| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
I'm interested in whether people believe Foolishness was correct or no, because him being town Foolishness doesn't mean he was right. Is there a particular person (wave probably, more than kita or toad, and I guess possibly me if you're not me and don't know my alignment) that you think he was wrong on that would screw up things being prome + marv? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 09:47 WaveofShadow wrote: D2 is a confusing time for the young austin.Um. Do you read? Everything he called me townie for in that post is from D1. Why did he call me scum on D2 if he found my D1 townie? But after he enters his cocoon and emerges way too late into D3, he hopefully finds his way and stumbles into the world, blinking. Then he...learns to fly or something? Just read it in an Attenborough voice. My D2 was also poopy, and I was more concerned with VE as a lynch than you. Thus the vote on him. A LOT of why I was very critical of you was for the same reason I was really critical of foolishness during N1/D2. Because of what the rest of the thread was doing. I think thread let Foolishness off too easy after the D1 lynch. He had some WEIRD interactions with sandroba, and they were more than enough for me to not want him on any safe lynch. I think thread let you off too easy D2, because there WERE some people posting that you were town just because you were active. If prome is mafia, then I'm going to feel SOMEWHAT justified in saying you shouldn't be let off the hook for just activity, because prome was either one person or the only person who said your activity made you townie without anything more. At the very least, if prome is mafia then HOPEFULLY I make a little more sense in my insistence that you weren't magically cleared because you'd posted a bunch. I'm just not good at taking the non-lazy step and going "well who actually exhibited this behavior." (See LXIII, where I post a whole friggin' STREAM of "things I find scummy that someone might have done" or "things I think scum might have done", and then follow up on MAYBE half of them). So a LOT of my criticality of you was because of rest of thread. I didn't care what you'd done, I cared that people were taking this REALLY easy way out of actually talking about you. As far as otherwise being on your case but NOT reading you carefully and saying you were town, I dunno. You weren't my lynch. I was comfortable enough with VE that I didn't go back and read you as hard. Felt very very cozy yesterday. Less cozy today, and ESPECIALLY less cozy after watching things develop and seeing Foolishness's posts, and a way to work my misgivings about marv into Foolishness's posts. The moment you REALLY chop kita and toad out of possible scummers (and with VE dead), the landscape changes a LOT. Reading you became much more important to me, in order to see if the remaining three really had dem mafias. ALSO ONCE PROME AND I STARTED TALKING RIGHT AS I GOT ACTIVE I WAS BEING SUPER CREEPED OUT BY HIM AND I PROBABLY HAD BOATLOADS OF CONFIRMATION BIAS WANTING HIM TO BE SCUM AND FOOLISH TOWN AND I NEEDED YOU TO LOOK TOWNIE IN ORDER TO MAKE THAT ARGUMENT SO I GENEROUSLY READ YOUR FILTER WITH TOWNIE SHADES ON? That's part of it. I do think your D1 looks townie in retrospect, but I was ALSO kinda hoping it would and looking for that today, whereas I wouldn't have yesterday. Also - + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fUSfWLnl.jpg) | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 10:03 WaveofShadow wrote: Oh. THIS. Read the question I'm responding to.Oh heeeeere it is. The entire reason for his scumread is because of my posts on VE and Prome (which apparently should be a-ok in everyone's books according to town-Foolishness now)? Well THAT explains why Austin thinks I'm town now! Foolishness said it was ok and he flipped town! LOL AND THE BLODED He calls me scum based on my D1 here and now he calls me town based on it.... Austin/Prome scumteam? I hope to god that makes sense when I look through it later. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
Apart from that, interested to hear from prome about all the later-in-the-day happenings. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 10:43 WaveofShadow wrote: Read the question I'm responding to with THAT POST.So....you're trying to play it off as a semi-joke post or an 'exercise' not rooted in reality? Because you seemed pretty serious about thinking I was scum to me. If the whole rest of the day gives you trouble, that's a different issue. But if THAT POST is particularly egregious, that post is in response to a question that says, "I don't see it, someone tell me how WoS could be mafia." When responding to that, I'm going to post why you might be mafia. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 10:52 WaveofShadow wrote: Thought there was a pretty good chance?Did you or did you not think I was scum for a portion of that day? That day, I would have put you above prome, gonzaw, kita, toad, myself. Lower than VE. PROBABLY higher than marv, he hadn't gone full suspicious for me yet. You were with Foolishness as possible second mafia. But honestly I wasn't too concerned about your alignment that day. My main concern about you was how people were referring to your activity, not your own alignment. