EPTe: holyflare
Hogwarts Mafia - Page 22
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
e: holyflare | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 06:07 Holyflare wrote: You had no case other than role pm. You just linked your old one that had flawed reasoning. Those posts from day 1 were posts no townie would ever make, but sadly I wasn't thinking clearly after having Cephiro and CR flip town. Besides that, you lied about your role ability in a way that makes no sense and there was a host confirmation that you were lying about the role completely. I am very much willing to admit when my cases are weak and when I'm wrong, but this is absolutely not such a situation. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 06:18 Holyflare wrote: Those posts? You linked 1 post linking to lonemeow that i would absolutely post as town in every game. People said palmar was town. Lonemeow comes back in with 0 posts and votes him with no reasoning. I am going to post it out and also question the other people on palmar. I also made a case on him to confirm after the night but he got vigd. Day 1 you are also not likely to hit mafia abd so killing lurkers as policy like i said is the most optimal as they were the ones posting enough to keep themselves in but not contributing. You also made no case if you just linked to an old one that you clearly had a good enough reason to drop after my answers. So your only case was a mod pm. This is the post I was particularly referring to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=20005446 If you think that post comes from the mindset of a townie and that the person making it is being genuine and attempting to provide town direction, I don't think this conversation is worth having. We could have a third party look at the post and my comments regarding it. I can assure you that people who are generally considered good town players would all agree. e: again, it's laughable to suggest that me dropping the case for a while is meaningful. That's just a mistake on my part rather than evidence of the case being wrong. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 06:29 Holyflare wrote: No, i fully admit my play wasn't towny but the posts that were mentioned have no alignment indicative nature in them. No, that is the likely the single most alignment indicative post in the whole game. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 06:31 Grackaroni wrote: Syllo had some good points against him when the 1 scum Hufflepuff check came out I still can't believe that you were scum acting excited that another scum town slipped by saying squib. Also that you claimed a secre vote after that doing that. Posting "nice town/mafia slip" in the thread as town makes no sense unless you are a blue pretending to be a squib. It also doesn't make sense as mafia except as fake content. A townie known for arbitrary play could make it, but still it should have been considered quite suspicious. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 06:36 Holyflare wrote: Well you are ridiculous. That part on stutters was fine. The others were policy. That is in no way alignment indicative and to say that is ridiculous. In what way would a scum mindset make that post? There isn't any reason to. It wasn't under the guise of scum hunting. It was 24 hours in and did point out stutters posts who were scummy. Nobody in the thread at the time said they wanted a palmar lynch. Guess what happened? He got lynched. Sn0 at the time posted very questionable things. You said it was just rehashing the thread but only 1 of them was and that was sn0,the other 2, well palmar at least was directly against thread sentiment at the time. The post was largely fake content and indicated that you are weren't reading the thread. No one was defending Palmar by suggesting that he always starts slowly. Palmar does not sit on reads until day 3. That was a pure fabrication and it is difficult to believe that the statement was based on something you had read somewhere. Indeed, Palmar usually has strong day 1. You stated that town was lacking direction, but the game had been only going for 24 hours and you offered it no new direction and the direction that was offered was very weak. Yet you claimed this direction was "correct" even though you later went on to say that you hadn't noticed anything blatantly scummy. The person making the post was not thinking like a townie and was not being genuine. You seem to disagree, but based on my experience I am not willing to take your word for it. I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this, and possibly not on anything else as it appears that your in-game tone and arguments were not byproducts of your alignment, but rather of your genuine perspective. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
Taking the lynch away from town by secretly using your vote and then not even assuming responsibility is just beyond comprehension though. I also have no idea why you didn't counterclaim Holyflare as town having two secret voters is extremely unlikely. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 07:00 Holyflare wrote: It was categorically mentioned that there were people that didn't pick up play till day 2 onwards, you, palmar etc. In the thread. It is you that has not read and it is exactly that above everyone else attitude which gets on my nerves. There is experience and then there is arrogance. Case on sn0 contained meta to back up a point already made about him. Palmar wasn't being questioned or pushed in any way. Stutters posts were not ordinary for someone who hasn't seen more than 1 game of palmars. Of course 24 hours in a case will be very weak though there isn't much content to go on. However, to blindly say a townie wouldn't do that is silly. Seeing as 2 out of 3 people got lynched for the exact reasons in that case then other people also saw sense in them. These people were all under the radar picks that nobody was focusing on (bar sn0),that is why it looks scummy out of context, something you seemingly have a habit to do. I am not arrogant at all. If it seems like I am, it is because on this issue I feel that your perspective on mafia significantly differs from mine. We aren't going to agree, to continuing does not seem worthwhile. