|
On March 26 2014 16:24 Eden1892 wrote:
OK town, so Cavalinho is either terrible at reading comprehension or trying to distort what I'm saying. Let's review.
Again it's not that he said OnceKing's start was weird, it's that he didn't do anything to figure out why it was weird or tell us how it was weird. He asked OK why OK made a post about policy lynching lurkers, OK said it was to get the town out of RVS. That's not weird. Cavalinho didn't bother to respond to him and then kept repeating himself about how weird it was. No explanation as to why or how that's weird, no attempt to develop OK's response, nothing.
His questions didn't have any apparent direction or purpose to them. He asked OK why OK made the post, OK gave a good answer aaaand... Cavalinho drops it like a hot potato. No follow up? Nothing? Why are we supposed to be convinced that OK is weird or scum or whatever when you're just asking questions to ask them and not developing any insights from them? He asserts that he was asking questions because he didn't understand what was going on, but you'll notice that he doesn't acknowledge OK's answer at all. Instead he starts playing reactively, answering OK's questions and then dropping the line of discussion. That's not what people do when they're trying to understand what's going on. He vaguely talks around the issue right before I prodded him, saying that he thinks OK's start was still weird, but that he "[doesn't] have any real reason to think [OK] is mafia" because of his "last accusatory post" (what post is this?) and he "seems townie, getting information and generally being one of those obvious town players" (this doesn't actually say anything about why he doesn't think OK is mafia; we know that he wouldn't think that because he thinks OK seems town, why does he?)
I also happen to think his OMGUS vote is him trying to look innocent because he's aware of his meta (not the post beforehand he noted that Robik townread him in a previous game because he OMGUS'd then), but that can go either way. What's telling is that he fails to develop his vote, he just puts it down and insists it'll be me or him today. That's dumb and not what a town player should be doing.
Cavalinho is my best read for mafia right now.
There was no information in the thread besides people goofing off when OK started talking about policy lynching. Why would you need to start talking about policy lynches when the game hasn't even really started yet? That's why his early post feels out of place. Furthermore, why should I press for more information when he has already given a townie answer and then started scumhunting on his own like before? It's like I have to walk you through every single thought that pops into my head.
Also, that point about why I don't think that OK is mafia is really, really dumb. If I think OK is townie, why on earth would I have to give you reasoning as to why he's not mafia? Is it because he can roll both alignments at once?
And the reason I wasn't able to do more scumhunting is because I was sleeping. Unless that's scummy behavior too. And furthermore, if you're going to talk about meta, go ahead and reread my NMM game. I got tunneled out of the game because I sheeped onto a vote. Which is basically the exact same thing that's happening here. Stop trying to create reasoning when there's nothing there. I refuse to get taken out day 1 because someone is trying to make reactions and reasonings where there are none.
|
On March 27 2014 00:33 OnceKing wrote:##UNVOTEAbout Cavalinho: I agree that he's suspicious in that he hasn't contributed a lot of original content. However, I disagree with Eden's statement that "blatantly riffing off of Robik" makes him scum. As seen here: Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 12:16 Cavalinho wrote:
I am also curious about aforementioned shit This is just an "me too" post which... doesn't really say a lot about his alignment. I'm most bothered by this: Show nested quote +On March 26 2014 15:26 Cavalinho wrote:
No, I am not dealing with this shit a second time.
##Vote Eden1892
One of us is going to be dead by the end of today and it isn't going to be me just because I agreed with someone. This is an overreaction and he's trying too hard to look like an indignant townie. He did the same thing in a previous game but the context is not the same -- last time he did this by attacking Amiko once Amiko said that he was just agreeing with something other players said before but before this he voices no suspicion of Eden, and in fact this post doesn't really voice suspicion of Eden either! Instead Cavalinho just places down a vote which gets no justification when we're well past so-called RVS. ##VOTE: Cavalinho. About LT: Gonna have to disagree with you guys, LT made an honest mistake and got impatient in pulling the trigger. sqrtofneg1 - What do you think of the interactions between IAmRobik, Eden, Cavalinho and Lord Tolkien? Cavalinho - Are you saying that if we lynch you today and you flip town we should lynch Eden? And more pressingly, why shouldn't we lynch you? (don't just say "I'm town") LT - Yes, actually I am getting flashbacks to Cav's mislynch on Day 1 of our last newbie game. But it's been a while and he's aware of his own playstyle. However, here's something interesting. He's brought it down to "me or you". What do you think of this?