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 11:06 WaveofShadow wrote: Yeah, I understand completely. As second place scum you should be concerned about me. Everybody else was concerned about the entire scumteam. Do you understand why this looks so dodgy to me? You are making excuses and trying to pass your scumread off as 'not really a legit read because it doesn't matter but maybe I would have lynched you.' That's why I'm actually explaining and not going "LOL WRONG" or "I changed my mind" or whatever. I think you have a legitimate point. I can give you SOME of the reasons, especially to that single post. I think if you look at my posting from that day as a whole, i DON'T have you as townie, but I certainly don't have you there with VE. MOST of the statements I make regarding your scumminess should be concern for other people being overly townie on you, which causes me to swing the other way, or be skeptical. I don't believe, however, that I freely post about why you're mafia or why you're super likely mafia, or whatever. But yeah, it's perfectly fine if you're concerned. I'm also not super worried, because I don't think that I'm the lynch tomorrow under any normal circumstances, and i THINK that if things are falling into place for us and we lynch scum, you will be concerned with my play, confused with my play, but think that I have to be townie. I don't care if you question me or are worried by me, only that you give prome a real loo. Giving prome/marv a real look as a duo would be sexy as well, as giving OTHER people a real look would be further sexy. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
| ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 20:35 marvellosity wrote: Not well. It just hasn't tickled my fancy. Probably the same reason as the lack of joviality? I think a combination of being pretty much unlynchable (and properly read) after the sandroba lynch + lynching scum D1 + the player list left me just uninterested in the game until that back half of D3.Yeah... just... mm. Can you explain why at all austin? This is more so it's here for me to muse on when I feel like it at some point. Easier to do mechanical work when your mojo is slightly deflated :p I do think that part of the back half of D3 looked much more like myself. As far as some of what you specifically were noticing, my read on you super changed with the brainz comment. You remember how I mentioned in the invader zim game that, at some point in the game, I just had that feeling you were scum because of the questions you were asking? The brainz comment set off that same warning. I hadn't looked hard at you yet, just had the low level minor suspicions about stuff, but that comment changed things and I interacted with you, instead of playing the "oh ha ha, marv disagrees about something ELSE" game, I played the "oh, marv is scum this game, why is he disagreeing with this and what is he hiding" game. Won't feel like the normal banter. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 20:28 Promethelax wrote: I'm interested in you actually saying what this means, specifically.We lynch austin tomorrow. This is not even a debate. He had a scummy switch to sand d1 he has played under the radar. He was the only vote not on foolishness d3. Austin's behaviour has been scummy the only reason he wasn't scum is that he and fool were not scum together. I'm ALSO interested in your thoughts on toad, given these posts: On January 29 2014 02:50 kitaman27 wrote: I don't see it as a flip/flop. I have no doubt that Foolishness spent a huge amount of time on those posts. If you don't find yourself wanting to believe he is town to some degree, then something is wrong. Things don't need to need to be black and white, so if Toad finds something suspicious about you, but feels the overall case against Foolishness is stronger, then I'm not as concerned. Are you looking at toad and wondering: "whoa he sure looks confident about me being mafia based on that point he made. Why is he voting Foolishness?" On January 29 2014 02:54 Promethelax wrote: You had a bunch of votes critical of toad. ONE of the things you disliked, is that he seemed to find Foolishness AND yourself scummy, even though you were both each other's targets, and probably not both scum.Essentially yes. He seems more confidant about me being scum than he seems based on his case/vote. I don't see his work today being an attempt to discern my alignment, instead he called me scummy and voted my target who he said was also scummy but I had posted bad posts and Fool had posted good posts. I don't follow. Toad continued to waffle during D3, wondering whether he should switch, etc. At the end of D3, you knew that Foolishness was town. Which meant that toad was scummy on two people who appeared mutually exclusive, but voted the townie dude and kept you alive. if YOU actually think you're townie, you think toad was just sitting back yesterday looking between two townies, and not really trying to differentiate the two, happy to call them both scummy. But I am the super mega awesome lynch for tomorrow? Why no comments on toad? Does he look worse now to you? (Rest of the thread I'm only interested in prome's answer as to what he saw and why he's targeting me over a dude he seems to have been scummy on) | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 29 2014 20:55 Promethelax wrote: I'm also interested in this!I did. His and marv's were both scummy. Sand