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 07:52 cDgCorazon wrote: @Syllo: From my perspective, you spent the whole game trying to fish information out of the hosts and it was really annoying. Then you ask a really obvious question (I'm being blunt because I'm obviously a liar in your case) and I gave you my honest answer. Your question was: Is someone who has no powers a VT or is a VT someone who has no powers? The polyjuice potion said that it takes someone's powers away. You should use that information and not pester the hosts about what it means. If you really do not know what a VT is, you shouldn't be playing this game. Don't expect the hosts to hold your hand through this game and don't call us liars when we refuse to do so. The issue was that there was already some indication that this host has a different definition of what a VT is. That is to say, Toad flipped a VT who was also lovers with ET. This is typically a blue role. You are still not even understanding what the question essentially was. All what was asked is whether the information given to us was accurate. Instead of answering yes or no, the hosts kept dodging. As for the other questions, those are very routine and most hosts are happy to answer them. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 07:56 cDgCorazon wrote: We didn't dodge shit. We said what the polyjuice potion did. It's a roleblock. Did you not understand that? You aren't even reading what you are replying to. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 08:05 cDgCorazon wrote: I have no clue what you mean. Being a lover with someone isn't much of a power. I don't know what games you are looking at. Perhaps if you had not fished for information the entire game I would not be this mad with you, but I'm irritated because of it. I've no problems with Toad flipping green. All I am saying is that due to him flipping green, I wasn't as confident as I would have otherwise been on the fact that a VT role could not have powers. The only time I was "fishing" for information was when I asked about the town win condition and only because the phrasing was leading. I had to ask about the win condition because my role PM did not provide that information. Asking whether RB blocks factional KP or not is not fishing for information. I was a roleblocker and often that information is even available to everyone in the game, even in closed setups. It is up to the host to decide what information he chooses to keep private. It is up to the player to ask these questions. The game mechanics are part of the game and the setup being closed does not usually mean that everything that isn't listed in the OP is kept secret. Sometimes the hosts haven't even considered whether the information should be secret or not. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 08:07 Grackaroni wrote: Syllo asking the hosts if it's possible for VT's/squibs to have additional powers is not a reasonable question and they don't have to answer it. It is completely reasonable question, but it is true that they do not have to answer it. However this isn't how I even framed the question. I argued that the information that they had already provided to us (polyjuice description) defined VTs and I asked whether that information was correct. Even if the information hadn't been given to us, it is a reasonable question because some mechanics of mafia are fundamental and deviating from those has to be done for a good reason. Vanilla townie means a role with no powers. e: the question and the refusal to answer can both be reasonable | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 03 2013 08:28 Grackaroni wrote: You are basically asking the hosts whether HF is a liar while stating that you are going to base your decision to lynch HF on whatever the mods say. It's a closed setup. The hosts don't have to say whether squib can only apply to Vanilla Townies. It was a little careless that they used the word squibbing for taking away powers but that's more HF's fault for talking about squibs to give scum town-cred while not realizing that he has to be a VT to know about squibs. Yes my motive for asking that question is to find out whether HF is a liar. As I noted earlier, what is going on in the game is irrelevant as to whether the host should answer the question. In one game I believe Mattchew claimed self-aware miller and when town asked the hosts whether millers are self-aware, the host (Palmar) publicly announced that they are not. Different hosts have different policies as to what information they reveal in a closed setup. It is up to mafia not to put themselves in positions in which they can be caught for lying. This applies to all mafia claims and it is not at all uncommon for hosts to answer this kind of questions. Furthermore, I've no idea why you say that it was "careless" to give us the information. There is no reason to believe that it was careless, but rather a conscious decision and likely indicative of them not considering the nature of VT information that needs to be kept away from players. Usually both town and mafia needs to know what the VT role is because both may need it. For example, blue roles may in some situations claim VT or because not knowing the VT role may lead to them leaking information about the fact that they have a role. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 04 2013 02:00 yamato77 wrote: Would have preferred not to get modkilled since I asked for replacement as soon as the situation arose (2 weeks ago), but meh. CR did what he could and town lynched him for it anyway; their mistake. Uh, he just specifically said that he tried to play as poorly as possible because someone playing that poorly can't be mafia. That's not doing what "he could", but I do think that his strategy would have had some merit if he had explained it before the lynch. He essentially got lynched due to you constantly indicating that you would be active and then disappearing without a word after 3 mafia flipped on n1. Probably not a good lynch overall, but it's hard to ignore promises of activity in these circumstances. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On November 04 2013 02:11 yamato77 wrote: When someone replaces out in these types of circumstances, you should probably not assume things as you did about why it is they replaced out. Of course I won't ignore this kind of evidence, especially if the replacement doesn't play either. The only information available to me was what you said about your activity and taking that information into account in the absence of other information is much better than ignoring it completely. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
| ||
