EPTTeam Melee Mini Mafia V: Newbies and Vets - Page 52
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
OnceKing
United States939 Posts
| ||
|
GlowingBear
Brazil12446 Posts
On July 12 2014 14:41 TheSlenderMan wrote: GlowingBear please filter my posts and comment on the case against you. I don't have many posts yet so the relevant posts are easy to find. Alright. --Your first case: + Show Spoiler + On July 12 2014 11:02 TheSlenderMan wrote: Still nowhere near caught up but I want to ##vote: Unvote ##vote: Team WeDemandALawyer Haru seems to have no incentive to Scumhunt, yet gives absurd Town-passes to Palmar (most noticeably) and later to Robik/ExO (when asked about the 'meh' comment). He/She also fumbled with his/her explanations (about the Glowinghand-defense) when pressured -- seems like a 'guilty conscience' that wasn't prepared to meet a sudden, hard-hitting question. (This bit, for instance: "Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven." Smells like trying to come up with a Pro-Town motive for something that has already been explained before in several posts -- why not say that commenting on the Kenpachi-argument was a plan devised together as Hydras when questions were first asked from Haru, instead of coming up with this motive only after it had drawn enough attention to be more than one Vote? Isn't this also a direct contradiction to saying earlier that Haru can't speak on Glowinghand's behalf?!) When did I turn into a hand? lol Kenpachi-argument wasn't a plan devised together as Hydras. I've used the QT to get his opinion about this policy. It was the same as mine. I decided to post about it because I think it was turning into a main point when it should be a secondary argument, and accessory argument. Saying it could be scum driven is not necessarily saying it was certainly scum driven. It was my way of saying that "watch out, you are getting something as certain while it is not, so keep it as a secondary argument and let's focus on a primary one". Haru can't speak on my behalf. We are a team but we don't share the same account nor the same ideas. I have suspicions on Robik. He said he likes Robik. We have different views while inside the same team, and I don't get why it is not natural. Ok, now on your bigger case: --Your second case: [spoiler] On July 12 2014 13:45 TheSlenderMan wrote: (1)Take a look at Glowing's filter, as well. No indication there that he wanted to 'watch out for the kenpachi argument because [we] felt it might be scum driven.' In fact, the comment Glowing makes of the 'argument' is quite a polar opposite to this claim (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=19#380). He sits on the fence as well as one can, regarding that subject. (2)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=25#499 Haru says here that they were excited to play but not excited to talk about the Kenpachi-rule for 10 pages. Indicates that they did talk something together. (3)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#503 Haru says that he and Glow should definitely comment on the Kenpachi-discussion -- the only motive I can glean from this post for that is that it was a 'hot topic' in the Thread for a long while. He doesn't say that they should, for instance, try to find possible Scummioso initiative in the initiation of the 'argument'. (And in fact, Haru doesn't seem to ever look for Scum. Not even when Voting for rayn.) (4)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#510 Haru, again, reiterates that it was important for one of them to comment on the topic that took considerable amounts of threadspace. He says that they, as a Hydra, definitely wanted to talk ABOUT the Topic but nothing else. (5)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#511 No Scumhunting prior to this post, then all of a sudden Palmar gets a FREE Town-pass for absolutely no reason at all. Alarm bells, they be a-ringin'! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#516 Here Haru says he cannot speak on Glow's behalf... (6)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=27#539 ...and here suddenly bringing the topic up was planned together. ('I can contribute by showing OUR collective intention. Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven.') Why not say that in the first place? And how does this alleged 'collective intention' show at all from the posts (by Glow) in question? Like, the whole notion about a 'collection intention' seems like an afterthought which actually doesn't fit either of their actions. Clearly they HAD discussed something regarding the on-thread discussion, but it doesn't seem like it was what Haru said in #539. Here's what Glow thought about the Kenpachi 'argument': Kenpachi rule doesn't sound as a winning plan to me. You may use it as a secondary argument but to get to the point you have a primary one there is so much game to be played. I think that if we keep discussing this topic it will just a waste of breath. Why do I think it's secondary: a scum can fake claim vt just so he can get townie to accuse him and get mislynched. More than that, a vt can simply try to pressure someone who claimed vt. Why not? Here's what Haru says they thought about the Ken-arg: OUR collective intention. Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven. I don't see this as consistent. (1) Answered above (2) It indicates we did talk and got the same opinion that it would be harmful to town to extend discussion regarding kenpachi policy at the time (3) As I said, in his posts he is never implying that the usage of kenpachi rule should be analyzed as possible scum maneuver. What he said is that it could be scum driven. And it could. But it's not a safe ground to walk on. So, why wasting breath on that policy? (4) Hmm, I guess you're getting the wrong interpretation of what he meant? I'll quote his post: + Show Spoiler + On July 11 2014 21:46 HaruRH wrote: So I guess here is where the problem lies I am not the same person as glowingbear and even though we are the same entity now, we are just a conjoined twin. My stance is that if glowingbear did not talk about the kenpachi rule thing, I would have talked about it. He never said he should talk about the topic and nothing else. This is you putting words in his mouth, dude. He said that, if I had not said anything about the poor usage of kenpachi rule, he would say. That's all. (5) In the context, he doesn't like what Palmar said. So that's why he considered OMGUSing. But he didn't want to OMGUS because it was early. Moreover, Haru played with Palmar before and probably has a good view of his meta, so why OMGUSing if he could have a hunch? (6) It's a team game. Again, I have a suspicion on Robik. Haru likes him. We are two heads in the same team, we think differently. However, sometimes, we have the same opinion, as for the kenpachi policy. He thought that, as a team mate who knows my alignment, he should defend be against attackers because (i) he knew my opinion on that, which was the same as his and (ii) when I'm attacked, he is also attacked because we are a team. I tried to answer it properly, but I am really tired. 3am here. Also, as even Haru said, we are a team but we are not the same person. He could answer you better because you've brought much more Haru's posts than mine. TBH, I don't really understand why you find these posts scummy lol | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
1: 31 posts (020/011) 2: 36 posts (025/011) 3: 99 posts (044/055) 4: 123 posts (031/092) 5: 64 posts (043/021) 6: 21 posts (009/012) 7: 80 posts (008/072) 8: 93 posts (077/016) 9: 89 posts (011/078) 10: 91 posts (076/015) preliminary thoughts by team: - slot 1 can stay, low posting but slenderman is doing work IMO, not killing this slot - slot 2 is whatever i'll sort it out later but i would be ok killing it - slot 3 is scum, we're killing today - slot 4 is memorable as town + high-posting so we're not killing this slot - slot 5 is oddly unmemorable for >60 posts, would be okay killing - slot 6 TBD, low post count and not memorable but a lot of that is Koshi replacing in - slot 7 is confirmed town, we're never killing this slot - slot 8 is funny because robik said he wasn't gonna talk but then has a bunch of posts. also we're not killing this slot because it's memorable as town + high-posting - slot 9 is confirmed town, we're never killing this slot - slot 10 is unmemorable despite a lot of posting, would be okay killing this slot tl;dr: - slot 3 scum - slots 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 are off the table - slot 6 tbd - slots 2, 6, 10 look good, probably in that order | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:19 GlowingBear wrote: [spoiler]Alright. --Your first case: + Show Spoiler + On July 12 2014 11:02 TheSlenderMan wrote: Still nowhere near caught up but I want to ##vote: Unvote ##vote: Team WeDemandALawyer Haru seems to have no incentive to Scumhunt, yet gives absurd Town-passes to Palmar (most noticeably) and later to Robik/ExO (when asked about the 'meh' comment). He/She also fumbled with his/her explanations (about the Glowinghand-defense) when pressured -- seems like a 'guilty conscience' that wasn't prepared to meet a sudden, hard-hitting question. (This bit, for instance: "Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven." Smells like trying to come up with a Pro-Town motive for something that has already been explained before in several posts -- why not say that commenting on the Kenpachi-argument was a plan devised together as Hydras when questions were first asked from Haru, instead of coming up with this motive only after it had drawn enough attention to be more than one Vote? Isn't this also a direct contradiction to saying earlier that Haru can't speak on Glowinghand's behalf?!) When did I turn into a hand? lol Kenpachi-argument wasn't a plan devised together as Hydras. I've used the QT to get his opinion about this policy. It was the same as mine. I decided to post about it because I think it was turning into a main point when it should be a secondary argument, and accessory argument. Saying it could be scum driven is not necessarily saying it was certainly scum driven. It was my way of saying that "watch out, you are getting something as certain while it is not, so keep it as a secondary argument and let's focus on a primary one". Haru can't speak on my behalf. We are a team but we don't share the same account nor the same ideas. I have suspicions on Robik. He said he likes Robik. We have different views while inside the same team, and I don't get why it is not natural. Ok, now on your bigger case: --Your second case: + Show Spoiler + On July 12 2014 13:45 TheSlenderMan wrote: (1)Take a look at Glowing's filter, as well. No indication there that he wanted to 'watch out for the kenpachi argument because [we] felt it might be scum driven.' In fact, the comment Glowing makes of the 'argument' is quite a polar opposite to this claim (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=19#380). He