is a detriment to his team. When he is up against two townies in me and foolishness you need to make sure you look good from his flip because it will come d1 or d2. So quick switching around deadline when I had clearly had foolish as more scummy and Hapa wasn't present was an easy way to do that. Scum expected not to get sand lynched d1 but to look good from having voted him but Hapa and I went over in the last two minutes and scum could not change their votes, they were stuck on sand. The middle votes were scummy. On top of that the scum shots have all been into the group of players who voted sand to reinforce the idea that everyone on that vote was town. Shooting outside of it would have been fine to eliminate players like Kita who had no suspicion on him and is a better analyst than Gonzaw. But they needed the idea of fool's to take hold. Just marv and mine? Hapa's vote not, your vote not? Marv's vote is scummy but marv isn't scummy, despite multiple people saying that marv feels off? You find marv townie this game and are confident in his alignment? You also think scum, in a game with town foolishness, and what you're saying is town marv (i think), and a bunch of other strong townies, used NKs not on active players, not on players who had correct reads, but...on players who voted scum D1 so as to reinforce that the D1 lynch was on scum? Like...you're suggesting that scum says "Good job team! We killed sandroba D1, now nobody will suspect us!" And then, instead of just playing NORMAL GAMES, after lynching scum D1, they decided that nobody would ACTUALLY believe in the lynch UNLESS they started flipping townies on the lynch. Can you point us to a single solitary game in which scum got lynched D1 and the voters got NO cred whatsoever? Can you point us to a single solitary game in which scum got lynched D1 by scum when there was no need to, and the rest of the thread went "Oh man, those guys who lynched scum sure look scummy, we better not trust them AT ALL"? | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 30 2014 02:06 WaveofShadow wrote: It's a great game for playing wonky scum.There's always a first time, austin. If anything considering how terrified I know people were of rolling scum in this game because of how stacked the playerlist was, I would argue this game was the PERFECT game for unorthodox scumplays. I'm also pretty sure I've said allllll of this before. But, to me, he's not pushing the idea that scum just played weird/unorthodox. He's giving a specific reason for their targeting of NKs. And that reason is "there was scum on the sandroba lynch, and mafia is killing the townies on the sandroba lynch to make it look like it was all town." To which I say: (1) One guy on the lynch flipping town doesn't make the others look more town. They're town/scum based on their own play and filters, not the alignment of someone ELSE who voted the same target. (2) I think people who lynch scum get town cred for LYNCHING SCUM. The moment sandroba is lynched, look at thread, the people on his lynch were "untouchable", etc. It wasn't "well let's wait and see if 2-3 of these guys flip town, and only THEN can we trust the sandroba lynch was townie." It's NEVER like that. I think his comment doesn't say "i think scum is playing unorthodox," because a D1 bus would be somewhat unorthodox. I think that I'm having problems with the fact that he's ... saying scum played a certain way in order to manipulate town's opinion, when (a) town would already have the opinion they want without any further manipulation and (b) the manipulation wouldn't actually change the opinion he's talking about. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
(or the fact that yesterday, prome posts a whole big case on me, except he doesn't actually care about my alignment, only whether or not i'm scum with foolishness. Prome ends up reading my filter and concluding nothing about my alignment itself, only that I'm not scum with foolishness. Then he posts stuff like: On January 28 2014 23:44 Promethelax wrote: Except he was also super tunneled and seemingly sure that foolishness was scum. And again, he still hasn't actually come to a real conclusion about me, just that I'm not scum with foolishness, which is actually not an alignment)I'm not necessarily discounting Austin as scum but I am discounting austin/fool as scum together. (or the fact that after reading my filter, he doesn't remember that I posted a bunch of posts on why people saying WoS was town for "activity" alone could be mafia and I didn't like it, doesn't see why those posts are relevant to himself for saying WoS town for activity) (or the fact that he doesn't appear to know his own filter, because I challenge you to find some solid reasons for his change on WoS from being scum to being town On January 29 2014 00:38 Promethelax wrote: You sure you've been reading this cycle? I spelled out my reasons for not finding WoS scummy earlier. ) | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 30 2014 02:30 marvellosity wrote: Shhhhhh. You'll scare the prome. We're over here hiding in the bushes, you can't go scampering around in the serengeti just yet.no, that's not how the case read to me. Did you go back and read it? He basically called off the case at the end of it because he (weirdly) decided you couldn't be scum with Foolish. Snippets from the case: You can have issues with the case, but