No, I would prefer not to get lynched today period. The reasoning behind lynch me and then lynch him is shoddy at best and detrimental to town at worst.
Also, you shouldn't vote me off because this is the exact same reason I died last game, barring overaggression. It was dumb then and it's dumb now.
The last time I wound up getting lynched was because I ultimately tried to vote off my scumread instead of trying to save myself. I refuse to be voted off day 1 again because I agree with someone and have similar opinions to someone else (which, for the record, he asked me for).
|
On March 27 2014 01:05 Eden1892 wrote:
You're talking around the points I made -- again -- and making really stretched parallels to another game -- again -- in an attempt to distort what I'm saying -- again.
For the rest of the town, here are the issues with Cavalinho's last post:
- He's distorting my arguments here. Specifically: he's framing my expectation that his questions have some purpose to them to mean that I expect him to walk us through every thought he has on the game; he's misinterpreting a question I posed ("why does he think OK is not mafia?" into "why does he think OK is mafia?") to avoid answering it; and he's introducing things I didn't talk about at all (him sleeping and not scumhunting as a result) in an effort to garner sympathy or otherwise discredit my arguments.
- He's still not explained his vote for me at all. In fact he's claiming to have sheeped onto a vote...? But he's the only one voting for me.
Lol, and I'm the one misinterpreting things. I gave you reasoning as to why OK is town. I don't need to tell you why I don't think he's mafia if I think he's town. I already told you it was because he's scumhunting like he was in his last game, but you're just going to ignore that to make yourself seem more right.
And I never said I was sheeping onto a vote. I said I did that last game, and that I died for it. I said I was agreeing with someone here and that parallels can be drawn between the two.
You know what I think? I think that you're just pouncing on what you perceive to be town weakness. If LT is town, I think that you're just looking for people to push for flimsy reasoning. You don't seem to particularly care very much about what people are saying and just look for things you can poke holes in. I'm going to stay on my vote for now, I see no reason to change it.
|
On March 27 2014 01:14 OnceKing wrote:
So Cav, who do you think is scum then?
I don't understand your logic for why my post on policy was strange -- people were joking around and posting stupid stuff and then I made it so that people would no longer post stupid stuff. Did you want the amount of stupid stuff to continue to pile up? How else are we supposed to get into discussion mode?
As I observed, this isn't the same exact reason why you died: the context is a bit different. You were already suspicious of Amiko that game, you were never suspicious of Eden this game and suddenly you place a kneejerk vote on him. wtf?
Read above as to why I think he's scummy.
Also, starting discussion isn't scummy. I thought your reasoning behind what you did was solid and that's why I dropped that tangent. At the time, it was like "what's with this policy crap nothing has happened yet." I guess I just think policy lynches are a last resort and that starting discussion with something like that is pretty peculiar.
|
Kindle is dying. Will return later to yell some more.
|
On March 27 2014 01:31 Eden1892 wrote:
I don't think that Cavalinho has really addressed the bulk of my concerns with his play so far, and I also don't think it's by accident, but I find myself unable to articulate why I don't like his last post, which is starting to make me reconsider. A lot of the things I'm still having issues with right now -- the tone and writing style, the apparent directionless demeanor of his questions, my read on why he OMGUS'd then -- are mostly unfalsifiable, which is a problem.
One major outstanding issue though is his rationale for voting for me. Everything that he said about me in the one post where he's explained himself is false, and his vote appears to be contingent on Last Tolkein being town. However, he voted for me before I said anything about LT. Thus the rationale he provided cannot be the original rationale he had for voting for me.
I would still prefer Lord Tolkein as I think it's obvious that he lied initially about his reads and then kept telling lies to cover up the first ones. I think my case on LT is stronger.
So I just got my hands on a computer and I'm about to get my story straight with some of my reads. Before I do, I want to address this.
