|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:46 Xatalos wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2013 03:42 Blazinghand wrote:On December 17 2013 03:40 Xatalos wrote:On December 17 2013 03:34 Blazinghand wrote:On December 17 2013 03:14 Xatalos wrote:
Right.. Don't you think that LSB has posted barely more than XigXag - and what LSB has posted has been way more suspicious? LSB has posted much more than xigxag in the past day, though his activity is also low. I don't see how this is even remotely relevant though, since nothing is more suspicious than what XigXag is doing. You're either xcum and trying to protect your xcumbuddy or you're being blinded by the availability heuristic. The fact that LSB's post seem more suspicious is not relevant given that xigxag has actually not been posting. You can't say his posts are more suspicious than xigxag's have been, you just remember him posting more and therefore he sticks out in your mind. Get your HEAD IN THE GAME. If LSB seems scummy because he's at least making a trivial effort to play the game, THAT MEANS HE CAN BE ANALYZED. That means he is NOT our lynch for today. You're basically arguing that we should lynch LSB because he's a worse lynch. Come on man. COME ON. I'd think that barely posting above the lurker definition, and being scummy in those few posts, is more scummy than not posting at all....... Okay, great idea, let's not lynch xigxag i'm sure that will just work itself out.... oh wait no the opposite of that Do you want LSB at LYLO either? Though I agree that it's impossible to analyze XigXag, so it might be safer to lynch him now rather than at LYLO.
xigxag is obviously the better lynch today, you have not raised any serious objections to:
1) xigxag will never be readable
2) xigxag will not die unless we lynch him
3) #1 and #2 are more true for xigxag than any other player in this game, so we should lynch him today.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
Coag's filter is bad, and the fact that it's better than xigxag's shows just how important it is to lynch xigxag
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
well don't hold your breath LSB
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
like what's with all this resistance to lynching xigxag? obviously there are other lurkers, though none as bad, but that's not super relevant when xigxag is playing like he is. Is like everyone but me a cop who checked xigxag and got back green? This seems pretty open and shut to me. He's lurking, he will never be legible, we probably dont' have any more blue roles.
let's take out tha trash.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
Like the reason we lynch xig before coag and LSB is that in the next 120 hours LSB and Coag will probably make more posts and potentially we'll learn more about what their alignments/reads are. It's worth keeping them alive over xigxag for an extra cycle since they are actually kinda sorta playing the game. xig is obviously not. there is no benefit to lynching him second instead of first. none.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:57 LSB wrote:
Also, anyone have any idea why Kushmasta was killed? I don't think it is a coincidence that we got two medics blue sniped on us.
I'm just reading his filter and incredibly confused
what do you think of xigxag? you have made no posts about him, nor about my current case, other than a (joking?) post about seeing his analysis.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 03:59 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2013 03:59 Blazinghand wrote:On December 17 2013 03:57 LSB wrote:
Also, anyone have any idea why Kushmasta was killed? I don't think it is a coincidence that we got two medics blue sniped on us.
I'm just reading his filter and incredibly confused what do you think of xigxag? you have made no posts about him, nor about my current case, other than a (joking?) post about seeing his analysis. Xigxag doesn't post and doesn't say anything and made a horrible case. Anyone can see that
Thanks! this post is much more useful (imo) than the inconclusive speculation about the kushm4sta kill.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 04:06 LSB wrote:
o.O seriously? Talking about a lurker is more important than figuring out why we lost 2 doctors already?
....yes? I don't understand what's special about two doctors being dead, or how it helps us get a lynch. They weren't even "sniped" as you claim since:
Doctor #1, holyflare, was shot by my predecessor.
Doctor #2, kushm4sta, was shot by the SK.
so... mafia have killed 0 doctors so far. The SK might have even been aiming for scum, who knows? Who cares? how is it even a little bit important?
get your head in the game
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
FWIW though I have you as town LSB and I see what you doing as misguided, but probably town-motivated.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
coag who's your next lynch?
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
BTW lsb I like that analsys of alak but shouldn't that mean lynchijg him and not xat?