sits on the fence as well as one can, regarding that subject. (2)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=25#499 Haru says here that they were excited to play but not excited to talk about the Kenpachi-rule for 10 pages. Indicates that they did talk something together. (3)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#503 Haru says that he and Glow should definitely comment on the Kenpachi-discussion -- the only motive I can glean from this post for that is that it was a 'hot topic' in the Thread for a long while. He doesn't say that they should, for instance, try to find possible Scummioso initiative in the initiation of the 'argument'. (And in fact, Haru doesn't seem to ever look for Scum. Not even when Voting for rayn.) (4)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#510 Haru, again, reiterates that it was important for one of them to comment on the topic that took considerable amounts of threadspace. He says that they, as a Hydra, definitely wanted to talk ABOUT the Topic but nothing else. (5)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#511 No Scumhunting prior to this post, then all of a sudden Palmar gets a FREE Town-pass for absolutely no reason at all. Alarm bells, they be a-ringin'! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=26#516 Here Haru says he cannot speak on Glow's behalf... (6)http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/461355-team-melee-mini-mafia-v-newbies-and-vets?page=27#539 ...and here suddenly bringing the topic up was planned together. ('I can contribute by showing OUR collective intention. Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven.') Why not say that in the first place? And how does this alleged 'collective intention' show at all from the posts (by Glow) in question? Like, the whole notion about a 'collection intention' seems like an afterthought which actually doesn't fit either of their actions. Clearly they HAD discussed something regarding the on-thread discussion, but it doesn't seem like it was what Haru said in #539. Here's what Glow thought about the Kenpachi 'argument': Kenpachi rule doesn't sound as a winning plan to me. You may use it as a secondary argument but to get to the point you have a primary one there is so much game to be played. I think that if we keep discussing this topic it will just a waste of breath. Why do I think it's secondary: a scum can fake claim vt just so he can get townie to accuse him and get mislynched. More than that, a vt can simply try to pressure someone who claimed vt. Why not? Here's what Haru says they thought about the Ken-arg: OUR collective intention. Which was to watch out for the kenpachi argument because we felt it might be scum driven. I don't see this as consistent. (1) Answered above (2) It indicates we did talk and got the same opinion that it would be harmful to town to extend discussion regarding kenpachi policy at the time (3) As I said, in his posts he is never implying that the usage of kenpachi rule should be analyzed as possible scum maneuver. What he said is that it could be scum driven. And it could. But it's not a safe ground to walk on. So, why wasting breath on that policy? (4) Hmm, I guess you're getting the wrong interpretation of what he meant? I'll quote his post: + Show Spoiler + On July 11 2014 21:46 HaruRH wrote: So I guess here is where the problem lies I am not the same person as glowingbear and even though we are the same entity now, we are just a conjoined twin. My stance is that if glowingbear did not talk about the kenpachi rule thing, I would have talked about it. He never said he should talk about the topic and nothing else. This is you putting words in his mouth, dude. He said that, if I had not said anything about the poor usage of kenpachi rule, he would say. That's all. (5) In the context, he doesn't like what Palmar said. So that's why he considered OMGUSing. But he didn't want to OMGUS because it was early. Moreover, Haru played with Palmar before and probably has a good view of his meta, so why OMGUSing if he could have a hunch? (6) It's a team game. Again, I have a suspicion on Robik. Haru likes him. We are two heads in the same team, we think differently. However, sometimes, we have the same opinion, as for the kenpachi policy. He thought that, as a team mate who knows my alignment, he should defend be against attackers because (i) he knew my opinion on that, which was the same as his and (ii) when I'm attacked, he is also attacked because we are a team. I tried to answer it properly, but I am really tired. 3am here. Also, as even Haru said, we are a team but we are not the same person. He could answer you better because you've brought much more Haru's posts than mine. TBH, I don't really understand why you find these posts scummy lol i'm not reading this shit or anything of similar length. if i go back on this and read it later consider it a merciful blessing by the grace of god but do not expect me to comment on anything this long because i won't | ||
|
GlowingBear
Brazil12446 Posts
On July 12 2014 14:46 Eden1892 wrote: why am I anywhere in the stratosphere of your scumreads then I said I have suspicions while skimming through the pages that made me feel I should filter dive you tomorrow and that's all. I'm sorry guys, too exhausted, 3:30am, gonna sleep because I can't even understand what are you writing anymore. | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
| ||
|
GlowingBear