You keep saying I'm not giving you answers. I've answered your questions on basically everything, but you just keep saying that I'm not cooperating and that I'm not giving you information. Every time I give you an answer on something, you just turn around and go "no, he isn't addressing anything." Except, I'm actually doing exactly that and it's really starting to bug me that you keep trying to poke holes in things.
The only thing you've brought up that has actually had some kind of purpose was the vote on you. I will 100% admit that it was initially nothing more than a baseless OMGUS. I got frustrated at getting focused day 1 (again) and just went "meh, fuck it."
When I actually sat down to look at things from a more rational perspective...It just looks like you're pushing me based on the fact that I'm not giving you answers or because you don't like the way I say things. You keep mentioning reactions and the like, but all of that stuff is based on your own perception which I've addressed already. Most of your supposed "case" boils down to "I don't like the way he is saying things," which does not make me mafia.
|
Here are the few reads that I've managed to gather thus far:
You can get my Eden read from above. If LT is town, then Eden is almost certainly mafia due to the way he pushes information and pounces an anything he perceives as weakness. It looks like he's more concerned with finding loopholes in reasoning rather than finding the mindset behind the moves players are making. While this can be construed as scumhunting, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is just because he looks busy. I'll admit, my own play has started somewhat sloppily and I think that his push was warranted...for a time. It looks like he's more concerned with making himself right rather than finding the right answer.
There's also the point that he's actually started skimming my posts and then ignoring what I'm saying. This can be a mistake, but considering the way he so aggressively goes after certain information (and then ignoring what he finds) doesn't lead me to believe so.
That being said, the points Eden brings up against LT make a whole lot of sense. LT's read on me is bosh. He says I'm practically confirmed mafia because I wanted someone to clarify something before I answered their question...What is that? Is that even a thing? I don't think that Val has really done enough to warrant being cleared as town, either. (Though Robik has done the same, and I generally think Robik comes up with pretty solid reads.) LT is scummy, and not just because he thinks I'm scum (which, considering the way this thread is going, is really saying something).
OnceKing is pretty clear town to me. I thought he had a strong town game before, and I think he has one now. Policy lynch weirdness aside, it's clear that he made those posts with a town agenda in mind and that he's done plenty to keep us occupied in trying to solve the game's mystery. His questioning is solid and his logic is pretty easy to follow. I like it.
Sqrt leans town for similar reasons. He doesn't thrust himself into the spotlight like OK does, but it seems like he's pretty focused on finding the right kinds of information. I don't think I have any real reasons to suspect him of anything right now.
Pixelated is slightly town. I've already put together why the initial case against me was derp, but all he has said was "I don't think that's good enough." That's...not a good answer. At all. It's like he's just set on it (which is silly for a town player, because nobody has perfect information except mafia) and not particularly willing to backtrack on anything. Despite this, he's actively looking for information and stuff.
Valenius is null, in case I didn't already make that particularly clear from my earlier reads. I don't think he has done a whole lot yet and looking through his filter leads me to believe that he's either genuinely AWOL or he's trying to lay low. Time will tell.
Robik is town. Another player thrusting themselves into the spotlight, giving reads and generally doing shit that generally gets done in games. Is confirmed best player.
Roland is null. I want to wait more before giving a read on him, because I already know I'm the kind of guy that likes to OMGUS and I feel like if I gave one now that it would be influenced by my confrontational mindset. (Though his read on Robik is actually kinda funny in the sense that, yeah, mafia probably wouldn't do that.)
I want to elaborate more, but some people haven't even gotten to a two page filter yet. More information, specifically from LT, would be great right now.
