "make friends not get lynched". One of my biggest goals right now, distracting as it may seem, is to hear from all, who has read and who has not.
|
Holy I town read (past tense) deus too.
Past tense because now that I think too many people are town everyone got kicked to null again. So I will shower, prepare for work, read, and try to give reads.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 20 2013 23:14 Alakaslam wrote:
Holy I town read (past tense) deus too.
Past tense because now that I think too many people are town everyone got kicked to null again. So I will shower, prepare for work, read, and try to give reads.
I never brought this point up!?!?! lone did, I never said iv thought deus was town either
|
On August 20 2013 23:14 Alakaslam wrote:
Holy I town read (past tense) deus too.
Past tense because now that I think too many people are town everyone got kicked to null again. So I will shower, prepare for work, read, and try to give reads.
Wait, what the heck. Your read on Deus is changing so fast I can't even keep track of it. Why did your opinion on him change to town after you made your case on him? Didn't see any reasoning with your unvote.
|
Also, right now I'm agreeing with lynching Deus.
##Vote: DeusXmachina
|
On August 20 2013 23:10 Onegu wrote:
Vote Count
DeusXmachina (2): OmniEulogy, Alakaslam, Holyflare
Justanothertownie (1): DuexXmachina
Not Voteing (4): iVlosK!, Alakaslam, Justanothertownie, LoneMeow
DuesXmachina is set to be lynched.
Of there any mistakes let me know.
Voting is mandatory. Deadline is at Tuesday, Aug 20 6:00pm GMT (GMT+00:00) 4Hours from now
##Vote: LoneMeow
|
On August 20 2013 23:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 23:14 Alakaslam wrote:
Holy I town read (past tense) deus too.
Past tense because now that I think too many people are town everyone got kicked to null again. So I will shower, prepare for work, read, and try to give reads. Wait, what the heck. Your read on Deus is changing so fast I can't even keep track of it. Why did your opinion on him change to town after you made your case on him? Didn't see any reasoning with your unvote.
I saw his analysis and whatnot. Now I'm back to null because that makes too many town. Other scumread was jat, who has pretty much done the same thing.
Y'all will have to convince me what is wrong with deus but your cases may have already said. Lemme go look.
|
On August 20 2013 23:17 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 23:14 Alakaslam wrote:
Holy I town read (past tense) deus too.
Past tense because now that I think too many people are town everyone got kicked to null again. So I will shower, prepare for work, read, and try to give reads. I never brought this point up!?!?! lone did, I never said iv thought deus was town either
Oh whoops- are you both scv's? 
XD yeah that was directed at the person who wanted to know
|
On August 20 2013 23:10 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 23:09 iVLosK! wrote:On August 20 2013 23:07 Holyflare wrote:
Who is to say that you could be town and he knew it so wanted to get on your side? There are a myriad of possibilities and I did not draw any conclusions from it other than his inconsistencies, I am pointing out the shit posts for other people to read. Whether you take from it that you are also scum is up to you, I do not give a shit. You did point out that I am the "only" player who has a town read on Deus. think you are referring to this, good observation skills Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 22:06 LoneMeow wrote:
I can't get a read on Alakaslam. He's been town in all previous games, so no meta to compare. The Xzavier vote shenigans make him look bad but that's basically all I can get on him.
An interesting point to think about: The only player to give a town read on Deus is iVLosK!.
Going to go back and re-read some filters.
I see what confused me, you buttz in 
Yeah lone or deus, neither looked all that scummy to me!
Jat has redeemed himself in my eyes...
I trust the bamcis iVLosK, but should I sheep?
Yes, if that is how I truly feel. But I feel lone is town... So I will look at others.
|
On August 20 2013 23:07 Holyflare wrote:
Who is to say that you could be town and he knew it so wanted to get on your side? There are a myriad of possibilities and I did not draw any conclusions from it other than his inconsistencies, I am pointing out the shit posts for other people to read. Whether you take from it that you are also scum is up to you, I do not give a shit.
... Chezinu.
Sees me say  iVLosk repeatedly
Lynch
Wait dangerous looks bad
Buddy up
Buddy up to the one who knows the bamcis one, one more townie who won't lynch
Deus defense thyself to move my vote is what is say but I'm headed to work. Therefore, deus, if you are town convince the rest unless I somehow get enough data reception to check up near deadline.
##Vote: DeusXmachina
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
