|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
slackers!
On August 13 2013 16:29 Malongo wrote:
Mafia is Holyflare, Squibbles and DeusXmachina. This game is easy!
well shit you're getting lynched
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 14 2013 12:32 Umasi wrote:
I've actually forgotten how that phrase is actually supposed to go :<
is it just 'when you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail'?
HAMMERZZZ (click me)
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Let's get this thing going
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 16 2013 03:57 LoneMeow wrote:Yes, let's do that. How about some policy talk to start with, what do you think about "lynch all liars" policy?
Definitely lynch all liars, there's only 1 or 2 scenarios where a town would lie so it is not worth it, and yes lynch all lurkers too, unless there are obvious lynches.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Stupid obvious shit in response to a question that asks for a stupid obvious response is not lynch worthy
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 16 2013 17:06 LoneMeow wrote:
Is anyone else around during EU daytime besides me?
I am but I'm off to whipsnade today (zoo, gf's bday) and won't be able to post till later, I do have some initial reads/concerns that I have seen so far though that I will post later
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care
Stuffz going down:
+ Show Spoiler +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.
Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++
Would like to hear more when he's back from work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps.
+ 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.
I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote: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... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest.
however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts.
This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy...
Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around.
Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
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. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts?
Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy.
For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!!
Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around.
[spoiler]On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game.
/spoiler]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Sorry I didn't post I just got in. Will be around tonight though for any queries/conversations we can have.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
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
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
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.
So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why
It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people
Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 07:37 justanothertownie wrote:
I did filter dive although that's a weird term for less than a page of posts. Of course I don't care about his rap stuff. I liked his post concerning the policies and the one about metareads in newbies. There wasn't that much else at the time I made that statement.
Do you not think what I wrote about him has any merit? Specifically the point about telling us not to write crap but then doing it himself? A few posts have happened since your last assumption.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 07:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Yeah, the first two posts are useless but I won't call him scum for this. The last one I don't think is crap. Those 2 players should be pressured into contributing.
He says it is pointless to post the obvious but many people obviously have asked the lurkers to speak, why is it useful to hear it a 4th time? Just because he said something you liked does not really mean it is a contribution in terms of our progression, it is a scummy move to do that and I want you to understand that for future reference. I find it interesting you aren't keen to pick up on that though
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 07:45 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:40 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 07:37 justanothertownie wrote:
I did filter dive although that's a weird term for less than a page of posts. Of course I don't care about his rap stuff. I liked his post concerning the policies and the one about metareads in newbies. There wasn't that much else at the time I made that statement. Do you not think what I wrote about him has any merit? Specifically the point about telling us not to write crap but then doing it himself? A few posts have happened since your last assumption. I don't think his hypocrisy is a reason to be suspicious. He probably just wanted to come in with flare, hence his aggressive first post (not counting rap). Holy would you rather focus on iV or reps/xzavier? Pressuring xzavier or reps might get them to start talking.
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
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 08:20 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 08:15 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 08:08 Alakaslam wrote:
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.
I'm hurt babe. I've already examined all of your filters earlier today while waiting for a truck to come in to the warehouse. Well what, I mean, I played along- wait a minute. So Holyflare, why didn't I get any fire for playing along with iVLosk? Did you notice that I posted about "Watching him with 75 energy" & stuff? & "Can't touch him without an upgrade"? But then I was all  iVLosK! the professional scum, and look who Holy tries to lynch. Dang it everyone scummy again, Please xplain ppl. Especially you Holyflare? Was that a meta blind eye or ?
I have played a game with you and have become pretty clear on your spam and contribution posts, you have actually posted reads and are willing to entertain scenarios, much like i am, that can force information out of people. While yes you have spam you also have useful bits of info. Ivlosk has really nothing in his favour so far, not that I am totally accusing him but I do not like hypocrisy and he has not contributed YET. This is still obviously early and I'd like to hear more from him.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 08:49 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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"?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading.
If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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.
Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles
You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy.
Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself?
I would rather get rid of the guy that says nothing than the person who can defend himself and (hopefully) contribute.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 01:26 iVLosK! wrote:
I said I spared him on condition of more posts from him and he's posted like once since then. Not exactly a 180 by any stretch of the imagination.
There was no condition, I await further posts implies you liked what he said and want to hear more because his contribution was apt. Xzavier and Reps were your main targets and you backed off reps because some people said he was playing like last game, you even 'dislike' (+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 05:26 iVLosK! wrote:
Using meta on noobies is usually useless, in my experience.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier.
I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. That's a pretty massive issue.... the objective isn't to find the safest person to vote for and then do it as town..... Your reason of not wanting to get rid of somebody who might contribute doesn't work in this case. Xzavier had literally not made a single post, was very likely to be modkilled and you had stronger feelings against another player but you kept your vote on him because it was safer? Am I reading that right? Safer for what? Town on D1 doesn't need to worry about what the safe vote is. if you wanted to be safe why didn't you just ##Vote:No-Lynch instead of putting it on somebody who wouldn't defend himself. I'm fairly certain I just got that last part wrong, would a mod be kind enough to tell me/us what the correct format is to vote for a no-lynch? Thanks!
I am confused why Xzavier WAS voted off though when the 2 votes were placed after the deadline........
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
sorry I meant to add a no-lynch is a valid thing to vote for that's why I quoted your post
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 08:08 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:07 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. That's a pretty massive issue.... the objective isn't to find the safest person to vote for and then do it as town..... Your reason of not wanting to get rid of somebody who might contribute doesn't work in this case. Xzavier had literally not made a single post, was very likely to be modkilled and you had stronger feelings against another player but you kept your vote on him because it was safer? Am I reading that right? Safer for what? Town on D1 doesn't need to worry about what the safe vote is. if you wanted to be safe why didn't you just ##Vote:No-Lynch instead of putting it on somebody who wouldn't defend himself. I'm fairly certain I just got that last part wrong, would a mod be kind enough to tell me/us what the correct format is to vote for a no-lynch? Thanks! I am confused why Xzavier WAS voted off though when the 2 votes were placed after the deadline........ We didn't even have enough votes against him. It wasn't a vote off. He was modkilled. They just said he got lynched in the end of day post.
No, it's a plurality lynch system, whoever has the most votes at the end of the day is voted off not majority, I've even stated that before and so did somebody else earlier when you said we needed more people.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did.
I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Besides what I have just written, the fact that I couldn't change my vote because I was out has given me more information for this game than just voting anyone else could have.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 08:45 Koshi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:43 Malongo wrote:
HIHIHI !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
so who am I replacing??!! Xzavier
Who is dead (but shouldn't be because of bad deadline shit..) and so you shouldn't be posting
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 18 2013 08:52 justanothertownie wrote:Xzavier is dead. Nice to see at least the replacements start active. Thank god. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:00 DeusXmachina wrote:
I voted on xzavier because it was basically the same thing as voting no-lynch. Call me crazy but I am not going to vote on 2 people that I am not 100 percent sold on being scum. It was stated earlier but you will never ever be 100% sure about a player being scum Day1. What kind of reasoning is this? This switch to xzavier was horrible (and illegal to in my opinion but the hosts decide so that's not relevant). Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not The alternative wasn't Squibbles it was iVLosk!. You know, the guy you made a big post on before.
before I left EVERYONES votes were on squibbles
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
No, but it takes a psychic to say what happened after.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 03:04 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game. you are mistaking me asking you questions for me making a case against you. I don't need to start quoting your filter to bring up how weird your vote was and your logic behind it. However the soft town claim bothers me quite a bit especially with how the game has played out so far. Why I think Holy is scummy. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 03:19 Holyflare wrote:Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care Stuffz going down: + Show Spoiler +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. Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++ Would like to hear more when he's back from work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps. + 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. I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote: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... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest. however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy... Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around. Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
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. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts? Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!! Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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. I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. /spoiler] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +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. On August 17 2013 21:26 Holyflare wrote:
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward Not a townie vote or mindset to have. As mentioned before No-Lynch is always an option. Town does not look for the "safe" or "easy" votes. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? On August 18 2013 00:17 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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. Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. ) Surely it is better to vote off the lurker and hear from squibbles tomorrow in case something legitimately came up and then we can vote squibbles tomorrow if it is unsatisfactory. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch. Clearly you've had a problem with LosK all game, yet you continue to keep your vote on Xzavier, I can only assume it is to be "safe". Lastly please don't soft claim town with a "I'm not going to post my thoughts at night, cause I might get NK'd!" after playing like shit and tunneling LosK for most of the day for play that I and a few others consider to be town aligned. It's bullshit. My town reads are still JAT and LosK, I think if Koshi continues to play exactly as he has been I feel pretty comfortable calling him town as well. I think he's right with saying scum was on the Xzavier lynch. I'm also leaning towards town on Lonemeow as I've really liked some of his posts, in particular these: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 17:53 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 14:30 reps)squishy wrote:
Squibbles said I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30
Which he has not. So do you think he's scum? Why so non-committal? Your filter is worrying, low activity and I get a feel that you're just trying to find a target to latch on rather than trying to find scum. On August 18 2013 01:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:17 Alakaslam wrote:
Good morning everyone. I agree with Holyflare's stance first of all
##Vote: Xzavier
As a placeholder.
However the squibbles voting is intriguing. It is a policy lynch based on what may be IRL circumstances. Is there actually something wrong with his posting, other than the lack of it?
If not, may want to reconsider...
... As according to his own deadlines, he will likely be modkilled. It is 9:15 on the west coast.
Any better reasons though? As the same goes for Xzavier... So if squib is preferable guess what When I dropped my vote on Squibbles I was fully expecting him to speak up before the deadline as he had said he's reading the thread during EU daytime. Now that it looks like he might be modkilled/replaced just like Xzavier I'm fully prepared to switch. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I'm fully prepared to switch to iVLosK! - as I've stated he seems to be suspiciously timid compared to his style in XLII and the point about not bringing much content that Holyflare brings up has merit. Also, now that you're here, can I have a few reads from you? To me this looks like a town motivated mind set. He's actively watching what people are doing and how they are reacting to things and trying to see the town/scum reasoning behind each action. Actually by quoting these I realize Slam also voted on Xzavier as a place holder at first. wtf. Sheep placeholder at that, scummy as hell. Add that to how much his vote jumped around and he makes me pretty nervous I think Deus looks pretty scummy as well and also mentioned he wanted a "safe" place to put his vote. After looking through his filter carefully though I no longer think he's the scummiest out of all three.
Not really sure where to begin with this, but here we go.
First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much.
Firstly, this was right at the start of the day, not much information to go off but I wasn't around before and it is a hell of a lot more contribution than people had been doing previously, I was pointing out what people were doing differently from last game, what I liked so far and what the fuck people were thinking about iVLosK! with so much bs floating around. The top that was being talked about was peoples views on lynching lurkers and it got us nowhere, this actually got us off that stale topic and got people talking, more than anyone had done so far.
+ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do.
You are taking all of my posts out of context, I would have asked these questions within my bigger post and then it would have seemed more reasonable, possibly to you, but maybe those people would ignore it. I wanted to see who was around before I asked the questions in the first place. I asked for 2 different people to give me their reads because I had a plan set around it to retrieve more information, so I asked people to give me reads on a person I thought was scum and a person I thought was town to see their responses.
As for IVLosK I cannot comprehend what gives you a town read on actions like that. He contributes nothing, when pressured adds nothing in his defence and was going to be lynched off with nothing valuable to save his life. What speaks town for you there? A townie should want to do everything he can to stay alive but no, nothing like that happened.
As far as the Xzavier vote goes, it is NEVER a good idea to no-lynch on the first day. EVER. Like how does that even make sense for you to say? It's practically a free night for scum to do what they want, at least with A lynch we have a 2/9 chance to hit a scum, especially with a no poster who may vote last second. I would have switched my vote to iVLosK quite happily if I was around at the time, but read into it what you will I'd rather celebrate my girlfriends birthday than tell her I have to pop out to switch my vote on mafia.
As far as my reads go, I have a lot of information from the last day that will be helpful. I will post these in a bit after I've had some time to relax.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 19 2013 05:56 OmniEulogy wrote:
I just want to leave this here for you Holy as it is part of the guides on TL.
"A common misconception in a majority lynch system is that no-lynch is bad due to the notion that flips are the only source of information. While flips are useful in confirming information, there are many cases where it is clear that town is bandwagoning a player and will lead to a mislynch. In most cases, a bandwagon lynch on a townie is not going to produce any useful information. Without serious competition for a lynch target, the mafia don’t have any incentive to either jump on or stay off the bandwagon. Unless there is insurmountable evidence that the target is mafia, a quick bandwagon usually suggests that the player is town. Don’t be afraid to no-lynch in this situation. Going with the flow and agreeing to bandwagon a townie stifles discussion and allows the mafia to coast through the day without giving up any information. It is better to force the discussion and risk a no-lynch than to go along with an obvious town bandwagon."
While this is plurality lynch the logic still applies. Why do you think no-lynch is bad? We'd still have another townie if you had done it, what a terrible thing to have right? Instead you lynched a guy who made 0 posts. what you NEVER do is lynch a guy with 0 posts. He either makes a last minute vote and gets himself killed D2 or is modkilled.
Also you were around with plenty of time to change your vote. You made your big post on him after you voted on Xzavier so enough with that bullshit, you simply chose not to move your vote.
but fine newb townie is what it seems you're going for and I can kind of see it. I can agree that Slam looks worse than you at this point anyway.
My post on LosK was made after I voted yes, I wanted to see his response but I see he didn't fucking write one, I didn't expect him to sit there like a mute tool and not reply to it. The rest of what I said still holds true, nobody was voting on him yada yada.
I don't know if you are a nooby or are just kidding me about but do the math please. In a 9 player game with 2 scum, you lose upon mislynching for a third time. If you no lynch, you can only mislynch once.
There's 9 players and 2 of them contain scum so that's 7 townies left. If we no-lynch then we can only mislynch 1 time. If we lynch the first day on the 0 poster or a random person then we can mislynch up to a 3rd time. So we can gain an extra day of lynches just because we vote off the first day. Statistically it is ALWAYS better to lynch on the first night, that post you referenced implies no-lynching can be used at any time in the game which is obvious.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Just writing it now, woke up not long ago.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Fuck I have a post on a lot of people but seeing as you're talking about slam now, I'll just paste that bit, don't wanna dilute the conversation
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
This is to get people to shape the fuck up, it's not going to be a read on everyone because that would get me killed but rather I want you to look at the overall shape of the game so far. What has been happening, who has been pushing who? Who has died and why? Who has not contributed anything?
When you can look at it objectively things become incredibly transparent. Koshi was a replacement for a town member, he was killed within the first night of him joining. Why? It's because he was on the right track and had it all figured out (I mean it's not rocket science anyway). I therefore only want to focus on the 3 people that were most suspicious to him: iVLosK!, Alakaslam and Deus. Yes, they might not ALL be scum, but at least one of them is probably. The real question is who should we be lynching today?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alakaslam
+ Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!!