|
On March 27 2014 02:51 Eden1892 wrote:I'm going to address you directly once more, Cavalinho, and then until you demonstrate you're capable of reading properly and/or arguing in good faith, I'm not going to address you further. There's a plethora of things you haven't addressed. The issue is that most of them aren't really arguable (not in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument but more literally that they can't be argued). You're doing a lot of subtle things with the way you write; I raised the example of how your tone kept changing to match what Robik was doing re: OnceKing, for instance. You haven't said anything about it. I don't expect you to say anything productive or helpful, though, on that front, and it isn't worth arguing out. (You will say that either I am misinterpreting your tone or that your tone changes are coincidental, and it will simply be up to the audience to decide whether you are lying or I am wrong.) Even still, there are things I've raised which you could have argued but have elected not to argue, probably because they're unarguable (in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument). You've repeatedly straw manned the arguments against you instead of addressing them charitably and reasonably. At no point did your questions, and responses to the answers you received, have any apparent constructive direction. Your voting rationale given was entirely post-hoc and despite your last message here it's obvious that you are sticking to your vote in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it, probably because you're desperate scum latching onto any last shred of capacity to cast doubt on me that you have. --- Why are all of you so quick to accept Tolkein's blatant lies about his test? Please. Until someone can rebut the five points raised in this post and establish that none of them are proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Tolkein is lying, no one in this thread has any reason to believe that Tolkein is being honest.
I'll answer in a bit, have some work to do and will get back to you.
|
On March 27 2014 02:51 Eden1892 wrote:I'm going to address you directly once more, Cavalinho, and then until you demonstrate you're capable of reading properly and/or arguing in good faith, I'm not going to address you further. There's a plethora of things you haven't addressed. The issue is that most of them aren't really arguable (not in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument but more literally that they can't be argued). You're doing a lot of subtle things with the way you write; I raised the example of how your tone kept changing to match what Robik was doing re: OnceKing, for instance. You haven't said anything about it. I don't expect you to say anything productive or helpful, though, on that front, and it isn't worth arguing out. (You will say that either I am misinterpreting your tone or that your tone changes are coincidental, and it will simply be up to the audience to decide whether you are lying or I am wrong.) Even still, there are things I've raised which you could have argued but have elected not to argue, probably because they're unarguable (in the sense that there is no legitimate counterargument). You've repeatedly straw manned the arguments against you instead of addressing them charitably and reasonably. At no point did your questions, and responses to the answers you received, have any apparent constructive direction. Your voting rationale given was entirely post-hoc and despite your last message here it's obvious that you are sticking to your vote in spite of the overwhelming evidence against it, probably because you're desperate scum latching onto any last shred of capacity to cast doubt on me that you have. --- Why are all of you so quick to accept Tolkein's blatant lies about his test? Please. Until someone can rebut the five points raised in this post and establish that none of them are proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Tolkein is lying, no one in this thread has any reason to believe that Tolkein is being honest.
You say that there are things that I could have argued in yet you don't post what any of them are or where I could have missed them. Since you are just the best player in all the known universe I think you should enlighten us and tell us what I've been missing. I'm directing all of my questions and answers towards you (which you conveniently gloss over) and how you're deliberately ignoring what I'm saying in favor of trying to discredit me.
I've said that either you or LT is mafia, but you just skim over that and call me an idiot and come to the conclusion that I'm saying both of you are mafia together. That isn't even counting the other times you've skimmed my posts and just came to the conclusion that I'm scum. (Filter dive if you want them, I've focused on them pretty extensively.)
Furthermore, you keep saying "straw man" and again fail to provide examples. Everything you say about my arguments really just makes sense at a cursory glance but, after any type of in-depth reading, it's clear that nothing you say about me or my arguments makes any actual sense.
While we're on the topic, why is it that you consistently push me as scummy while voting someone else? That's like...What? You've egged on this wagon ridiculously hard, while voting someone else, and still haven't come to the conclusion that I'm town based on the votes piling up on me.
I want to ask for your reads on all the players in the game right now. You keep pushing people as scummy but you only have like two townreads, both of which being universally read by everyone as townie.
Also, I'm rescinding my townread on sqrt. That vote was absurdly dumb.
|
Furthermore Eden, could you explain why cutting discussion short is pro town? All town has is talking, and if you don't want to talk to clarify what you actually feel about me...That isn't good. Not from a town perspective, anyway.
|
On March 27 2014 07:14 sqrtofneg1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2014 07:06 Valenius wrote:On March 27 2014 07:04 IAmRobik wrote:On March 27 2014 06:55 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
The neutral read was from before he did his reads, and after he posted his reads, I didn't change my read because the reads really wasn't anything new. can you english Translation (Correct me if im wrong sqrt) His neutral read on me was before I posted my long read post. Since thoroughly digesting that long post, he feels nothing in there was new, so it hasn't changed any of his reads. That the gist of it? Yes.