not because he wasn't looking individually at you or your alignment, that's wrong. One interesting thing about the case is that he goes from to I'm quite curious to hear how you view the 2 quotes as a thought process or whatever, austin. We're gonna get him thread with all sorts of other questions, like who in the world the two scum are, why me today instead of other scumreads of his who then voted town yesterday, etc. etc. Then we're gonna get specific about the idea of me bussing, because I believe I was the first to ask Foolishness about his sandroba read in his first reads post, and I called out Sandroba on the prome PYP: LoL comparison before prome did. But as far as those two quotes go, I would say that prome is pulling a portion of his reads from his butt, and has been perfectly happy all game to say that two people doing the same single thing are of different alignment for no reason/little reason. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 30 2014 02:30 marvellosity wrote: Except that his overall conclusion is "austinmcc cannot be scum with foolishness"no, that's not how the case read to me. Did you go back and read it? He basically called off the case at the end of it because he (weirdly) decided you couldn't be scum with Foolish. Snippets from the case: You can have issues with the case, but not because he wasn't looking individually at you or your alignment, that's wrong. One interesting thing about the case is that he goes from to I'm quite curious to hear how you view the 2 quotes as a thought process or whatever, austin. Not that I'm SUPER SCUMMY, so he needs to look at Foolishness again, because I've got to be scum. If he finds a bunch of SCUMMY stuff in my filter, and he finds that foolishness and I can't be scum together, then the conclusion is not "austinmcc can't be scum with foolishness." It's "austin looks REALLY scummy, but foolishness looks more scummy because of _______, and I don't think they're scum together, so austin must be town despite looking scummy?" or it's "Foolishness looks scummy, but austin can't be scum with foolishness, and austin looks REALLY SCUMMY, so I need to reassess foolishness, maybe see if thread wants to lynch austinmcc instead" There may be lines that say I do scummy stuff, but if his conclusion is that we can't be scum together and he's voting foolishness and sure on foolishness, he HAS to be grudgingly concluding that I'm town, or that he's wrong on foolishness. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On Austinber 42 2002 11:11 Promethelax wrote: I need to work on my scumgame. Every time I play scum, I start my first post with "Okay broskis, this is just silly." I can't help it. On January 21 2014 11:35 Promethelax wrote: Okay broskis, this is just silly. We know how to start a game and it isn't this Mafia Scum inspired baseless lynches shall we discuss policy? Why yes we shall because you all will actually have to commit to something. Since we aren't the run of the mill hokey dory TL types I think its time we set a few ground rules: there should be no discussion of policy lynching lurkers. We simply lynch them. If everyone is good enough to be shadowed everyone is good enough to play the game and we cannot tolerate lurkers. It is my hope that this particular policy doesn't come into play since, obviously, we are the best that TL has so we should play the best as well and lurking simply isn't the best. We are all good enough to carry a town and I would like us all to be that good this game. Play your hearts out gentlemen. I would also like a non-aggression pact. That is we all agree to play nice since I'd rather like to be good role models for our newbies. And yes, I know I'm scummy for posting this, does someone want to come out and say it so that I can defend myself and we can move on with this game and make actual cases on each other and find scum. Unlike WoS I was excited to roll scum in this game, I figured I'd have an excuse to be steamrolled but if I did a good job it would be a huge accomplishment but no, I'm town, I have to figure things out. I would much rather lie to you all but fuck me, I don't get to lie to you. I gotta work for my money. So get it together boys, we are policy lynching lurkers, we aren't going to be mean to each other and we are going to catch scum. And we'll start with Hapa making a case on me, why? Because its tradition is why. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
but no. I tried to make one in paint, but there's not a good cartoon head that fits. So this is all you get p.s. google image searching assorted terms with charles barkley and dunk leads to good things | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
On January 30 2014 02:51 WaveofShadow wrote: You should have laughed at that.austin stop trying to make up for not being trolly earlier. Not only does this not help, but it looks shitty because everyone else pointed it out. + Show Spoiler + Unless you actually make me laugh with something. Also, can't help it. I got interested yesterday. I'm now EXTRA interested. | ||
|
austinmcc
United States6737 Posts
 ) | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Spirit vs SHIN
Clem vs SKillous
herO vs TBD
TBD vs GuMiho
AI Arena 2025 Tournament
Replay Cast
Clem vs Zoun
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
SOOP
SKillous vs Spirit
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