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 09:29 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 09:19 reps)squishy wrote:On August 17 2013 06:51 justanothertownie wrote:
I'm around. This one liner is pretty funny. It's like I am not a Lurker ahhh!!! I as far as who we lynch always the most obvious person day1. If you don't have a super obvious person day 1 go lurker. And as the games go on Liars over Lurkers. Some people have alot of IRL stuff going on but if they don't contribute they need to go. As far as Alakaslams videos and iVLosK!'s rap + Show Spoiler +Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am Mafia's big swinging ding-a-ling, make 'em sing.
Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am everything you ever were afraid of.
Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am Mafia's big swinging ding-a-ling, make 'em sing.
Holla-Holla Loo-Yuh
Yeah, you rappers bore me, I wanna kill you
Do it for me and I'll holla-holla. I do mind it very much. But when it gets repetitive I will not tolerate it. Hiya! Glad you're here. Have you listened to Chloe? The most relevant stuff is up to 0:55 and the most relevant part follows immediately. "You DON'T say!" "WHERE ARE YOU YOU OLD BAT" It's my lurker siren. Better than a list post, as it's more personal. A fast way to state my opinion on it. As for page 35 FTW type stuff I promise not to do that unless you seem like you are actually scum this time. Also, the lynch style is different. So we are more encouraged to stick to our guns. And believe me, I am trying hard to tone it down but I get the juices flowing... I mean really I can be nuts like 3 vids one page & stuff. I promise to not do that here.
He started off initially really differently from the last game I played with him. I put this down to wanting to evolve his play but over time he has made me question that.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 11:20 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 11:08 iVLosK! wrote:
We in Kansas tend to look at California with a mixture of disdain, pity, and confusion. Even more so outside the city. Seems they know our politics well. /can't saytoomuch online Yeah. County by county it gets nuts, but it's a great state. Gun in the truck? CA; Huge fine, gotta register all over the place etc. unless you have a good reason, and obey tons of statutes to do it legally when you have said reason AZ: dude laughs at me calls me paranoid enough potassium to destroy an office building? CA; "Move along, move along". AZ: "excuse me. What is the load you're carrying?" ... "I see you are with a fertilizer company. I think you had better tell me what you're carrying son." ..." Ok good. What for?" ... "Ok. ID?" ... "Thank you. Go." And AZ gets a bad rap. Hmm. I think it is just different priorities. So back to mafia: what is who is scum and why isn't anyone else talking?
+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 11:47 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 11:31 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 11:20 Alakaslam wrote:On August 17 2013 11:08 iVLosK! wrote:
We in Kansas tend to look at California with a mixture of disdain, pity, and confusion. Even more so outside the city. Seems they know our politics well. /can't saytoomuch online Yeah. County by county it gets nuts, but it's a great state. Gun in the truck? CA; Huge fine, gotta register all over the place etc. unless you have a good reason, and obey tons of statutes to do it legally when you have said reason AZ: dude laughs at me calls me paranoid enough potassium to destroy an office building? CA; "Move along, move along". AZ: "excuse me. What is the load you're carrying?" ... "I see you are with a fertilizer company. I think you had better tell me what you're carrying son." ..." Ok good. What for?" ... "Ok. ID?" ... "Thank you. Go." And AZ gets a bad rap. Hmm. I think it is just different priorities. So back to mafia: what is who is scum and why isn't anyone else talking? Gun in the truck? Kansas: No reaction because there's a gun in every truck in Kansas. reps looks like shit for: EDITING HIS FUCKING POST On August 17 2013 09:19 reps)squishy wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 06:51 justanothertownie wrote:
I'm around. This one liner is pretty funny. It's like I am not a Lurker ahhh!!! I as far as who we lynch always the most obvious person day1. If you don't have a super obvious person day 1 go lurker. And as the games go on Liars over Lurkers. Some people have alot of IRL stuff going on but if they don't contribute they need to go. As far as Alakaslams videos and iVLosK!'s rap + Show Spoiler +Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am Mafia's big swinging ding-a-ling, make 'em sing.
Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am everything you ever were afraid of.
Holla-Holla-Loo-Yuh
I am Mafia's big swinging ding-a-ling, make 'em sing.
Holla-Holla Loo-Yuh
Yeah, you rappers bore me, I wanna kill you
Do it for me and I'll holla-holla. I do mind it very much. But when it gets repetitive I will not tolerate it. EBWOP: Correction I don't mind it. Also I am not to fond of constant one liners or posts that are not constructive "I fucking mind you coming in and WASTING the very first post of the game (which was totally going to be filled with more useful scumhunting) with a bomb-ass rap song... EBWOP: Wait, I don't mind. So this post is just filler now." On August 17 2013 09:49 reps)squishy wrote:I read all pages so far. I am suspicious of iV. He believes in lynch all liers and also stated town has plenty of reasons to lie. Is it me or does that seem a little scummy. Proof. 1. 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? 2. There are plenty of reasons to lie as town. Part of this game is misleading scum about what your own abilities and intentions are. He's suspicious of me because he caught me contradicting myself. Okay. I, of course, made it clear that the above was plain sarcasm. On August 17 2013 10:01 reps)squishy wrote:
Welp that clears my suspicion of you, Sorry. iVLosK! who do you think is suspicious? And he's done. He's made his D1 contribution and wants to know what others think now. Reps, you claim to hate one-liners and lurkers, but if you take away your first real post (and you did, with that EBWOP), that's about all that you've done here. As it is, you just moved a step up on my "To lynch" list and Deus is going up there with you for immediately jumping on the first wagon he could find when he had just been talking about pressuring lurkers 15 minutes earlier. There are border patrol stations in Kansas? ... Why? And oh man iVLosK!, careful there. You may wanna check out the game to which I refer with "page 35 FTW".... These aren't scum tells with reps.
These 2 posts (and a few more) are where he completely devolved into off-topicness and then lightly throws in a question of asking for reads.
However, these things pale in comparison to what the fuck happened at the voting stage. This is exactly the same scenario as last game too which is beyond annoying because last game he did the same thing and was town.
Initially I posted a lot of info against iVLosK! because quite frankly he was scummy as fuck and many of the town agreed with me, including Slam: + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 02:06 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 02:04 justanothertownie wrote:
Why is this town so inactive? What happened to Deus for example? Is it the timezone? Deadline is in one hour if I'm not mistaken so people should start posting! I will definitely second this. If I am right in my suspicions, IVLosk should be first lynch. If I am wrong we really shouldn't lynch any of them ofc.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 03:01 Alakaslam wrote:
##Unvote
and
+ Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 03:03 Alakaslam wrote:
I can't be another modkill ##vote iVLosK!
and finally
+ Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 03:05 Alakaslam wrote:
##Unvote
##Vote Xzavier
He has a "bad feeling" that makes him completely switch his vote, like what, there is NO reasoning whatsoever for that. Obviously there are several conclusions that can be drawn from this:
1) He was actually indecisive. Although for no reason. At that point in time after being sure IvLosK! would be the first lynch he had second and seemingly third thoughts, his voting pattern seems to be that of a extremely indecisive townsperson that has trouble seeing everything in perspective, although this could be because of #2.
2) He was surprised by the towns vote concensus, knew IvLosK! was scum and had to bandwagon, saw that I had an afk vote on Xzavier and took that into consideration. However, it should be shown that Slam changed his vote to Xzavier AFTER Deus did, he saw that he could bandwagon and kill a townie, taking his vote off a scum counterpart for a free town kill would be easy seeing as 2 people were already on him so he would take less flak for it because other townies would be supporting his decision.
What further raises suspicions is the posts afterwards, + Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 05:08 Alakaslam wrote:
Sigh... That vote was really stupid.
Deus man, why didn't you answer me.
I should have stayed on iVLosk or something.
Man I don't know what to make of the game yet, I have those gut reads but I want to back them up. I can't this calendar day but I will be back during this day phase (tomorrow). Stuff hast come up.
Man the consternation, watch me go from being a scumread to 100% scum just because I'm gone. That is exactly what happened to vlosk and probably why I felt bad about it- and that may actually go for deus.
What, must I be the town voice of caution or are we to go nuts lynching our own. Last couple games scum wins go figure.
But yeah srsly vlosk defend even just a little while I'm gone plz. On August 19 2013 14:09 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2013 13:18 iVLosK! wrote:On August 19 2013 10:51 iVLosK! wrote:
Pages 27-29 are almost exclusively filled with connection theories. And poor ones. A connection theory where the theorist doesn't know the alignment of both subjects is complete shit. ... And useless fluff used to appear contributory. Also, apparently I'm supposed to respond to something. If you quote it, I might. Hi I'm back Read Holyflare's filter But basically I need to help convince town we aren't scum team because I went and was an idiot and got wishy washy The juices flow Ok so I voted vlosk because he hasn't been explicitly helpful, and then I remembered my meta impression of him was fallacious... Then I get the juices of reservation flowing and lo and behold deus is reserved too and I think to myself "I was reps hammer last time and in the event iVLosk is messing around to later be bamcis town he would be a great loss as a mislynch crap crap what we do now" and he voted Xzavier and I remembered HolyFlare and was like "oh yeah" and I was in hurry like 5 minutes from deadline so I just did it was not thinking straight and boom. So scummy like "ok let's bus vlosk and then not do it lol and since I think he is so bamcis I should just not make sense" or I don't even know what my scum motive for that mistake is.
To top this all off, scam has not pressured a single person in this entire game, the only bit of 'pressure' he applies was on koshi: + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 10:03 Alakaslam wrote:Just a note. Why koshi go from "why were you guys voting iVLosk" ... To this? Cherry pick town mistakes and push agenda and what? Why is he trying so hard to make me look bamcis? When did I ever have skill? I mean, I'm trying to pick it up but man, what you prefer, true spam so you know I sux or this somehow "still spammy" reserved style? You gonna push the LS meter to 110% Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:34 Koshi wrote:guis guis guis. No worries. Just remember. Need to kill Alaksalam,Holyflare, DeusXmachina or iVLosK. Just kill the one that is the most useless day 2. Alaksalam knows better than to create such a shit environment and to do 0 scumhunting the entire game. And I am certain he knows that voting a 0 poster is horrible. His biggest contribution were giving out general advice. It is a newbie game but I don't like it. On August 18 2013 01:26 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I would rather get rid of the guy that says nothing than the person who can defend himself and (hopefully) contribute. You need to get rid of scum. Not of guys that can't defend themselves. Especially when they flip town most likely. On August 18 2013 06:17 iVLosK! wrote:On August 18 2013 05:59 Koshi wrote:
Ok, so seriously. Those 3 people on Xzavier. Why the fuck would you vote on a 0-poster? He did flip scum. Umadbro? This guy is trying to WIFOM me and I don't like it. On August 18 2013 03:00 DeusXmachina wrote:
Yeah don't vote modkill I get it
On August 18 2013 03:03 DeusXmachina wrote:
##Unvote
##Vote Xzavier On August 18 2013 03:01 DeusXmachina wrote:
4 votes and we need 5
5 spamposts in the same minute these are 3 of it. He knows he shouldn't vote for a modkill. He votes for the modkill. And then he says it is majority lynch when it is plurality. So bad it hurts my soul. iV and Alaksalam should be lynched next time unless magic happens on day 2. The other 2 follow closely.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
It was totally unfinished but I want to get your shit focused rather than wander off onto other people.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 20 2013 04:19 OmniEulogy wrote:
but actually JAT, If you agree with my reads even if LosK to you is scum do you see where I'm coming from? Unless scum has seriously outplayed us because of three really bad votes from townies which is so highly unlikely, scum has to be on that Xzavier lynch.
then why would they unvote IvLosK! if you think he is town at the risk of looking scummy?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I wanted to see your responses on slam before I post the rest, and his response or complete shutdown I guess you could say was pretty interesting.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 20 2013 07:10 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 07:01 Holyflare wrote:
I wanted to see your responses on slam before I post the rest, and his response or complete shutdown I guess you could say was pretty interesting. Ok. What's keeping you now or are you at it? That's too bad Lone. For me it is mental torture trying to read him.
making reads, seeing what shit is going down and seeing how deus is defending/talking, also waiting for ivlosk to make his so called posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
DeusXmachina
Let'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. 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. 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. 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....