Why did you vote me? Was it really based off the fact that I made a promise to respond to a post later on? Is that supposed to be a legitimate scumread?
|
On March 27 2014 07:19 Eden1892 wrote:
Cavalinho I'm off of you and trying hard to get someone besides you lynched, calm down and help me kill Tolkien if you think he's scum.
I'm perfectly calm, I'm just looking for answers. And I think there's a scum between you and LT, and I really want to get to the root of why the way you're working the way you are first.
You pushed me as scummy for quite a while, even when you were voting someone else. If voting someone else constitutes "off of you," why were you off of me and still trying to get me lynched? Why are you deliberately ignoring what I'm telling you? Or is "off of you" just when you supposedly stop talking to me?
Also, reads pls.
|
On March 27 2014 07:24 sqrtofneg1 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2014 07:17 Cavalinho wrote:On March 27 2014 07:14 sqrtofneg1 wrote:On March 27 2014 07:06 Valenius wrote:On March 27 2014 07:04 IAmRobik wrote:On March 27 2014 06:55 sqrtofneg1 wrote:
The neutral read was from before he did his reads, and after he posted his reads, I didn't change my read because the reads really wasn't anything new. can you english Translation (Correct me if im wrong sqrt) His neutral read on me was before I posted my long read post. Since thoroughly digesting that long post, he feels nothing in there was new, so it hasn't changed any of his reads. That the gist of it? Yes. Why did you vote me? Was it really based off the fact that I made a promise to respond to a post later on? Is that supposed to be a legitimate scumread? Slightly. Putting off that question for a long time really looked scummy.
So promising to come back and answer it is scummy? Also, why is it that I gave an answer and you're still on your vote?
Heading to the gym soon, will be back later tonight.
|
On March 27 2014 13:11 Eden1892 wrote:
hurp derp a durp herp hep C
**nearly positive that both Cavalinho and sqrt are town
I can follow this reasoning as well as the above post you mentioned.
Though sqrt really needs to stop voting me because that's kind of derp. But we've already went over that.
##Unvote
##Vote LT
|
Eden
Though I don't really like your read on sqrt, I think that this is a good lynch for today.
Well, it's not even your read, it's like the reasoning for the read. You seem to have issues with almost everything that can be regarded as poor play...But you townread sqrt for it. The reasoning makes sense, but it doesn't really feel consistent with the rest of what you were pushing throughout today. How strong would you say that read is, and if LT flips town, how would that mar and change the rest of your reads, barring night chat?
|
Also, Robik, vote someone. You're supposed to be like that towniest player in the game right now and you haven't even voted yet.
|
Okay, I'm probably not going to be around at deadline. Can we possibly coalesce on someone soon that preferably isn't me?
Like...I don't see what makes me a "caught mafia." At all.
|
On March 28 2014 00:58 Pixalated wrote:
Cav opinions on my read on LT?
I'm really liking the parts about attracting attention; this kind of thinking doesn't really make sense from a mafia perspective. Why would you bother making a plan like that that can backfire so horrifically? Townies as a rule of thumb don't care about attracting attention, so it holds water.
It's just...Martyring yourself isn't good. I know he does it and I know he's a slow starter when it comes to day 1 play. If all we have to go on is him making clumsy attempts to catch scum and then trying to vote himself when it doesn't work, then the attracting attention theory doesn't really hold up because he's just going to play the "woe is me" card until we stop focusing him. That, on the other hand, can be considered mafia play. If he's just going to make us feel bad for pressuring him at all, then why would we bother keeping him around? At that point, he's either mafia or useless, and either of those options sound better than me getting lynched.
|
@Mod
LT can't vote twice ya know.
|
I think out of the four people that I'm concerned about right now, (You, Val, Roland, LT) Tolkein would be the one I would be concerned with voting off the most. I'm okay with either him or Roland, because Roland jumped on what could be considered a "safe" wagon and isn't letting up despite all evidence to the contrary.
Though for the record, you strike me as town for now. So I guess disregard the fact that I'm concerned with you.
(Also, yes, Eden is a pain in the ass when he tunnels. I can absolutely see that. Also, unvote me pls kthx.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