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
I don't like that as a reason. If I had a strong scumread on alak (since even if xata is town, alak's actions are scummy) and a weaker (unflipped associative!) scumread on Xata, I'd push and vote alak rather than xata, and just say i'm open to the option of lynching xata. It's not like there's 2 hours left to the lynch, and your only option is the consolidate; why not lynch the guy who you think is more likely to flip scum?
even the so-called "wagon" on xata has only 2 votes. i don't get why you're not playing this like you did here (link). I'd like a better explanation than you just gave.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 09:14 LSB wrote:
I lynch people who I think are scum. It's as simple as that.
but not the person you think is most likely to flip scum? you're not lynching anyone.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
a last minute vote to a wagon that's not happening is opting out of the discourse.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 09:31 LSB wrote:
I believe we have difference in how we play mafia.
My play revolves around identifying who I think is scum and then going after them. If I doubt that they are scum, I remove them off of my list and no longer go after them. I do not relish the concept of lynching someone who I think is town, and unless I am consolidating my vote to a major candidate I will no push someone who I think may be town.
Alakaslam is safer because we caught him lying, while Xatalos is more of a read based on day 1 play. I still think both of them are scum and would be willing to lynch either. Nor do I want you to forget SideSprang.
right, I follow your logic entirely. the part where you lose me is the part where, halfway through this day, you vote xata or alak even though you think alak is more likely to be scum (or in your words, "safer") based on a xata "wagon" of 2 votes. why not push your top scumread and say you're willing to lynch xata, like you did yesterday?
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
Alak tell me about LSB. Do you think he's scum? Does this post, your most recent one seriously concerning him, summarize your views accurately?
On December 16 2013 13:57 Alakaslam wrote:
Well...
Anyway I am confident anyone who reads me will find my alignment. I have explained all my motives.
I was thinking, next most likely to be scum at one point was LSB. I thought he might be more likely to produce info than vayne but now he has gone done been scummy. Again.
Shalt be as I hoped sir LSB?
Xata I have been suspicious of early and have since dropped it. I forget why. I may go read him.
If you think I am scummy, vote me and state why in that post so I can react-defend, thank you in advance.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
I'm not trying to say the way you play is impossible for town to play; I just want to get more insight into your thought process. You and I clearly think differently, and that fact doesn't make you scum. It doesn't give you a pass in showing a townie motivation, though. I don't want you to repeat yourself. Perhaps i have not properly phrased my questions. I want to read a paragraph written by you, and by doing so, begin to think a little more like you and understand your motivations, got it?
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
I like your explanation for why alak is scum, I just think that it still applies even if Xata is town.
Like let me phrase it this way
Imagine all possible worlds in which Alak is town. In some of those worlds, Xata is also scum, but it not ALL of those possible worlds. Xata's scumminess seems to be (at least via your thought process; I could be wrong) a function of alak's scumminess, which means it's less likely Xat is scum than Alak
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On December 17 2013 10:01 LSB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2013 09:54 Blazinghand wrote:
I like your explanation for why alak is scum, I just think that it still applies even if Xata is town.
Like let me phrase it this way
Imagine all possible worlds in which Alak is town. In some of those worlds, Xata is also scum, but it not ALL of those possible worlds. Xata's scumminess seems to be (at least via your thought process; I could be wrong) a function of alak's scumminess, which means it's less likely Xat is scum than Alak Both of my cases are independent of each other. So it doesn't apply in this case But yes, should one of my cases be dependent on the other being scum (A is scum if B is scum) (ie PYP mafia day 3) I am more willing to lynch B first, and then A. I'd prefer we stop this discussion simply because it has little relevance to what is actually going on in this game. I am more than happy to take it to PMs or postgame if you want to chat about optimal mafia play. Should you wish to defend Xata I am all ears
in case it's not clear i'm also trying to discern your alignment and your veracity. whether or not you really believe what you're saying, or if i've caught you in an inconsistency and you're trying to chalk it up to "tomato tomato"
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
Coagulation was just temp banned for 2 days by GMarshal.
That account was created on 2006-07-02 16:52:39 and had 8333 posts.
Reason: Come on dude. I hate banning you, because you're a cool guy, but you've been consistently riling up people in TLMafia, its ok to disagree, but please do so with logical arguments as opposed to disruptive behavior. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