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
However, then day 2 hits, he makes a big post here:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 14:23 DeusXmachina wrote:So here it is, like promised, my long post. My so much writing that some of you may not read this post. Overview:I. Introduction II. Day 1 Voting III. Omni, iV, and HolyIV. Lone/JATV. Slam V. Final thoughtsI. Introduction To prepare for this post I went back and reread the entire game. In addition I studied filters. The reasoning behind this is simple, my early game reads were weak, almost non-existent, and I wanted to start fresh and unbiased. In this post I will go over all my town reads and more importantly my scum reads. I tried to base my reads on a variety of factors. Even if they are not entirely accurate, they are well thought out and will illicit responses. II. Day 1 VotingIt is almost comically to see everyone so caught up on day 1 Xzavier voting. Right off the bat I will say that the day 1 voting catastrophe is a perfect opportunity for scum to mislead town. Furthermore, it is irrelevant to scum hunting, therefor any analysis based off of day 1 votes is useless, and possibly scummy. I will explain both of these points. Why is the day 1 voting catastrophe irrelevant to scum hunting? Well, to begin, look at the candidates. We had iV, Squibbles, reps, and Xzavier. Two of these candidates we know to be town, xzavier and reps, and the other two were arguable in that we did not know if they were scum or town. The fact of the matter is, before the day 1 lynch there was no clear scum favorite. Okay, that's the setup. Point 1: It would be a huge misstep for scum to vote xzavier last minute. Why would scum a) put themselves under so much scrutiny by switching votes last minute and b) take their vote off of a controversial lynch target? It would be absolutely horrible play by scum. At the time several people had what I would call a weak scum read on iV. So what do you think, that between slam, holy, and myself one of us was trying to protect a fellow scum? HA! That's ludicrous.The biggest advocates of scum reads based on the Xzavier lynch aren't even convinced iV is scum. Furthermore, if in light of new information we find out that iV is scum, wouldn't that reflect poorly on the people who didn't vote for him? The whole argument that scum voted for xzavier is bs. Of the 4 potential candidates for lynching its likely that three of them are town. It is just as likely that scum voted for Squibbles, or scum voted for iV. So here is thing. My vote on xzavier is because I genuinely thought he was the best candidate. I did not believe iV was scum, and I was neutral on Squibbs. To me, it genuinely seems like slam was in the same boat. I cannot speak for holy. If I have lost you, ill reiterate, simple and sweet: Interpreting a vote on xzavier as scummy is asinine. It is a terrible basis for a scum read. And most importantly the day 1 lynching catastrophe is a perfect opportunity for scum to lead town, by targeting the wrong people, by building cases on the wrong people. And for this, I apologize. I should have know better than to let something like this happen. Quickly, last thing, why the hell are people looking at my meta and saying, "oh he is not as aggressive as last game, that's scummy". We had a discussion on meta during policy chat and came to the conclusion that is not very useful in newb games. Furthermore, how much do you have to fucking compare? 2 games, of course I am not going to play the exact same in my only two games. Which brings me to an interesting point: that is similar to one of the arguments against iV. Might be scummy to make that argument, or bad town. II. Omni, iV, and Holy There is so much that can be said about these individuals. 1 scum, 2 scum, or no scum? Are they connected? Why the attacks on each other? I wanted to talk about them together, to compare mentalities, contributions, etc. Furthermore, I think that it is very likely that 1 is scum, and is attacking/being attacked with scum motives. So let's begin. OmniI had a neutral read on Squibbles so that does not affect my read on Omni. The first thing he does upon entering the game is post some quick, poorly thought out scum and town reads. He makes a really poor case against me initially, more on that later. + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. So what does he do? Jumps on the Xzavier vote fuck-up train. In a way, he mimics Koshi, but doesn't really offer anything new to the table. If I was scum I would do exactly what he is doing, use the day 1 lynch opportunity, and come in loud and big to appear active and town. After that he has a couple posts that target holy, ending in a case against holy, then drops holy. + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. That's a pretty massive issue.... the objective isn't to find the safest person to vote for and then do it as town..... Your reason of not wanting to get rid of somebody who might contribute doesn't work in this case. Xzavier had literally not made a single post, was very likely to be modkilled and you had stronger feelings against another player but you kept your vote on him because it was safer? Am I reading that right? Safer for what? Town on D1 doesn't need to worry about what the safe vote is. if you wanted to be safe why didn't you just ##Vote:No-Lynch instead of putting it on somebody who wouldn't defend himself. I'm fairly certain I just got that last part wrong, would a mod be kind enough to tell me/us what the correct format is to vote for a no-lynch? Thanks! On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. On August 19 2013 03:04 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game. you are mistaking me asking you questions for me making a case against you. I don't need to start quoting your filter to bring up how weird your vote was and your logic behind it. However the soft town claim bothers me quite a bit especially with how the game has played out so far. Why I think Holy is scummy. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 03:19 Holyflare wrote:Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care Stuffz going down: + Show Spoiler +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. Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++ Would like to hear more when he's back from work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps. + 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. I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote: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... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest. however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy... Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around. Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
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. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts? Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!! Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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. I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. /spoiler] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +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. On August 17 2013 21:26 Holyflare wrote:
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward Not a townie vote or mindset to have. As mentioned before No-Lynch is always an option. Town does not look for the "safe" or "easy" votes. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? On August 18 2013 00:17 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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. Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. ) Surely it is better to vote off the lurker and hear from squibbles tomorrow in case something legitimately came up and then we can vote squibbles tomorrow if it is unsatisfactory. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch. Clearly you've had a problem with LosK all game, yet you continue to keep your vote on Xzavier, I can only assume it is to be "safe". Lastly please don't soft claim town with a "I'm not going to post my thoughts at night, cause I might get NK'd!" after playing like shit and tunneling LosK for most of the day for play that I and a few others consider to be town aligned. It's bullshit. My town reads are still JAT and LosK, I think if Koshi continues to play exactly as he has been I feel pretty comfortable calling him town as well. I think he's right with saying scum was on the Xzavier lynch. I'm also leaning towards town on Lonemeow as I've really liked some of his posts, in particular these: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 17:53 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 14:30 reps)squishy wrote:
Squibbles said I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30
Which he has not. So do you think he's scum? Why so non-committal? Your filter is worrying, low activity and I get a feel that you're just trying to find a target to latch on rather than trying to find scum. On August 18 2013 01:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:17 Alakaslam wrote:
Good morning everyone. I agree with Holyflare's stance first of all
##Vote: Xzavier
As a placeholder.
However the squibbles voting is intriguing. It is a policy lynch based on what may be IRL circumstances. Is there actually something wrong with his posting, other than the lack of it?
If not, may want to reconsider...
... As according to his own deadlines, he will likely be modkilled. It is 9:15 on the west coast.
Any better reasons though? As the same goes for Xzavier... So if squib is preferable guess what When I dropped my vote on Squibbles I was fully expecting him to speak up before the deadline as he had said he's reading the thread during EU daytime. Now that it looks like he might be modkilled/replaced just like Xzavier I'm fully prepared to switch. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I'm fully prepared to switch to iVLosK! - as I've stated he seems to be suspiciously timid compared to his style in XLII and the point about not bringing much content that Holyflare brings up has merit. Also, now that you're here, can I have a few reads from you? To me this looks like a town motivated mind set. He's actively watching what people are doing and how they are reacting to things and trying to see the town/scum reasoning behind each action. Actually by quoting these I realize Slam also voted on Xzavier as a place holder at first. wtf. Sheep placeholder at that, scummy as hell. Add that to how much his vote jumped around and he makes me pretty nervous I think Deus looks pretty scummy as well and also mentioned he wanted a "safe" place to put his vote. After looking through his filter carefully though I no longer think he's the scummiest out of all three. It's possible that Omni begins pushing a lynch on Holy, using the voting catastrophe, and drops it when it doesn't seem to be working. There is a little tiff between these two. So i ask myself, would scum bus each other in this way? Unlikely. So it's safe to say both are not scum. So from here I tried to look at who is pushing a case for the wrong reasons? Is holy even pushing a case? Is Omni being genuine? Ill answer these questions. HolyHere is Holy's side of the argument: + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game. On August 19 2013 03:50 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 03:04 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game. you are mistaking me asking you questions for me making a case against you. I don't need to start quoting your filter to bring up how weird your vote was and your logic behind it. However the soft town claim bothers me quite a bit especially with how the game has played out so far. Why I think Holy is scummy. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 03:19 Holyflare wrote:Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care Stuffz going down: + Show Spoiler +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. Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++ Would like to hear more when he's back from work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps. + 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. I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote: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... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest. however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy... Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around. Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
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. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts? Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!! Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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. I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. /spoiler] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +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. On August 17 2013 21:26 Holyflare wrote:
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward Not a townie vote or mindset to have. As mentioned before No-Lynch is always an option. Town does not look for the "safe" or "easy" votes. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? On August 18 2013 00:17 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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. Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. ) Surely it is better to vote off the lurker and hear from squibbles tomorrow in case something legitimately came up and then we can vote squibbles tomorrow if it is unsatisfactory. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch. Clearly you've had a problem with LosK all game, yet you continue to keep your vote on Xzavier, I can only assume it is to be "safe". Lastly please don't soft claim town with a "I'm not going to post my thoughts at night, cause I might get NK'd!" after playing like shit and tunneling LosK for most of the day for play that I and a few others consider to be town aligned. It's bullshit. My town reads are still JAT and LosK, I think if Koshi continues to play exactly as he has been I feel pretty comfortable calling him town as well. I think he's right with saying scum was on the Xzavier lynch. I'm also leaning towards town on Lonemeow as I've really liked some of his posts, in particular these: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 17:53 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 14:30 reps)squishy wrote:
Squibbles said I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30
Which he has not. So do you think he's scum? Why so non-committal? Your filter is worrying, low activity and I get a feel that you're just trying to find a target to latch on rather than trying to find scum. On August 18 2013 01:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:17 Alakaslam wrote:
Good morning everyone. I agree with Holyflare's stance first of all
##Vote: Xzavier
As a placeholder.
However the squibbles voting is intriguing. It is a policy lynch based on what may be IRL circumstances. Is there actually something wrong with his posting, other than the lack of it?
If not, may want to reconsider...
... As according to his own deadlines, he will likely be modkilled. It is 9:15 on the west coast.
Any better reasons though? As the same goes for Xzavier... So if squib is preferable guess what When I dropped my vote on Squibbles I was fully expecting him to speak up before the deadline as he had said he's reading the thread during EU daytime. Now that it looks like he might be modkilled/replaced just like Xzavier I'm fully prepared to switch. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I'm fully prepared to switch to iVLosK! - as I've stated he seems to be suspiciously timid compared to his style in XLII and the point about not bringing much content that Holyflare brings up has merit. Also, now that you're here, can I have a few reads from you? To me this looks like a town motivated mind set. He's actively watching what people are doing and how they are reacting to things and trying to see the town/scum reasoning behind each action. Actually by quoting these I realize Slam also voted on Xzavier as a place holder at first. wtf. Sheep placeholder at that, scummy as hell. Add that to how much his vote jumped around and he makes me pretty nervous I think Deus looks pretty scummy as well and also mentioned he wanted a "safe" place to put his vote. After looking through his filter carefully though I no longer think he's the scummiest out of all three. Not really sure where to begin with this, but here we go. Show nested quote +First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much. Firstly, this was right at the start of the day, not much information to go off but I wasn't around before and it is a hell of a lot more contribution than people had been doing previously, I was pointing out what people were doing differently from last game, what I liked so far and what the fuck people were thinking about iVLosK! with so much bs floating around. The top that was being talked about was peoples views on lynching lurkers and it got us nowhere, this actually got us off that stale topic and got people talking, more than anyone had done so far. Show nested quote ++ Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do. You are taking all of my posts out of context, I would have asked these questions within my bigger post and then it would have seemed more reasonable, possibly to you, but maybe those people would ignore it. I wanted to see who was around before I asked the questions in the first place. I asked for 2 different people to give me their reads because I had a plan set around it to retrieve more information, so I asked people to give me reads on a person I thought was scum and a person I thought was town to see their responses. As for IVLosK I cannot comprehend what gives you a town read on actions like that. He contributes nothing, when pressured adds nothing in his defence and was going to be lynched off with nothing valuable to save his life. What speaks town for you there? A townie should want to do everything he can to stay alive but no, nothing like that happened. As far as the Xzavier vote goes, it is NEVER a good idea to no-lynch on the first day. EVER. Like how does that even make sense for you to say? It's practically a free night for scum to do what they want, at least with A lynch we have a 2/9 chance to hit a scum, especially with a no poster who may vote last second. I would have switched my vote to iVLosK quite happily if I was around at the time, but read into it what you will I'd rather celebrate my girlfriends birthday than tell her I have to pop out to switch my vote on mafia. As far as my reads go, I have a lot of information from the last day that will be helpful. I will post these in a bit after I've had some time to relax. and a few others. Here is the thing. Holy's defense is strong, and it seems like a town defense. He did bring up good points. Holy was the one to get real discussion going day 1. Holy was the first one to show real aggression. Holy built a decent case against iV based othe information he had. But is that proof? I wouldn't say so. Holy didn't vote iV despite attacking him. Holy went to great lenths to defend himself, and Holy has not really contributed that much post day 1. As you can see there is 2 sides to the coin. Back to Omni. What upsets me about Omni is he does have some good points. Furthermore, he has been one of the most active members considering he only joined us a short while ago. But a feel like like he is building cases for all the wrong reasons, and I can't shake a scum vibe from him, but he seems genuine. All things considered, It is possible that both are town, and simply misguided in their efforts. iVSo what about iV? Well iV is someone who I will watch closely. I keep going back to his antagonistic behavior. That and he doesnt seem to give a shit what is said about him. I admit that is a weak reason to call him town, but it's something to go on. It could be a damn good poker face, so with that in mind I will keep my eye on him.
and here
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 14:23 DeusXmachina wrote:So the questions I want answered: Holy: 1. What are your reads, and why have you not been contribution to the town after day 1? 2. Why did you spend so much effort defending yourself? 3. Do you think Omni is scummy? 4. Are you dropping the case against iV? If so why? Omni 1. Why can you not come up with better reasons to suspect someone? 2. Why push hard against Holy and drop him? 3. How are you still hung up on the Xzavier vote being a reason to suspect someone? In conclusion: Holy: Slightly Town. Because of his initial aggression and contribution to town. Because if he is pushing an agenda he is doing a terrible job, by not contributing post day 1 lynch. Still wary of his actions. Omni: Scum. Seems to plausibly be pushing an agenda. Weak reads. Wary of his seemingly genuine contributions. iV: Neutral. Antagonistic grump who seems to be doing his own thing. IV. Lone and JAT JATWhy the hell do people have a town read on JAT? Lets look at what he has done so far. Where are his noticeable contributions? How can anyone be convinced that asking questions/giving advice is strong town. I think that reflects very poorly on Omni. Omni claims his strongest town read is JAT. W T F. Go filter dive this guy and look how many times he says, "I agree with that" or "I can't disagree there". It's silly. Here is his first big post, and first case against someone: + Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 07:35 justanothertownie wrote:Ok, I read Deus filter again and I really don't like it. He looked very motivated pre game and you describe him as an agressive, active townie in the last newbie game. I don't see that at all in this game. He started with some policy posts without saying anything. That's ok in itself but after that his activity really dropped down. He wasn't agressive instead he asked generic questions like this: Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 05:23 DeusXmachina wrote:
Analyzing peoples previous games to determine their role this game, good or bad in newbie? Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 06:36 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:32 justanothertownie wrote:On August 16 2013 05:26 iVLosK! wrote:
Using meta on noobies is usually useless, in my experience. So, how much experience do you have? I guess you played 1 game on TL... other sites? Why do you ask? After I mentioned that policy talk doesn't add that much he quickly backed off. Feels really defensive (although this post isn't that bad apart from that). Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 03:06 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. Yeah scum could talk policy all day. Lets put all this lying, lurking, and what-have-you talk aside for now. I am going to vote reps or xzavier if they don't start posting. I want to push for a lynch day 1, and as of right now they are the best candidates. If reps/xzavier are tied for first then a close second would be, well.... everyone else. Although, I can't help be suspicious of holy. Last game he was pretty try-hard and this game he seems pretty detached. I won't press it for now though because he said he was busy. Anyway, I think our goal should be pressuring xzavier and reps to get them to participate. Lurkers won't be tolerated! His scumhunting pretty much only revolved around lynching lurkers. Easy thing to do as scum. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 09:07 DeusXmachina wrote:
Lets entertain a scenario. Reps or Xzavier are completely aware that the game has started and are intentionally not posting. They don't feel any real pressure so they aim to do several things:
A) Contribute nothing to increase the chances of a no-lynch day 1
B) Contribute nothing to avoid mistakes or posts that could get them unwanted attention.
or the less likely
C) Play a lurker roll so their scum buddy can bus them.
How easy would it be to drop in and say, "oh sorry guys I couldn't post because.... blah.. blah.. blah...". Some of you are already assuming that they are just afk.
Why are we tolerating lurkers?
What seems weird to me is his stance on iVLosk. First he defends him. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:45 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 07:40 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 07:37 justanothertownie wrote:
I did filter dive although that's a weird term for less than a page of posts. Of course I don't care about his rap stuff. I liked his post concerning the policies and the one about metareads in newbies. There wasn't that much else at the time I made that statement. Do you not think what I wrote about him has any merit? Specifically the point about telling us not to write crap but then doing it himself? A few posts have happened since your last assumption. I don't think his hypocrisy is a reason to be suspicious. He probably just wanted to come in with flare, hence his aggressive first post (not counting rap). Holy would you rather focus on iV or reps/xzavier? Pressuring xzavier or reps might get them to start talking. Then he is suspicious of him: Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 10:01 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 09:54 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 09:53 reps)squishy wrote:
I am sorry I don't see where I "fucked up".
Please point it out. On August 17 2013 09:49 reps)squishy wrote:I read all pages so far. I am suspicious of iV. He believes in lynch all liers and also stated town has plenty of reasons to lie. Is it me or does that seem a little scummy. Proof. 1. 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? 2. There are plenty of reasons to lie as town. Part of this game is misleading scum about what your own abilities and intentions are. I've bolded the obvious sarcasm for those unable or unwilling to keep up. Seems more egotistical than sarcastic. Shortly after that Losk is town suddenly: Show nested quote +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.
But why don't vote for our townread, right? Then there is this: Followed by: Finally he claims not to have known this is plurality lynch which has been stated several times in the thread. He either doesn't read the thread or this is a bad excuse for his weird voting. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:08 DeusXmachina wrote:
On August 18 2013 08:07 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. That's a pretty massive issue.... the objective isn't to find the safest person to vote for and then do it as town..... Your reason of not wanting to get rid of somebody who might contribute doesn't work in this case. Xzavier had literally not made a single post, was very likely to be modkilled and you had stronger feelings against another player but you kept your vote on him because it was safer? Am I reading that right? Safer for what? Town on D1 doesn't need to worry about what the safe vote is. if you wanted to be safe why didn't you just ##Vote:No-Lynch instead of putting it on somebody who wouldn't defend himself. I'm fairly certain I just got that last part wrong, would a mod be kind enough to tell me/us what the correct format is to vote for a no-lynch? Thanks! I am confused why Xzavier WAS voted off though when the 2 votes were placed after the deadline........
We didn't even have enough votes against him. It wasn't a vote off. He was modkilled. They just said he got lynched in the end of day post. I really would like to hear his reasoning for all of this. Also he should be way more active Day2 if he is town because right now I am really worried about him. First thing of note: He quotes a shit ton but doesnt give that much explanation. Weak case. Second thing of note: He argues that I am scummy because of my inconsistency. Let me just make something clear. Why is that scummy? Shouldn't town BE inconsistent. Reads are constantly changing, new information constantly surfacing, the game is fucking changing. Hell yes I am going to be inconsistent at time, especially at the beginning of the game. Weak weak weak argument. Remeber when I said scum will use the xzavier lynch as an opportunity to push and agenda? Well this is it folks. Targets me because I have come under recent suspicions, and makes a really shitty argument. His first real stance comes after the xzavier lynch on an easy target. JAT mimics other people. He bandwagons. This kid is scum. I can feel it. Main target for pressure these day 2. LoneAlthough I cannot say this with complete confidence, I believe Lone to be town. He asked some good questions, and seems genuinely invested in promoting discussion. Furthermore, he is playing moderately aggressive, is pointing fingers (like his case against JAT), and he is bold in his votes. I would like to hear in-depth analysis from Lone. I would like to see real town effort. Conclusion: JAT: Scum. This guys filter is BS. Not contributing. Weak stance. Bandwagon. Using Xzavier lynch to push agenda. Low key. Lone: Slightly town because of noticeable contributions and efforts to further discussion. V. Slam Slam is a weird one. He is goofy and hard to follow. I have a very tough time reading him. I don't think slam is scum but I will look into him in the days to come. He seems to be trying to improve his play, as Holy mentioned, and I think that is pro town. He is asking good questions, has actually taken stronger stances this game than I have seen in the past, and seemed genuinely confused about the iV situation. VI. Final thoughts I could see a possible scum team being JAT Omni. I plan on looking into Omni more in the days to come. I would like him to answer my questions. Because I am much more confident in JAT being scum I will vote him instead of Omni for now. We will see how things play out. -Sincerly A devoted townie you loons! ##Vote Justanothertownie
I want you to actually just look at the overall structure of it, wall of text about me and omni, then 3 FUCKING LINES ON IVLOSK SERIOUSLY??????
not only that his second part of the post has 0 QUESTIONS TO HIM AT ALL??????????????????????????????? What more evidence do you want for this jesus christ....
His biggest scum read is JAT, his conclusion is that JAT is scum but JAT has contributed 100000x more than IvLosK at this point, total bs.
but now that he doesn't think IvLosK! is guilty you know what, + Show Spoiler +On August 20 2013 04:27 DeusXmachina wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 20 2013 03:55 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 03:10 justanothertownie wrote:
Ok.
Omni I would like you to make a summarized post on why you think Deus is scum. Try to stick to why scum Deus would do something instead of just pointing out contradictions please. sure thin, although I'll say now most of his contradictions do point to very scummy behavior. He starts off by saying town should be allowed to lie and we should lynch lurkers, this also means it's ok for scum to lie as he says town will never catch lying scum. Town's mindset is to catch scum lying because they NEED to lie to stay alive, not to ignore it and let anybody say what ever they want. The policy lynch for Lynch All Liars exists for that very reason. In a newbie game you don't need to fake claim your role, in fact by town lying you just add more confusion to the rest of town. Although this was just his policy talk I felt it was a very important start to his game. He goes on to say he wants to put all the policy talk away, and follows it up by saying he's voting for a lurker because they are lurking and haven't posted. I know he's played a few games before, he knows you don't claim to cast a vote for pressure. EVERY vote should have the intention to lynch behind it. As town you want to get lurkers to contribute but you don't say "hey, this is only a pressure vote but you better start contributing or maybe it'll become a real vote!" That is not a town oriented move. It's scum focusing on a "easy" target and being very non-committal about it on top of that. If we still had hardcore lurkers I'd bet he'd still be voting for them doing the exact same thing. he goes on to talk to Holy and asks this question, "Yes he hasn't contributed, but do you want to make a case against him because he hasn't contributed or because he is a hypocrite?". This isn't something town says... "yeah he hasn't contributed and he's going back on what he's saying BUT that's no reason to make a case on him!" actually... that's called scum hunting and it's exactly what town should be doing. Unfortunately this comment stops Holy and Deus effectively stops any potential attempt at town talking about it at all. Which he has done several times now. Again this is not how a townie behaves. You don't try to stop people from talking about the only leads they have to go on, you contribute and try to find something else that other people have missed. Scum try to stifle conversation and tell people that it's scummy to continue trying to scum hunt. He has constantly been trying to work out association cases based on nothing, which although many townies unfortunately were doing, scum loves this and tries to hop in with their own, because it's pointless but it makes them seem like they are contributing. Once people see an association case it becomes very difficult for them to think about it in another way which effectively shuts down their helpfulness. Deus was completely on board with doing just that. his vote has been covered, but again it's scummy and there is no town benefit for him voting for a modkill. It only adds confusion. He goes on to claim that the voting catastrophe is irrelevant to scum hunting which it certainly is not. Town tries to gather information from clusterfucks like that but he claims it's scummy to talk about it and we should just ignore it and pretend it didn't happen. Makes sense considering he made the jump to Xzavier from LosK first. Claims myself Holy and ivLosK have some sort of connection..... not really sure how. "There is so much that can be said about these individuals. 1 scum, 2 scum, or no scum? Are they connected? Why the attacks on each other?" Mmmmmmmm WIFOM bombing town is so helpful. After everything he says about thinking I'm scummy, he then claims I'm genuine and have been actively contributing and posting and then calls Slam town. - then says JAT and myself are the scum team. Can not even make up his mind in the same post. literally has 0 direction and claims I'm trying to mislead town. Let's see what he's said... "II. Omni, iV, and Holy There is so much that can be said about these individuals. 1 scum, 2 scum, or no scum? Are they connected?" and "VI. Final thoughts I could see a possible scum team being JAT Omni." one (two) large post which comes down to an association case based on nothing. Baffle them with bullshit guys! they won't see through the smoke. Townies don't do this crap. Scum try to lie and confuse us, they try to stop scum hunting, stop conversation, and try to convince town that everybody else is scum. so yes, I believe Deus is scum and actively trying to mislead town by throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks, he himself certainly has not stuck to one story even in the same post. The only thing he's stayed consistent on is that the Xzavier lynch should stop being looked at. - scummy. I don't say town should be allowed to lie. I say it is unlikely that you will catch scum lying, so I would rather focus on lurkers over liars. I don't really understand what you are saying in the next paragraph. I was trying to pressure lurkers. At that time no one had really contributed much, except for holy, so that wasn't a scummy tell in my mind. Holy didn't clearly communicate his main reason for being suspicious of iV. Not basing any cases of mine on connections. The most I said was I could foresee a connection between JAT and Omni. I am probably off base with that one. I have already addressed in detail why I think scum hunting based on the Xzavier lynch is detrimental to town. Like I said Scum will try to capitalize on that opportunity. You, holy, and iV have a connection as far as the thread goes. Arguing among each other. Again you go back to me talking about connections, that is weak. I admit, It was preemptive for me to say that you guys were connected, but that was not at all the focus of that post. It was a very small tidbit of information. Furthermore, both of you were building cases based on the Xzavier lynch. JAT to a lesser extent, but he did bring up the voting prior to the lynch in his case. I did stick to one story. Your argument is weak. You are trying to find evidence when there is none. Here is the story. I think you are pushing an agenda, capitalizing on the Xzavier lynch. I think you mimicked Koshi to a certain extent, and your arguments are super weak. I think you are scummy. But at the time of that post, my biggest read was JAT. I outlined all the reasons I thought JAT was scummy. Furthermore I said Holy has attributes that seem scummy and that seem townie, and I am leaning town. I said you "seemed" genuine, and have other townie traits, but I am leaning scum on you.
NOW HE THINKS ME OMNI AND IV ARE CONNECTED?????????? There is literally no evidence at all other than me defending myself from omni's posts and me targeting ivlosk day 1 because he WAS scummy to me.
To top it all off, he is pressuring Omni on why he took his suspicion off of me here + Show Spoiler +On August 20 2013 04:39 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 04:37 OmniEulogy wrote:
because the people I believed to be town while watching the game were not part of the vote, the only person on the edge but I still believe is just useless town is LosK so at least 1 person on Xzavier should be scum. possibly two. if I didn't have a town read on Meow or JAT then I wouldn't be so sure. Okay if you believe one person on the lynch is scum why are you not focusing on Holy anymore? On August 20 2013 04:52 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 04:42 OmniEulogy wrote:
I think Holy's afk vote wasn't as bad as yours and Slam's. As I said earlier my case on him was pretty much revolving around how bad his vote was and that he wanted the "safe" option. I still think he's scummy just not my top scum read anymore. Why isn't Holy's vote as bad? It is substantially more under the radar (which is more scummy than attracting everyone's attention). It was done for equally as bad reasons. The fact that he went afk after does not mean that the vote is not scummy. Ok guys I really have to go.
For these inconsistencies, and distancing and pure wtf?ing I am going to vote right now.
##Vote DeusXmachina
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I hate this new 10000 character filter what the shit that was a lot of copy pasting, anyway Slam and Deus look very suspicious and of course IvLosK too right now. Will post my read on him when more people are around.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Read my shit, vote deus, profit???
|
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
|
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.
|
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.
|
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
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 00:07 justanothertownie 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 just want to quickly mention that there isn't much original thought in this post. I mean iVLosk is wrong (this is no connection case although it makes iVlosk look bad in the long run) but almost all your points are already stated in my first case on Deus. I know you made a second post about this so I won't draw conclusions before I read the whole thing but this stuck out to me.
Like I told you before, this was all in my original big post, didn't want to post it earlier because I wanted to see other peoples reactions to the first bit. I added bits that were up to date only today. I've already written about ivlosk too
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Ok, after seeing all this defending from deus I actually want to switch to slam who gave up straight away after I made a case on him, anyone else agree? I also do not think JAT is a valuable lynch target right now either.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
and I certainly have not been making terrible contributions, I've made cases on 2 of you so far of whom I thought were most suspicious, if anything you have tunneled JAT and have been more useless.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
sorry
##Unvote
##Vote Alakaslam
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 02:53 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 02:49 Holyflare wrote:
and I certainly have not been making terrible contributions, I've made cases on 2 of you so far of whom I thought were most suspicious, if anything you have tunneled JAT and have been more useless. Your cases were terrible contributions. Your case on iV was based on stupid reasons. Your case on me basically repeated what others have said. Your case on slam was the best one.
so why aren't you voting slam?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
and you also followed the reasoning of my case? and being an antagonistic asshole is not a good way to play town or scum, he was going to get lynched and still has contributed almost nothing, his reads were useless...
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
vote slam if you think that was the best case, not anyone else....
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
jesus christ this is the biggest clusterfuck of shit i've seen before a day end
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
your voting is dumb, you should know that I said it last game and this game, making it so contested, nobody is going to fucking vote jat today
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
no voting is not an option, jat isn't going to get voted, vote your SECOND highest scum read if you want any swing of things, there are 2 scum after all
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
fml, these people just sheep my votes every day ~_~
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless....
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 05:21 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I was under the impression we were looking for scum.
seriously shut the fuck up
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 05:39 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I'm failing to see why I should be a lynch candidate D3. Mind explaining?
The people who weren't on slam, obviously. I'm not saying you're scum or anything just to look into those 3
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 05:43 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 05:39 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 05:21 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I was under the impression we were looking for scum. seriously shut the fuck up lolumadbro?
at you being a totally useless scummy target or an even more useless town, no not really, you're my lynch tomorrow
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 06:03 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +So who would you lynch today? On August 19 2013 Alakaslam wrote:
Honestly don't know yet. I want to read what deus has to say, he was giving me mixed up gut reads and I'm tired ant not thinking best but I can think, I will try.
I think at the end of the game night I wanted to lynch deus most ironically. I can't remember why
On August 19 2013 14:32 Alakaslam wrote:
K actually appears I didn't like deus or jat. Can slam not even remember his own reads? Why would town have to go back to see who they were suspicious of. I could understand this from a scum perspective. Scum would want to go back to see who they "said" they were suspicious of. I might be over-thinking it. From my big post on slam. I should have gone with that. I should have fucking gone with that. Now you guys are going to chase after the wrong people.
I gave you 2 opportunities to switch...
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 05:58 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 05:56 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 05:39 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 05:21 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I was under the impression we were looking for scum. seriously shut the fuck up Calm down Holy. It's just a game. Yeah Holy, let's just chill. Cora just posted in my QT and told me to knock it off so let's have a truce for now, K?
Yeh, if that was even true you are about to be warned for talking about coaching and I would have received a PM about it, so no thanks.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 06:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 06:09 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 05:58 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 05:56 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 05:39 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 05:21 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I was under the impression we were looking for scum. seriously shut the fuck up Calm down Holy. It's just a game. Yeah Holy, let's just chill. Cora just posted in my QT and told me to knock it off so let's have a truce for now, K? Yeh, if that was even true you are about to be warned for talking about coaching and I would have received a PM about it, so no thanks. Cora is the host... Not a coach.
you wouldn't have a QT with the host unless you were being coached
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 06:24 justanothertownie wrote:
Holy he is obviously joking about being scum (true or not).
On August 21 2013 05:58 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 05:56 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 05:39 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 05:21 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 05:09 Holyflare wrote:
I know it's night now, don't say reads yada yada yada but just gonna state the obvious, vote Deus, IvLosK! or Omni tomorrow. Probably losk, he's fucking useless.... I was under the impression we were looking for scum. seriously shut the fuck up Calm down Holy. It's just a game. Yeah Holy, let's just chill. Cora just posted in my QT and told me to knock it off so let's have a truce for now, K?
No, this could be a scum slip. Only scum have a QT, unless he was being coached (which he just said he wasn't).
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I think he's trying to be more clever than he actually is
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
wow you can claim fake scum but I can't claim fake cop? hilarious
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Blazinghand told me to do it.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
treat bull shit with more bull shit
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
You wouldn't have a QT with the host of the game unless you were being coached so thus you were insinuating you were being coached.
There are many forms of bull shit.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:09 DeusXmachina wrote:So why did you make a case against slam if you cop checked iV night 1?
oh jesus christ are you people retarded
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
it's not a fake claim, it's not a real claim, it's a troll
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Blazinghand is a SCUM COACH, I don't think you quite understand what the thing you apparently do best (trolling) is.
I guess if troll claim is fake claim then yes?? what kind of question is that???
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
god you have no brains, you're just adding to my confirmations
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
but now I know you are town because you are talking off the top of your head and didn't know that BH was a scum coach
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Deus or omni it is
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
hahahahahahahahahahahahaahahaha deus......... jesus christ were you waiting for that to jump on jat all game?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
the slam switch was in the last 10 minutes of the day, there is no way scum would join on it when everyone was around
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
this game is beyond comical
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:24 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 07:21 Holyflare wrote:
the slam switch was in the last 10 minutes of the day, there is no way scum would join on it when everyone was around And why not!! Look at how much town cred Umasi got last game for voting Gotard.
he joined right at the start, gotard was being useless and was obviously getting lynched that day, not to mention that vote was NOT plurality
in this game plurality means the lynches could swing either way REALLY easily... at the current state of the game town is really far ahead and voting off a scum in the last 10 minutes of a lynch of day 2 when he had 0 votes previously would just not happen
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:24 DeusXmachina wrote:We will see who is laughing when your targets start flipping.
You were totally spot on with your reads last game right? OH wait no you weren't you tunneled all game and became oblivious to everything else around it
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
this game I'm 1 for 1 so far
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:28 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 07:26 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 07:24 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 07:21 Holyflare wrote:
the slam switch was in the last 10 minutes of the day, there is no way scum would join on it when everyone was around And why not!! Look at how much town cred Umasi got last game for voting Gotard. he joined right at the start, gotard was being useless and was obviously getting lynched that day, not to mention that vote was NOT plurality in this game plurality means the lynches could swing either way REALLY easily... at the current state of the game town is really far ahead and voting off a scum in the last 10 minutes of a lynch of day 2 when he had 0 votes previously would just not happen Lol. You apparently didn't even follow that game. So stop talking about it. The only thing that got Gotard lynch was a last minute vote switch by Zyrre. The only thing that got slam lynched this game was a last minute switch by lone
and why did umasi HAVE to blend in, because I fucking targeted all 3 scum on night 1 and got night killed for it and you STILL didn't pick up on that
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
there is no point for getting town cred when only YOU are the one that is pressuring JAT
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
also jat could easily leave his vote on you and you would have been lynched and nobody would have asked ANY questions seeing as I was the only one on slam at the time, and no lynch or a town lynch is 100x more preferable to what just happened to scum
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:32 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 07:30 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 07:28 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 07:26 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 07:24 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 21 2013 07:21 Holyflare wrote:
the slam switch was in the last 10 minutes of the day, there is no way scum would join on it when everyone was around And why not!! Look at how much town cred Umasi got last game for voting Gotard. he joined right at the start, gotard was being useless and was obviously getting lynched that day, not to mention that vote was NOT plurality in this game plurality means the lynches could swing either way REALLY easily... at the current state of the game town is really far ahead and voting off a scum in the last 10 minutes of a lynch of day 2 when he had 0 votes previously would just not happen Lol. You apparently didn't even follow that game. So stop talking about it. The only thing that got Gotard lynch was a last minute vote switch by Zyrre. The only thing that got slam lynched this game was a last minute switch by lone and why did umasi HAVE to blend in, because I fucking targeted all 3 scum on night 1 and got night killed for it and you STILL didn't pick up on that Calm down Holy. Go get a tissue and wipe away those tears. This is just a game, and you are getting annoyingly personal.
this isn't personal, you have a flaw and that is tunneling, you aren't looking at the bigger picture on why people would make the moves they are
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I was on you, omni was on you and jat was on you... I switched to slam and I was the only one on him then JAT did which made all the votes equal why would he even risk that when he could just stay on you and hope lone switched to you??
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 07:35 OmniEulogy wrote:
So.... Holy.... I saw you post the cop check thing and I was going to say "We'll I'm a 3p Miller but please don't lynch me for it" but assumed people would understand that you were trolling LosK. I guess he didn't get it? the last two pages are fucking hysterical. I actually can't stop laughing at how dumb people reacted to that LOL.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
sorry I meant lone, me and omni
the point still stands there is no way jat would go on slam just so someone would switch
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Why would he ever risk it when he could just go on you and 3 people would be on you??? Nobody would ask any questions
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Slam was a spur of the moment last second switch not an inevitable kill. Umasi last game HAD to bus his team because sc_am was useless and gotard and him were linked, he made no fight against gotard until my night post and then he came out all guns blazing which was very out of character, but you were too concerned with 1 aspect of his vote and that threw you off him completely... In this game jat was under no threat of link with slam, no danger of getting lynched probably in this entire game, it just doesn't make sense
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I thought i read it meant a no lynch somewhere but now I can't find it so maybe you were right?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Deus make a case on omni or ivlosk or both
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Time Cycle:
This game will follow a 24 hour night/48-hour day cycle. The deadline will be at 19:00 BST (+01:00) The day lasts for 48 hours. Who-ever has the majority of votes at the end of the day is lynched. If at the end of 48 hours, there is no majority, it is a no-lynch. Night lasts for 24 hours, and you can post at night.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 08:25 iVLosK! wrote:Person reaching the number of votes first is lynched. If I have 4 votes and you have 4 votes but I received 4 votes first, I am lynched.
No
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Woah woah so the rules are changing??
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Majority means most votes in britain, so you can say that even in a plurality lynch, hence my confusion
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 08:48 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 08:27 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 08:25 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 08:06 Holyflare wrote:
Ties are no lynch Person reaching the number of votes first is lynched. If I have 4 votes and you have 4 votes but I received 4 votes first, I am lynched. No Ja.
Si.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 21 2013 23:42 iVLosK! wrote:Do share.
soon™
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 00:02 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 23:57 Holyflare wrote:On August 21 2013 23:42 iVLosK! wrote:On August 21 2013 23:41 Holyflare wrote:
I've solved the game Do share. soon™ But when will then be now? VeZ9HhHU86o
19:00 hours sir
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
iVLosK! is scum, kill him now!
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Was nice knowing you town. Kind of....
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
This aint a case with quotes because I can't be bothered, you can make your own because it's obvious, game solved. Sereals though, look at who voted who. Why would slam switch so much.
Mainly, what I think is actually the case is - So who was everyone voting at the start of the game or applying pressure to that slam did not? SQUIBBLES!!! WHO DID SLAM NOT VOTE?? SQUIBBLES!!!! Instead he placeholdered xzavier instead for no reason. He also was asked for reads on omni, never gave them. Omni kept lightly mentioning scam for his voting during the day but never put a case on him, only me briefly and then deus tunneling the rest of the game (was suspicious as fuck though to be fair, soz deus).
If you click slams filter and click the all button and than ctrl + f and search omni, it comes up what? 3 times? no reads, no mentioning, no pressure, blind acceptance. If you click omnis filter slams name only comes up in tandom with deus and never much else. He also didn't vote slam in the lynch at the end and stayed on deus, WHY BOTHER WHEN BOTH WERE EQUALLY SCUMMY TO YOU?
GGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG, town wins.
btw trying to sheep deus, pro move, you slipped up though
+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 03:04 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:31 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 08:05 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:54 Holyflare wrote:
I also find it funny that you jump on everyone voting Xzavier when everyones alternative was squibbles who also would get modkilled, totally legit reasoning... not Squibbles said two things, I have the gift of knowing that he was town and therefore I can tell you he was either a very new, or bored townie. His two posts also indicate that and while I was reading the game before being subbed in for him my read on him was town. Why are you deflecting the subject? Squibbles didn't get voted on, if he had this wouldn't be as bad as it is. At least you could argue Squibbles had said he would contribute but never did. I also thought he was town from what he has posted (if you actually read anything I posted, it seems you haven't). I am also not deflecting, the point you raised was that you shouldn't vote for a 0 poster, squibbles was a 2 poster with a no vote that also got modkilled, the REST of the town was on him right until the final minutes where they bandwagoned iVLosK! and then subsequently Xzavier. There was some suspicious shit there though and I'll leave it till the day before I discuss it. Not making the same mistake as my last game. you are mistaking me asking you questions for me making a case against you. I don't need to start quoting your filter to bring up how weird your vote was and your logic behind it. However the soft town claim bothers me quite a bit especially with how the game has played out so far. Why I think Holy is scummy. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 03:19 Holyflare wrote:Here's the run down so far, yeh it's early but /care Stuffz going down: + Show Spoiler +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. Here we have squibbles pointing out what I find to be obvious but what many of us failed to say. He didn't need to backtrack but he did because this is an important point, it isn't beating a dead horse and implies that he'd like further discussion if this arises in the future, I like this guy. Also agrees with not posting bs spam. +++++ Would like to hear more when he's back from work. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Deus started a bit wishy washy but I'm assuming he is being more aprehensive over the last game where he started with full on aggression against reps. + 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. I'm liking this post, yet, it seems this game he is going all out aggressive on lurkers. Lurkers annoy me yes but he hasn't really added anything yet in terms of proper content other than elaborating his policy when asked which increases my suspicions of people that are rating him as a town player for now ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Not sure about this lonemeow guy, he has the town mentality sure with stuff like this: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 15:26 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 15:16 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 15:11 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 14:55 Alakaslam wrote:On August 16 2013 14:49 LoneMeow wrote: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... You addressed the content itself, but I was more curious of your thoughts of it as a first post. Did it seem like the way a town player would enter the game? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=424098Check my reads. Why? You are suspicious? Okay, I see your track record on figuring out first posts isn't exactly stellar :D I want to see people talk about each other, because that makes the game much easier to figure out. I consider his first post pretty much null from a completely new player. On that matter, my reads so far: slightly town on DeusXmachina and Alakaslam, null on the rest. however he hasn't had to talk about other people so I cannot give a good read on him whatsoever yet. If you read this lonemeow I want your full impressions on iVLosK! and Slam. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What I am REALLY quizzical about are why people are riding iVLosK!'s dick so fucking hard, he implies he hate's wishy washy bull shit but has provided absolutely 0 content in his posts so far: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. This is his only thing that has any merit and it's a line about him agreeing with a post.... like seriously I question the people that lean town on this guy... Stupid obvious shit 1: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 07:41 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 07:16 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:43 justanothertownie wrote:
Because he makes it look like is very experienced and after playing one game this seems odd to me. I would like to know if he is just a show off or actually not really a newbie because it might influence my read on him later on. If I had to guess I would lean slightly townie on iV because of his aggressive first post (not counting the rap). Although, one post is virtually nothing to go on. Especially the first one. Your guess on iV JAT? I would argue that the rap was very aggressive. Krizz Kaliko does not fuck around. Stupid obvious shit 2: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 09:08 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 08:55 Alakaslam wrote:
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. Yes. I am a zergling. Your thoughts? Stupid obvious shit 3: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. For a guy that states he hates people that talk about "stupid obvious shit" he sure is hypocritical. He's also just devolved into talking about lynching lurkers in his last post, again, no content. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Slam... is slam, but this game he's seemed to get his shit somewhat together: + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 12:56 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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!! Confused about his town read on iVLosK obviously and mentioning me over everyone else seems a bit quizzical too as I didn't post much. + Show Spoiler +On August 16 2013 14:02 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +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. I like this post but by this nature he should also assume that ivlosk is now scummy (after reading my post/his filter), he has a habit of being swayed easily by people who are expressing pro town interests which you all need to watch out for too. Obviously the game is early and you can't read too much into what he is saying so press him lots <3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------JAT hasn't really added anything other than his dislike of fakeclaims, can't read into him at all so would like to hear more from him too, will push him on people when he is around. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. /spoiler] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I will push people for reads and things if they are around when I post this First off we have this large post which looks impressive at first, then after reading it you realize it doesn't say a whole lot other than the first few posts of nearly everybody gives him a town vibe. This is behavior of somebody who wants to look like they are contributing without actually putting anything of worth into a very large post very early into the game when there isn't really much information to go on. Tries to get on the good side of multiple people and not disturb things too much. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 07:02 Holyflare wrote:JAT what is your opinion so far on ivlosk and also I'd like to hear your thoughts on lonemeow On August 17 2013 07:29 Holyflare wrote: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. So you liked his rap and pointless posts about being a zergling? Ok sounds reasonable....... Oh wait not really, i want you to filter dive like i have done and specifically point out what it is you like and why It is irrelevant for now why i picked these 2 people Slam if you are still here what are your thoughts on deus and JAT? Another scummy move is to constantly keep asking people what they think about the others and not answering or very briefly answering questions directed at yourself. This way again it looks like you are contributing when in reality it is the others doing most of the talking. Also I happen to like LosK's pointless talk as it is part of the reason I have a slight town read on him. He seems very comfortable to talk about nothing in particular which sets most scum on edge and can sometimes make him a target for others to try and attack because of it. Which you later do. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 08:42 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +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. On August 17 2013 21:26 Holyflare wrote:
##Vote xzavier for now as a placeholder until something more obvious comes forward Not a townie vote or mindset to have. As mentioned before No-Lynch is always an option. Town does not look for the "safe" or "easy" votes. + Show Spoiler + On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? On August 18 2013 00:17 Holyflare wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 08:04 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +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. Wasn't this the post where you said you were using it to build a 'case'? You agreed with JAT that relying on modkills would be bad so why have you gone 180 on squibbles when you originally liked his first post? (here: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:20 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2013 03:15 iVLosK! wrote:
Has this game started?
Shall I begin the rape? No, past iVlosK!. Not yet. But soon... very soon. Show nested quote +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. This is Squibbles only game post but I like the content on multiple points. I spare thee, and await further posts. ) Surely it is better to vote off the lurker and hear from squibbles tomorrow in case something legitimately came up and then we can vote squibbles tomorrow if it is unsatisfactory. + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 23:55 iVLosK! wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 23:48 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 23:20 LoneMeow wrote:
I'd like to get more reads from almost everyone, please.
My current top scum suspects, in no particular order:
Squibbles - is participating in the game, but hasn't really produced any content nor reads
iVLosK! - it seems to me that his play is different from last time, but that's weak so I'm prepared to watch him for now
reps)squishy - although he finally gave some reads that only happened after being pressured so I'm still suspicious
Had a relatively strong town read on Holyflare, but his useless (and very non-committal) vote on Xzavier makes me a little worried I might be misreading. If he posts at 6.59 he will not be modkilled, hence the placeholder vote, it can be moved anytime I feel like it onto someone more suspicious. It is also madatory to vote for someone otherwise you will also probably be warned/modkilled, if I was to suddenly become inundated with things to do later at least my vote would be on a worthy person. It is more suspicious that people have not voted at all with only 3 hours left to go. This is also a plurality lynch meaning that the person with the most votes, not majority will be voted off. Do you really want to vote off the guy that has at least said something rather than the person that has said nothing? A last second vote from Xzavier would be tantamount to admitting he is scum. If he does, we just lynch him D2. I would much prefer to allow him to be modkilled and we can see what his replacement has to say. I much prefer reps or sqibbles for the lynch and will vote squibbles because multiple players have stated that reps is always like this. ##Vote: Squibbles You do NOT want to accidently vote off a town member if they have contributed, even 1 or 2 posts, compared to somebody who has done none for now. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I honestly do not understand how people can think you are acting town when you flip flop all over the place on almost every post you make: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 01:27 iVLosK! wrote:
Anyway, if Xzavier and reps haven't done anything meaningful by the time the Chiefs game ends tonight, I will lower the boom on whichever I deem most worthy. Nothing has been noted in your posts since then that implies you'd even think about modkills or squibbles voting, you just seem to be bandwagoning with no valid reason for the easy lynch. Clearly you've had a problem with LosK all game, yet you continue to keep your vote on Xzavier, I can only assume it is to be "safe". Lastly please don't soft claim town with a "I'm not going to post my thoughts at night, cause I might get NK'd!" after playing like shit and tunneling LosK for most of the day for play that I and a few others consider to be town aligned. It's bullshit. My town reads are still JAT and LosK, I think if Koshi continues to play exactly as he has been I feel pretty comfortable calling him town as well. I think he's right with saying scum was on the Xzavier lynch. I'm also leaning towards town on Lonemeow as I've really liked some of his posts, in particular these: + Show Spoiler +On August 17 2013 17:53 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 14:30 reps)squishy wrote:
Squibbles said I run PST and do work so my main times where I will be extremely active will be after 4:30
Which he has not. So do you think he's scum? Why so non-committal? Your filter is worrying, low activity and I get a feel that you're just trying to find a target to latch on rather than trying to find scum. On August 18 2013 01:29 LoneMeow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:17 Alakaslam wrote:
Good morning everyone. I agree with Holyflare's stance first of all
##Vote: Xzavier
As a placeholder.
However the squibbles voting is intriguing. It is a policy lynch based on what may be IRL circumstances. Is there actually something wrong with his posting, other than the lack of it?
If not, may want to reconsider...
... As according to his own deadlines, he will likely be modkilled. It is 9:15 on the west coast.
Any better reasons though? As the same goes for Xzavier... So if squib is preferable guess what When I dropped my vote on Squibbles I was fully expecting him to speak up before the deadline as he had said he's reading the thread during EU daytime. Now that it looks like he might be modkilled/replaced just like Xzavier I'm fully prepared to switch. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 01:22 Alakaslam wrote:
Indeed, iVLosK! Looks bad after reading up on HolyFlare, but are there enough reasons to voteswitch? Shall he defense hisself? I'm fully prepared to switch to iVLosK! - as I've stated he seems to be suspiciously timid compared to his style in XLII and the point about not bringing much content that Holyflare brings up has merit. Also, now that you're here, can I have a few reads from you? To me this looks like a town motivated mind set. He's actively watching what people are doing and how they are reacting to things and trying to see the town/scum reasoning behind each action. Actually by quoting these I realize Slam also voted on Xzavier as a place holder at first. wtf. Sheep placeholder at that, scummy as hell. Add that to how much his vote jumped around and he makes me pretty nervous
I think Deus looks pretty scummy as well and also mentioned he wanted a "safe" place to put his vote. After looking through his filter carefully though I no longer think he's the scummiest out of all three.
Carefully through deus' filter, not scummy, few posts later.
+ Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
in fact...
[bold]##Vote: DeusXmachina[/bold]
His filter is worse than Slam's, He made the same terrible vote, and he's not playing like his standard town play as said by other people.
Unless anything massive happens in the next 48 hours the only other person I'd consider voting for right now would be Slam. I'll be going through his filter and trying to make a case on him as well but the case made by JAT is very compelling.
wut wut, gg
seriously though we have at least 1 blue role, what is he doing??
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Also if i die it's ivlosk because he's around waiting to switch kills to me if i said something incriminating too <3
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
gg little meowth, gg town
##Vote OmniEulogy
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 03:04 OmniEulogy wrote:
yeah I thought you were scummier than Deus and you conveniently forget your defense is between those two posts of me making my cases against you, and against Deus.
In essence your case is bad because you forget what happened between those posts Holy. Really, Really bad.
what posts?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
yeh deus isn't scum, he tunneled just like that last game too it was funneh
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I also made a better case against slam by the way, you didn't change then either
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
who was the only person that also tried to make a case on you, deus! Try and lynch him off obviously!
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Why would people vote slam and sheep me in the first place? BECAUSE HE FELL APART AFTER I MADE A CASE ON HIM AND THEN STARTED FALLING ALL OVER THE PLACE.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 03:24 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 03:22 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 22 2013 03:09 Holyflare wrote:
I also made a better case against slam by the way, you didn't change then either ????????????????????? He made a case far earlier but the "better case" I didn't see either.
If you didn't think it was a better case and weren't more suspicious of slam than deus then you are equally now suspicious.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 03:30 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 03:28 Holyflare wrote:
Why would people vote slam and sheep me in the first place? BECAUSE HE FELL APART AFTER I MADE A CASE ON HIM AND THEN STARTED FALLING ALL OVER THE PLACE. the guy who voted on Xzavier started to fall apart after your case on him..... and that's why he voted LoneMeow almost 36 hours later and got himself lynched at the end of D2.... am I reading this right?
Are you playing dumb or what?
On August 20 2013 02:34 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 02:29 justanothertownie wrote:
No said question can absolutely be answered. I did not ask for the alignment of said players I asked for the reason for Omni's scumread on Deus and Alakaslam and why he thinks they would voteswitch as scum. Pfft just read HolyFlare that's probably all the alakasuspicious that can be remotely loosely said in a nutshell That's like just short of all that can be said short of what is pulled from ass
From then on he said nothing other than quiet sobbing.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
This game is so over I question whoever disagrees with this.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 03:41 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 03:38 iVLosK! wrote:On August 22 2013 03:29 justanothertownie wrote:On August 22 2013 03:01 iVLosK! wrote:
Scum is so bad at this. Explain. Killing Lone. Why? He was confirmed town.
How is he confirmed?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
So did me and you, are we now confirmed too?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
And I supplied the wood and you created the coffin, it doesn't matter what order it happened.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
By the way I want you to actually do what I said and click slams filter on all messages and ctrl + f omni.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=423708&user=Alakaslam&view=all
here is his all filter,
I want to draw attention to here: + Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 23:08 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2013 23:04 LoneMeow wrote:On August 19 2013 22:42 Alakaslam wrote:
I know sorry about being gone.
I am here now gimme a bit to read. While you're here, give me a read on Omni please? Ok. Reading his filter now. Persona just started but I will still be able to check stuff out. That is why I was afg a bit, if not afk.
and here: + Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 23:21 Alakaslam wrote:
Well, I don't want to OMGUS but as he thinks I am second scummiest in the game I naturally think he is at least misguided, but if that's my fault for principle voteswitching I get it. Captain hindsight can work mightily in people.
Still, wish deus answered me at the time. At least he has said why since.
I want to see what OE thinks of deus upon his return.
and here: + Show Spoiler +On August 20 2013 13:59 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 03:57 justanothertownie wrote:
I don't know if you are scum. But since I absolutely don't trust my ability to read you I am looking for mafia elsewhere at the moment.
If you have the time I guess it would be a good idea for you to have a look at Deus if you really want to lynch him. If you have even more time I would like your opinion on Omni and iVLosk. Well you just got my opinion of PAGE 35 FTW omni is not my favorite person here. He keeps pushing me and deus, I'm not gonna like him a whole lot. From captain hindsight I think he is leaning town. Dude tho iVLosk how is lone Wow Like I must read what you said again
Each time you or someone else asks for a read on omni, it's literally nothing in response and then a deflection to someone else, there is also another example here:
+ Show Spoiler +On August 21 2013 01:59 Alakaslam wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 01:57 justanothertownie wrote:Ok, I just reread Deus filter. I urge everyone voting him now to do the same. That's the least you can do. I am not convinced he is scum. As I reread I got the feeling everything up to his last post about me could be a townie who made a big mistake under pressure at the deadline Day1. Before he made that big ass bullshit post on me I was about to consider him town again and I now know why again. It's this post that I liked: On August 20 2013 04:00 DeusXmachina wrote:Just got up. Ill answer the questions directed at me 1 by 1. JAT's is first + Show Spoiler +On August 19 2013 19:46 justanothertownie wrote:
So Deus, you don't like it if I quote you - ok. I don't like to quote such an enormous post anyways.
So here is my answer to you but first:
I thought about the whole thing since yesterday and I will admit that the lynch conclusions alone are not enough to forge a solid read on someone. I got caught up in this because your voting was really stupid even if it wasn't scum motivated. If you read what I said you know that I already mentioned it doesn't make so much sense for scum to voteswitch like that if iVLosk is town. And iVlosk is right that this is kind of an association case and that they are bad.
Still I don't really like how you responded to my case on you and I will tell you why.
Yeah, I quoted a shitton if you want so say it like that but I always explained what's scummy about it if it doesn't speak for itself like your voting pattern. You don't even adress one point of my case directly instead you are saying I am scum for pushing you? Wow, now I am impressed. Thats's the scummy way to "defend" against a case.
You are absolutely right - a townie should change his reads if there is new information but did you really do that? What happened between your vote on iVlosk and your vote on Xzavier that changed your mind and if there is nothing why did you vote for iVLosk in the first place? If you can explain your thought process through yesterday to me instead of just claiming there is no way scum would do that I would consider changing my read on you. Also please explain to me why you didn't know it was plurality lynch when it was mentioned several times before the lynch (did you read the thread at all?).
So far I see your case on me is that I am agreeing with people on things + OMGUS. Yeah, great case.
Other than that:
I am suspicious of Omni myself. He is obviously right about me but if I understand him correctly he obsed before he replaced so it is easy to know who looks townie to people and who doesn't and scum likes to give townreads. It is easy for them to give strong reads because they know who is town and who isn't.
But what really gets me thinking about him is his reasoning. He doesn't even really consider iVLosk to be scum and still insists on you or slam being scum and I don't follow that.
There still is only one alive player who I really have a considerable townread on and it's not him.
I would really like you to keep being active Day2 and to keep posting reads. If this means you have to push me - do it.
The same goes for iVLosk who didn't contribute anything for a long time now. I don't want to call him scum for not defending himself before the lynch anymore because it was very shortly before the deadline that he got voted but still several people were suspicious of him and there was always the possibility of him getting lynched earlier. I don't know what to think of him.
It really sucks that slam is afk for half of the dayphase btw. On August 19 2013 07:35 justanothertownie wrote:Ok, I read Deus filter again and I really don't like it. He looked very motivated pre game and you describe him as an agressive, active townie in the last newbie game. I don't see that at all in this game. He started with some policy posts without saying anything. That's ok in itself but after that his activity really dropped down. He wasn't agressive instead he asked generic questions like this: Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 05:23 DeusXmachina wrote:
Analyzing peoples previous games to determine their role this game, good or bad in newbie? Show nested quote +On August 16 2013 06:36 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 16 2013 06:32 justanothertownie wrote:On August 16 2013 05:26 iVLosK! wrote:
Using meta on noobies is usually useless, in my experience. So, how much experience do you have? I guess you played 1 game on TL... other sites? Why do you ask? After I mentioned that policy talk doesn't add that much he quickly backed off. Feels really defensive (although this post isn't that bad apart from that). Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 03:06 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 01:30 justanothertownie wrote:On August 16 2013 20:37 LoneMeow wrote:On August 16 2013 20:30 justanothertownie wrote:
Because it was mentioned someone did it in one of the last newbie games and because there were 2 townies who fakeclaimed cop in the first game I played. Ok, I see. What do you think of this game so far, any reads? Not really. I didn't like some posts from Deus and the first one of Squibbles that much but this won't tell me anything. I'm just not a fan of this rather pointless policy discussions. People can talk alot about these things without adding any useful content. I won't read to much into early contentless posts though. Bad experience last game. Yeah scum could talk policy all day. Lets put all this lying, lurking, and what-have-you talk aside for now. I am going to vote reps or xzavier if they don't start posting. I want to push for a lynch day 1, and as of right now they are the best candidates. If reps/xzavier are tied for first then a close second would be, well.... everyone else. Although, I can't help be suspicious of holy. Last game he was pretty try-hard and this game he seems pretty detached. I won't press it for now though because he said he was busy. Anyway, I think our goal should be pressuring xzavier and reps to get them to participate. Lurkers won't be tolerated! His scumhunting pretty much only revolved around lynching lurkers. Easy thing to do as scum. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 09:07 DeusXmachina wrote:
Lets entertain a scenario. Reps or Xzavier are completely aware that the game has started and are intentionally not posting. They don't feel any real pressure so they aim to do several things:
A) Contribute nothing to increase the chances of a no-lynch day 1
B) Contribute nothing to avoid mistakes or posts that could get them unwanted attention.
or the less likely
C) Play a lurker roll so their scum buddy can bus them.
How easy would it be to drop in and say, "oh sorry guys I couldn't post because.... blah.. blah.. blah...". Some of you are already assuming that they are just afk.
Why are we tolerating lurkers?
What seems weird to me is his stance on iVLosk. First he defends him. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 07:45 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 07:40 Holyflare wrote:On August 17 2013 07:37 justanothertownie wrote:
I did filter dive although that's a weird term for less than a page of posts. Of course I don't care about his rap stuff. I liked his post concerning the policies and the one about metareads in newbies. There wasn't that much else at the time I made that statement. Do you not think what I wrote about him has any merit? Specifically the point about telling us not to write crap but then doing it himself? A few posts have happened since your last assumption. I don't think his hypocrisy is a reason to be suspicious. He probably just wanted to come in with flare, hence his aggressive first post (not counting rap). Holy would you rather focus on iV or reps/xzavier? Pressuring xzavier or reps might get them to start talking. Then he is suspicious of him: Show nested quote +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. Show nested quote +On August 17 2013 10:01 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 17 2013 09:54 iVLosK! wrote:On August 17 2013 09:53 reps)squishy wrote:
I am sorry I don't see where I "fucked up".
Please point it out. On August 17 2013 09:49 reps)squishy wrote:I read all pages so far. I am suspicious of iV. He believes in lynch all liers and also stated town has plenty of reasons to lie. Is it me or does that seem a little scummy. Proof. 1. 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? 2. There are plenty of reasons to lie as town. Part of this game is misleading scum about what your own abilities and intentions are. I've bolded the obvious sarcasm for those unable or unwilling to keep up. Seems more egotistical than sarcastic. Shortly after that Losk is town suddenly: Show nested quote +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.
But why don't vote for our townread, right? Then there is this: Followed by: Finally he claims not to have known this is plurality lynch which has been stated several times in the thread. He either doesn't read the thread or this is a bad excuse for his weird voting. Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:08 DeusXmachina wrote:
On August 18 2013 08:07 Holyflare wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:49 Holyflare wrote:On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. I like how you ignore everything I've said the entirety of the game just to focus on the person I put my vote on. It was my girlfriends birthday today (went out yesterday for it/party today) so I left my vote on the safest person so far. If he posted once and voted he'd be still in the game and I would NOT be alright with that, I would 100% not be alright with wasting 2 days just so we could fucking waste another day talking about him and wasting the day on him. That's a pretty massive issue.... the objective isn't to find the safest person to vote for and then do it as town..... Your reason of not wanting to get rid of somebody who might contribute doesn't work in this case. Xzavier had literally not made a single post, was very likely to be modkilled and you had stronger feelings against another player but you kept your vote on him because it was safer? Am I reading that right? Safer for what? Town on D1 doesn't need to worry about what the safe vote is. if you wanted to be safe why didn't you just ##Vote:No-Lynch instead of putting it on somebody who wouldn't defend himself. I'm fairly certain I just got that last part wrong, would a mod be kind enough to tell me/us what the correct format is to vote for a no-lynch? Thanks! I am confused why Xzavier WAS voted off though when the 2 votes were placed after the deadline........
We didn't even have enough votes against him. It wasn't a vote off. He was modkilled. They just said he got lynched in the end of day post. I really would like to hear his reasoning for all of this. Also he should be way more active Day2 if he is town because right now I am really worried about him. For starters, scum reads based on the xzavier lynch are extremelly unreliable, and I will try to explain that by detailing my thought process. Ill say this again, the xzavier lynch is a MASSIVE opportunity for scum to capitalize on. It's a gateway to mislynching a townie. There was some talk about my inconsistency. I wouldn't call the moments before the Xzavier lynch inconsistent. At least in my case, the better word is impulsive. So my thought process: The most impulsive thing I did that day was vote iV. Shortly after, I posted what I was thinking. + Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 02:56 DeusXmachina wrote:
Sorry guys. I couldn't be around this morning. Read the thread. Although I don't completely agree with Holy stance against iV, everyone else seems convinced. Not sold on squibbs. I would rather vote Xzavier but that is clearly not going to happen. Fuck I might change my vote. iV seems to aggressive/antagonistic to be scum.
I got in right before the lynch. I pan through the posts. Wow people seemed convinced iV is the best lynch candidate. Vote iV. Wait a second, I don't really agree with that. He is way to antagonistic, and aggressive to be scum. I don't think this is right. Well how many votes against him, we need 5 right? (Yes I genuinly thought it was a majority lynch. No I didn't catch where it said plurality. Yes when slam responded right after saying plurality I discarded it because I thought wtf does that mean). Nope this isn't right he is not scum. Unvote, vote Xzavier. Why vote Xzavier? Yes I actually thought it was a majority (Guys do you really think scum would say something so stupid?). I thought, you know what, I am sticking to my guns this game. I don't want to tolerate lurking. Why such a strong stance against lurking? Well I had a major lurker in my last game who turned out to be scum. Another lurker, although not as bad, who turned out to be scum. Okay, so in retrospect Xzavier was beyond a lurker. He was a no poster. But I thought to myself, I don't think Squibbs is scum just yet, I don't think reps is scum just yet. So he is the only one I can vote for. I kick myself for not voting no-lynch. But don't you see! That inconsistency, that impulsiveness is not scummy. Who is more likely to be impulsive? A scum who is constantly thinking about the ramifications of his actions, or a townie who is interested in scum hunting, not constantly making sure he does not look suspicious. Look how much shit that Xzavier lynch got slam and I? That would be, like I said earlier, a massive misstep by scum. That's why talk of scum reads based on the Xzavier lynch are so silly. That's why I think Omni is trying to capitalize on the lynch. Ill respond to JAT's case point by point. The first little bit is based on my meta. I think that is a weak argument. He is talking about how I am not being as aggressive. Well different game different situation. Second point. Back off the policy talk was not defensive at all. I was heading your advice/agreeing with you. My scum hunting was based off of only lurkers? I didn't have anything else to scum hunt at the time. I didn't want to talk about inconsistencies in IV's play and over-analyze his first post, so I didn't chime in with Holy. After that is the best example of my inconsistency. My read on iV was changing, that's all that needs to be said. The rest I explained above. Overall it's still a weak case. My case on you was not just based on you agreeing with things. It doesn't sound like an impossible scenario to me. The only thing that really frustrates me about him is his tunneling against me. I already stated why his case is bullshit and I won't do this again here. I don't understand why he attacks me and not Omni (I know he leans scum on him but he pushes me instead). I would absolutely attack Omni right now if I was him. He even stated several times that Omni is the one who is pushing an agenda with the Day1 lynch but instead he fucking votes me for laughable reasons. I don't get it. But I also don't see why scum Deus would do this - it's just bad/stupid play. Also it weirds me out how everyone apart from iVLosk voted him without a problem. Either they are a very obvious scumteam (I won't call it impossible) or something doesn't add up here. Any thoughts? I will see if I can find a better target for my vote for now. Check out lone for me ya? Now, brb.
You are talking about omni, are suspicious of his agenda and get a chance to press him further? Slam asks you to tunnel lone instead, like what more shit do you need?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Also, who was on the lone vote? Slam and Ivlosk, what other obvious alternative is there to framing him than voting off his lynch target?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
But lone is dead and you are not.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
He wasn't super obvious town, didn't push slam or whatever, wasn't a real threat to anyone by way of his posts. If anything you or JAT would be better examples to kill but JAT voted slam and you stuck to Deus even though your second read is slam? what reasoning is that?? If slam and ivlosk were actually scum together they could have switched votes to deus at any time to save slam and I'm sure they'd be around for the vote for that to happen and your vote would have killed the townie.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
We also have 1 blue, if it was a jailkeeper or cop they 100% would have blocked deus or checked him last night. Since we haven't heard from them that means deus is safe for now. Most likely we have a doctor and he has been missing who to save each night though. I think I know who the doctor is but that is irrelevant for now. Seeing as I am town and the person I think is blue is blue then that only leaves you on my suspicious list.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 04:18 justanothertownie wrote:
We voted slam so close to the deadline - they had no time to react and even if they had it would not have been enough because it would be slam - deus 3-3 with slam getting the votes first. Or did I make a mistake somewhere?
There is no way both scum would vote lone knowing that either slam or deus would get lynched that day.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Speculation is 100% what we need to do. It determines whether we can mislynch today or not.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
and yes
Congratulations, you are FXOLeenock, the Town Jailkeeper! Once per night, you can play a long macro game with another player, forcing them to stay at the GSL studio all night. While this roleblocks them, it also protects them from 1 KP. You win with the eSF players!
quoted from front page, it does block
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
the 2nd mislynch would be game over
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
there are 4 town, 1 scum left.
I know I'm town, and I'm pretty sure you are town. If there is a cop he would have checked someone other than us 2 because we were on the slam lynch aka deus, omni or ivlosk. If he reveals that he got a town check on one of them then that's 4 confirmed people (or 3 if you are blue jat) and then we easy lynch off the 2 or 1 remaining. Since we can afford a mislynch.
Jailkeeper would be much the same reasoning as cop for revealing.
Doctor on the other hand, there's not much point theorising about that, he saves someone or he doesn't.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
and roleblocking should block scum....?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 04:34 OmniEulogy wrote:literally doesn't address a single thing I just said. Yes I haven't played perfectly this game but not playing perfectly =/= being scum. My actions don't make sense from a scum point of view either, as I said read through my filter, I've been contributing all game long, pushing my reads, and I sure as hell didn't KNOW Slam would flip scum, my #1 read was Deus, #2 Slam. Why do you act like you knew Slam would flip scum while only acting on hindsight? It's stupid. Only Scum would know Slam was going to flip Scum, I don't know if you figured that out yet though. You were literally on the Deus bus pushing hard till Slam's 2nd extremely scummy vote and then bailed asap. Scum would know Slam would eventually get caught and lynched for how he was playing and would be ready to bus him to get town cred. You make it sound like I was trying to keep Slam alive without bussing him on top of all this. Scum wouldn't rely on having both players make it to the end game. You're whole point that Slam doesn't mention me very much applies to a lot of people, that's how he was playing, as I said you literally can't find Lone anywhere in his filter, his conversations with LosK are completely pointless, and he straight up avoids answering my questions directed at him during D2.
On August 19 2013 03:22 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 19 2013 03:14 justanothertownie wrote:
I agree with your reasoning itself, Omni. Deus and Alakaslam look quite scummy with their voting behaviour.
I am not so sure about IVLosk being town - I don't think his careless posting is enough to give him a town read especially because he is a veteran mafia player.
You raise some interesting points about HolyFlare. I will read him again (he was null to me before your case). please by all means pick my case apart as well, I wasn't able to say this because I was so late in joining this game but I believe not only does Koshi's death prove he was on the right track, but that in order to correctly pick the scum off the Xzavier lynch we need to go through each others cases and almost play devils advocate on how certain points might be considered town rather than scum. Admittedly at least in my case I find it very difficult to find town motivation behind a players actions after I think they are scum. I'll have to take another look at LosK then as well. He's messing around a lot which makes it very difficult for me to read him. I just don't think scum would be so openly ballsy as he is being lol
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I'm saying I'm playing devils advocate like you asked.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
entertain other notions and put out theories that I do not necessarily agree with, I'm not sure you understand what it means to be honest
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 04:39 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 04:36 Holyflare wrote:
and roleblocking should block scum....? Roleblocking blocks roles not necessarily KP. Scum had a role.
roleblocking blocks kp, any action that is submitted a roleblocker can block
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Making an alternate argument to your deus and ivlosk tunneling is also a form of playing devils advocate so no, maybe you should fucking google before insinuating that I don't know how to speak my own language. Just because I quote a post where you say do that for peoples TOWN MOTIVES does not mean I can't do it for peoples scum motives. It is the opposite to what you said to do.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
You also shouldn't have a problem with me tunneling you if you are town, I wouldn't find anything to question you about and you would be clean from everyones suspicions. So why the hate? Is it because you ARE actually scum?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
The thing is you aren't defending yourself, I didn't say slam DIDN'T reference you, I'm saying he actively deflected from you. Of course if you were scum you would be trying to discredit everything I say anyway so what is the point of even discussing anything with you in the first place?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On August 22 2013 03:21 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 03:09 Holyflare wrote:
I also made a better case against slam by the way, you didn't change then either there's a big difference between you making your defense while I was voting on you, then JAT making his case, followed up by my analyzing of Deus's posts and Deus continuing to act like scum, trying to blame everybody else, and then you making .......... oh wait you didn't make a case on slam..... what are you talking about? The case you made on Deus after JAT and I had already covered everything and then your jump onto Slam with no reasoning behind it? Wait hold on... where is this case on Slam or even mention of him that you are talking about... You were on the Deus wagon the entire time up to the lynch and then the only thing you say is you were actually literally attacking Deus the post before that while still on his lynch wagon. You made one mention of maybe lynching Slam because Deus was trying to defend himself and that's it. one sentence. Was that your case?
In response to that crapy deflection you are trying to do. Deus actively defended himself for over an hour+, Slam cracked after the first case I made for him, it was an obvious switch to make.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
He also tunneled people the last game I played with him and he's doing the same thing in this game now. There is no where his scum buddy would let him tunnel JAT so aggressively all day.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I just said he actively deflected from you...?
Have you read those 3 pages? Obviously not. Do you remember why the case was 36 hours ago and I bring it up again? Obviously not.
SLAM WAS AWAY FOR HALF OF DAY 2. HIS "3 pages of filter afterwards" are all saying: "holys case sums me up", "i am annoyed now" "i believe losk unvote deus vote lone"
if are seriously using that as an excuse then just lol
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Are you just intentionally playing dumb?!?!?!?!?!? You said my case was 36 hours ago and I'm saying it doesn't matter because slam only came back within 24 hours and THEN WHEN HE READ IT HE FELL APART... what are you not understanding here?
Like what the actual shit. I am taking credit for revealing slam as the scum and not deus and actively trying to vote him off after I liked deus' defending.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 05:31 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 05:28 OmniEulogy wrote:
So... because Slam said he had to leave and couldn't play for that day you take credit for.... taking his computer away then? Are you using his inability to post as your reason??? just lol is right.
Anyway JAT who in their right mind would vote on Xzavier D1 in the first place? This is the type of shit that is 1 scum did it, especially in the way Slam did it, there is probably another one on Xzavier. Slam had no reason to last minute jump onto Xzavier if he wasn't following some sort of weird plan imo. Exactly. But the only real plan I can see there is saving iV.
Slam was agreeing with iv all day 1 and calling him town, if he switched off of iv and eventually revealed scum it would be obvious implications for iv. Hence all are accusations have been wasted calling iv scum with slam when really we should be looking elsewhere.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 05:34 OmniEulogy wrote:
So you are saying he fell apart and posted three more pages of filter that look pretty much as useful as every other page? keep beating that dead horse Holy, see how far it'll take you.
@JAT in my night post that's the only person I mention, as that is the other possibility.
His posts before what I said were a lot more useful and did not implicate him as much as after my post. Stop being a tool you haven't even read them.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 05:35 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 05:33 Holyflare wrote:On August 22 2013 05:31 justanothertownie wrote:On August 22 2013 05:28 OmniEulogy wrote:
So... because Slam said he had to leave and couldn't play for that day you take credit for.... taking his computer away then? Are you using his inability to post as your reason??? just lol is right.
Anyway JAT who in their right mind would vote on Xzavier D1 in the first place? This is the type of shit that is 1 scum did it, especially in the way Slam did it, there is probably another one on Xzavier. Slam had no reason to last minute jump onto Xzavier if he wasn't following some sort of weird plan imo. Exactly. But the only real plan I can see there is saving iV. Slam was agreeing with iv all day 1 and calling him town, if he switched off of iv and eventually revealed scum it would be obvious implications for iv. Hence all are accusations have been wasted calling iv scum with slam when really we should be looking elsewhere. That is absolutely not true. Before slam voted iV he stated iV would be the best lynch in his eyes.
Look at how quickly he switched position from pro town iv to scum iv and then off that notion.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Guess who he also NEVER mentioned other than 'oh my eyes of suspicion are on him'. Squibbles. Guess who everyone was on at that point? Squibbles.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Also iv was being an antagonistic asshole (and still pretty much is) Who do you think was better in the long run to keep in the game?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 05:40 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 05:36 Holyflare wrote:On August 22 2013 05:34 OmniEulogy wrote:
So you are saying he fell apart and posted three more pages of filter that look pretty much as useful as every other page? keep beating that dead horse Holy, see how far it'll take you.
@JAT in my night post that's the only person I mention, as that is the other possibility. His posts before what I said were a lot more useful and did not implicate him as much as after my post. Stop being a tool you haven't even read them. so the case that you made about his posts being useless was wrong and you are saying his posts were now useful?
I wasn't even sure on slam at that point but he was on the xzavier lynch and so was deus so I only made cases on those two. His defence was awful and like I said he fell apart. I made a case out of nothing and if you say it isn't even a good case then that's because his posts weren't implicating enough for you either. However, his stance afterwards completely changed my mind and after seeing deus' defences, like I said, it's an easy switch.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 05:43 OmniEulogy wrote:
Squibbles was just an AFK townie who didn't feel like playing anymore, he was the lurker who had 2 posts which even I said would have been a better person to lynch than Xzavier, not voting for him and then voting on LosK doesnt make Squibbles scum. Saying that also makes Deus scum because he didn't vote for Squibbles but instead went straight to LosK, and then to Xzavier. Good logic.
I told you deus tunnels. He tunneled lurkers, of course his vote would be on a lurker if he wasn't convinced that iv was scum.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
His tunnel on JAT all game should be evidence enough for that. If you look at last game he was also tunneling all game.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
He is exactly the same in this game as he was last game, the only difference is he has had pressure on him the entire time. He reads a lot of the guides and knows that the best thing to do when being attacked is to point out other peoples scum mistakes and why you should not be voted over anyone else. His only downside is tunneling. I am not so sure he would tunnel JAT for THIS long if he was scum, it just doesn't make any sense at all. In fact why am I even debating things with you. YOU ARE THE SCUM.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
The only people to have played with him last game were slam and me (and reps.........) and slam was scum so I don't know where the shit you get your information from.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
and when did he say that sherlock? oh wait early on in the game, the part he was mentioning was day 1 where he pressure voted someone and that was his 'aggressiveness' people and him were talking about, the rest of the game he has been exactly the same, I WAS IN THIS GAME WHY ARE YOU EVEN TRYING TO DEBATE THIS
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
+ Show Spoiler +On August 22 2013 07:16 OmniEulogy wrote:
simply put Deus, I kept my vote on you because you are my strongest town read, as you say three people switched to Slam meaning my vote on him would have been truely pointless, I would rather keep my vote on my top scum read to let people know where I stand instead of jumping onto Slam with everybody else. I was prepared to switch but instead wrote what I did at the end of D2.
More on Deus, as I've said before I believe you trying to make Slam seem town while about to be lynched for the last hour, and him trying to keep you from being lynched by jumping off your wagon and trying to find somebody else to vote for is still very much a possibility. The only reason JAT has given me for that not being possible anymore is that it doesn't sound very believable that two scum were on the Xzavier lynch. You (Deus) didn't think even 1 scum was on the lynch and criticized me heavily for pushing it so hard when now obviously there was at least 1 scum on it.
The other possibility as JAT mentioned is that Slam jumped onto Xzavier in order to save LosK who still would have been lynched even with you joining Xzavier (as it would have been tied 2-2 with LosK coming down from 3 votes) so if LosK is scum, Slam would have had to move to save him.
Also sorry JAT I was going in circles with Holy till he decided to call it quits, which he never really did. Also Deus's meta is still relevant @Holy because he's still one of my scum reads. How dumb do you have to be to think Deus is cleared as town just because Slam flipped scum (And that is all that has happened since the time you were ready to lynch Deus btw)
Deus vanished after Slam was lynched after trying to convince us he was town for an hour as well. Not even a "well done town! thank's for keeping me alive for another cycle!" nothing. He has been soft defending Slam for most of D2 and it's quite possible that the scum team just decided to both vote on Xzavier at the end cause honestly who the hell would see that coming.
I do think I got a bit too wrapped up on Deus though, as thinking about it logically it would seem that LosK would be the scum buddy by looking at the D1 lynch and through the conversations between Slam and LosK + LosK's behavior in general has not helped town very much at all. D2 however imo points towards both Deus and LosK equally. As I said earlier, I haven't played this game anywhere near perfectly but that =/= playing like scum. I've pushed my reads, contributed to town discussion, tried to get others to contribute and even while Holy was pushing me he's doing things I said town should do to try and hunt scum. I've been playing this entire game for the purpose of catching and lynching scum and I think my obsession over the D1 Lynch and my push to get people to focus on the people involved on it was well placed.
This is easy, he just scum slipped. Let's get this over with.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:35 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 07:22 DeusXmachina wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 18 2013 07:39 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2013 07:02 Koshi wrote:On August 18 2013 07:02 OmniEulogy wrote:
what's up guys. I'm almost completely caught up Yeah it took me 5 minutes as well. Hahahaha yeah, unfortunately what I'm really going over right now is the massive clusterfuck at the end of D1. I agree with you completely when you say that nobody should vote for a guy with literally 0 posts. Town should NEVER lynch the "easiest" target which it seems like they did... that's complete scum mentality. Town lynch the scummiest players not the easiest ones -.- ... I'm also really upset that three people didn't even vote which makes it even harder to sort it out. so far I think I'm pretty happy with my reads right now though I think Slam really sticks out to me as scummy for jumping around on his votes so much, even to the point of voting for Xzavier on two seperate occasions, however he has been one of the most consistant contributors in the game albeit very spammy. I'm getting a newbie town feeling from him and with the amount he's posting if he is scum it wont take long for him to slip. For that reason I'm ok with him currently. I've never played with Deus but people say he's an aggressive townie. I'm not seeing any of that from this game. He's been asking really bad fluff questions which would be easy for scum to imitate to pretend to be contributing, his vote on Xzavier and his reason behind it were terrible or rather his lack of a reason. Then after the lynch on Xzavier he goes after Holy for something he was fine before and even said he thought Holy was town for. I'd say out of all the players he's my top scum read right now. And then Holy votes for Xzavier as a "place holder" never to take his vote off him. Very scummy behavior considering he goes for the easy lynch, and a way to avoid needing to actually come up with a reason to vote for somebody. As far as town reads go I had a newbie town read on Reps and so in turn I believe Koshi is town. JAT is my strongest town read in the game at the moment slight town read on iVLosK! and the rest are all neutral as I still have to go through the filters again. I'd really like to know why Slam jumped his vote around so much asap and why the hell all three of you (Holy, Deus, Slam) thought it was a good idea to lynch Xzavier. This is a post that I would point to as alignment indicative. It is his first in this game. Of the three candidates that he will focus on he focuses on Holy and Myself. At the time slam was not one of the best contributors, so this seems like a fake reason to "be ok with him currently". Another thing that really bugs me about this post, is when he says JAT is my strongest town read. I don't think JAT should have been anyone's strongest town read at this point in the game, unless you are scum and you know he is town. JAT and Holy would you interpret this post in the same way? Anything else to point out? Is this alignment indicative? Omni would you mind commenting on this? What were some of the contributions that caused you to overlook slam and focus on myself and holy?
being scum does that
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
think of it this way, who would slam say in the qt would be the people to target? Me and you...
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:41 justanothertownie wrote:
Why are you doing this to me people?
I like Omnis point about slam trying to get people off Deus.
But I like Deus point about Omni being ok with slam when joining the thread, too.
Holy is the only one I am leaning town on but I don't like big parts of his reasoning against Omni.
iV is content just continuing not giving a fuck while not really being pressured by anyone (I would hate going into LYLO with him)...
because I was being lazy and only half believed myself when making a 'case' against him, that's why it looks weak, but now I'm actually convincing myself
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
yeh but who would slam tell him to target first? my reads in the first day last game were all the scum team, he 'might' try and tell him to pressure me into looking scummy first
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
replacements don't get obs qt
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:49 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 07:45 Holyflare wrote:
yeh but who would slam tell him to target first? my reads in the first day last game were all the scum team, he 'might' try and tell him to pressure me into looking scummy first It's possible. How come slam did not try and pressure you though?
disassociation obviously
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:52 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 07:50 Holyflare wrote:On August 22 2013 07:49 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 22 2013 07:45 Holyflare wrote:
yeh but who would slam tell him to target first? my reads in the first day last game were all the scum team, he 'might' try and tell him to pressure me into looking scummy first It's possible. How come slam did not try and pressure you though? disassociation obviously Then why did he pressure me? lol
because the rest of the town did
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:53 OmniEulogy wrote:yeah, I was just observing the game on my own as a replacement. Also yeah yeah Holy fuck you too, when I flip green I'm sure you'll be overjoyed.  The only thing you are doing is fucking town over if I get lynched because then you look just as bad as LosK and Deus heading into LYLO
if anyone read the vote on slam they would know that not to be true
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Like I said earlier, who would be better to leave in the game? The antagonistic douche losk or the non contributer who could be modkilled into someone productive
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 07:57 OmniEulogy wrote:
clearly the guy you voted for right? lol
would rather have sex than change my vote, ty
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
also great to bring up an entire case on losk and hope NOBODY WOULD VOTE ON HIM BECAUSE OF IT, logic much
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 08:07 justanothertownie wrote:
Well, it's late. I'm taking off. I am really unsure about who is scum right now and I hope iV puts some effort into this tomorrow.
iv is not scum
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 08:02 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 08:00 Holyflare wrote:
also great to bring up an entire case on losk and hope NOBODY WOULD VOTE ON HIM BECAUSE OF IT, logic much unlike you I'm still trying to scum hunt, also apparently you could still put in your 2 cents on losk but couldn't change your vote from xZavier. Smooth move there.
because I honestly thought i'd be around to change it and then like I said in one of my posts 'what if i became inundated with stuff to do', turns out i was... -.-?
why scum hunt when i've found the scum
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
this really is no contest, if you're green i'll vote deus and we still win so who gives a shit?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 08:21 OmniEulogy wrote:
yeah yeah, I'm going to flip town and you guys are going to have to decide between Deus, LosK, and Holy is going to look absolutely terrible for his lack of cases, other than on Slam and doesn't follow it up and then for the first time in a full week makes a very weak case about me and mostly Slam - he intentionally avoids trying to mention my filter because everything in it leans town, his rehashing of my and JAT cases on Deus (who he also pushed the majority of D2 without adding anything new), JAT seriously man I'll go over LosK's filter and hope I hit something big cause right now any three of Holy, Deus, and LosK could be the remaining scum to some degree and it will literally be down to you after today to figure that out if I get lynched.
I've said it before but if you listen to this moron and lynch me, You better be sure as fuck who you're going to lynch the next day because otherwise you lose.
slam deus and losk and now yours with little conviction because like I said earlier I didn't believe it myself but now I do.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
guess who started the vote on slam?
On August 21 2013 02:48 Holyflare wrote:
Ok, after seeing all this defending from deus I actually want to switch to slam who gave up straight away after I made a case on him, anyone else agree? I also do not think JAT is a valuable lynch target right now either.
This guy.
On August 21 2013 02:52 Holyflare wrote:
sorry
##Unvote
##Vote Alakaslam
and I still tried to convince people to vote him after I started it, really bad omni, really bad.... oh wait my vote switch got us a scum kill, what did you do again? stayed on deus, that's right gz
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
haha you are a tool i literally tried to force deus to switch and called him an idiot for not doing it, have fun dying though~~~
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
Totally necessary to bus slam at that point too, your arguments are so weak it's hilarious, why wouldn't I just vote deus like the rest of you and saved slam?? You would have voted him the next day and I'd still get more time for kills, it just doesn't make any sense so why bother saying it.....
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
because you are scum, gggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
If I didn't switch nobody would have either.
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
so full of shit it's incredible you should have instant switched
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
want some stuff from your filter?
On August 21 2013 02:59 LoneMeow wrote:
EBWOP:
##Unvote
##Vote: Alakaslam
hey look, 2.59 to secure the lynch, you sure as shit left it late to agree with us on lynching him
On August 21 2013 03:00 OmniEulogy wrote:
I'm perfectly fine with a lynch on Alakaslam today as well. he's a VERY close 2nd on my reads. I'm keeping my vote on Deus as my #1 scum read though.
oh wait you had to wait till 3.00, the actual deadline before you even mentioned slam and stayed on deus, ahahaha I hope people see this is the biggest slip since ever
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 09:01 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 21 2013 02:57 Holyflare wrote:
jesus christ this is the biggest clusterfuck of shit i've seen before a day end This is him trying to convince you to vote Slam everybody. Very convincing. rofl what a joker.
I hope you actually are scum because you are thick as all hell.
On August 21 2013 02:48 Holyflare wrote:
Ok, after seeing all this defending from deus I actually want to switch to slam who gave up straight away after I made a case on him, anyone else agree? I also do not think JAT is a valuable lynch target right now either.
Look at this post, note the time. 2.48. All your bases on switching to slame and talking about me being his scum buddy are on his switch to lonemeow, when did that happen?
On August 21 2013 02:49 Alakaslam wrote:
I swear. Seeing the vote count, and that nobody else listens to the bamcis, I do this. Only thin that makes sense for me, and not that it particularly does.
##Vote: LoneMeow
oh yeh, 2.49
dat clairevoyance yo
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
or the references I made to deus, ahahaha
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
just like it's pretty convenient for your refresh right?
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
see that was easy, gg town, he caved
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
I wouldn't know I've never been scum, just expert scum hunter holyflare
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 09:10 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 09:08 OmniEulogy wrote:
nicely played Holy, well done man. I'm sorry I'm such a dick during this LOL WAT? Way to ruin the game.
/facepalm
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 09:12 DeusXmachina wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 09:11 Holyflare wrote:On August 22 2013 09:10 DeusXmachina wrote:On August 22 2013 09:08 OmniEulogy wrote:
nicely played Holy, well done man. I'm sorry I'm such a dick during this LOL WAT? Way to ruin the game. /facepalm /facepalm
not like you didn't do it on my "fake cop call"
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
what is happening..........
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
ok guys seriously though, i feel bad, i AM the scum
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
what the fuck is going on x_x
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
that aint right cz im the doctor???
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
5 for 5, scum hunter holyflare strikes again
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
you should have played it out man, I actually think town would have mislynched you somehow
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
as in mislynched someone else 
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
well I had them all in the same post, I would have dropped my suspicion on nightcat as soon as day 2 hit :/
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
switch sc_am for nightcat and 5/5 still stands
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
you should have claimed medic man, I was actually going to lynch you at one point
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
oh I said I solved the game so that I would be a night kill target on purpose but I guess he didn't read it/thought lone would be a better target x_x
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 09:37 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 09:36 Holyflare wrote:
oh I said I solved the game so that I would be a night kill target on purpose but I guess he didn't read it/thought lone would be a better target x_x yeah I decided not to kill you because of that xD
BAD MOVE BRO YOU LEFT SCUM HUNTER EXTRAORDINAIRE IN THE GAME
|
United Kingdom30774 Posts
On August 22 2013 09:47 OmniEulogy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2013 09:41 Holyflare wrote:On August 22 2013 09:37 OmniEulogy wrote:On August 22 2013 09:36 Holyflare wrote:
oh I said I solved the game so that I would be a night kill target on purpose but I guess he didn't read it/thought lone would be a better target x_x yeah I decided not to kill you because of that xD BAD MOVE BRO YOU LEFT SCUM HUNTER EXTRAORDINAIRE IN THE GAME clearly I knew not what I did.
<3 sorry bout the harsh things I was saying
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.bboyscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/homerbrain.jpg)