Brazil12446 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:22 Eden1892 wrote: also heads up: i'm not reading this shit or anything of similar length. if i go back on this and read it later consider it a merciful blessing by the grace of god but do not expect me to comment on anything this long because i won't I was answering Slenderman here. I don't think my case on sqrt is big. I've put all quotes on spoiler and you just have to read it if you think you should read proofs... | ||
|
GlowingBear
Brazil12446 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:26 Eden1892 wrote: that's fine but when you get back i expect an explanation as to how you got the impression that i've been playing nice with people But I didn't said that... geez... I had suspicions on you, which doesn't mean you're necessarily suspicious of overly friendly behavior or passivity... that's why I'll filter dive you, so I can get a better view of what gave me the feeling that you were suspicious. My main scumhunting is attacking passivity/friendly behavior. It's not may only scumhunting method. Ok, now I'm gone. | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
What we should mean when we say it is determining the alignment of other players What people often mean is determining who is suspicious What it means when it is used to justify witch hunting is ignoring any points in favor of a target being town so that finding someone to burn regardless of anything they say after some "tell" is justified. So because people take the second meaning most often, people who can form town reads and give town reads are considered scummy because they are not "scum hunting" even though they actually "are" And people who witch hunt are seen as "townie" because they are "actively scum hunting" and "pushing their reads" Bullshit. The witch hunters are actually actively pushing their agenda 27NinjaBunnies! Does this post seem familiar to you, but not of me? If not, read the spoiler! + Show Spoiler + Then I actually understand your dislike of Blazinghand. You have not been in enough games with him,  unto his gracing a thread.Understand that his effusive pride, it is different from pride itself for I hate pride. Nay, his pride... ...Lampshades. Therefore a once all-for-show became more genuine. | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:21 Eden1892 wrote: ok friends here is a post count thus far, each number corresponds to the teams in the OP and the parentheses numbers are each poster 1: 31 posts (020/011) 2: 36 posts (025/011) 3: 99 posts (044/055) 4: 123 posts (031/092) 5: 64 posts (043/021) 6: 21 posts (009/012) 7: 80 posts (008/072) 8: 93 posts (077/016) 9: 89 posts (011/078) 10: 91 posts (076/015) preliminary thoughts by team: - slot 1 can stay, low posting but slenderman is doing work IMO, not killing this slot - slot 2 is whatever i'll sort it out later but i would be ok killing it - slot 3 is scum, we're killing today - slot 4 is memorable as town + high-posting so we're not killing this slot - slot 5 is oddly unmemorable for >60 posts, would be okay killing - slot 6 TBD, low post count and not memorable but a lot of that is Koshi replacing in - slot 7 is confirmed town, we're never killing this slot - slot 8 is funny because robik said he wasn't gonna talk but then has a bunch of posts. also we're not killing this slot because it's memorable as town + high-posting - slot 9 is confirmed town, we're never killing this slot - slot 10 is unmemorable despite a lot of posting, would be okay killing this slot tl;dr: - slot 3 scum - slots 1, 4, 7, 8, 9 are off the table - slot 6 tbd - slots 2, 6, 10 look good, probably in that order If I am slot three the curse of Alakaslam continues even as it is broken; I don't mention it but many things about what I do are mathematically intriguing. | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
I am martyring under the understanding that 27nb is probably actually right. The two slots I called out are scum; when we are confirmed it does not matter what sqrt did, he won you the game by being just the right level of LHF to get scum to unreasonably push him; the scummiest form of pushing an agenda. If you aren't willing to check my filter to find out what those are, then just as I deserve to be lynched, you deserve to lose. | ||
|
OnceKing
United States939 Posts
| ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
I see as Ezekiel: with uncanny prophecy. I see as Hitler: with uncanny hatred and love and hatred- insane mood swings With that Segway into Godwin's law, I Invoke it. Thread is dead to me, and nothing more than a joke thread. | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:36 Alakaslam wrote: I am martyring under the understanding that 27nb is probably actually right. The two slots I called out are scum; when we are confirmed it does not matter what sqrt did, he won you the game by being just the right level of LHF to get scum to unreasonably push him; the scummiest form of pushing an agenda "i intentionally played scummy to get the scum to push me as a mislynch, bow before my scumhunting glory" | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:38 OnceKing wrote: fantastic slam. now please tell me what you have done in your favor that would make you town. With great wisdom I point to the drink/// I come, in peace! For you said to for to not to drink your drink! And my Cadillac, man! How many mpg's does it get? MILES? HAHAHAH! DAMN BRO, I WENT TO THE FULL SERVICE LANE GUY WAS LIKE "BETTER SHUTTER' OFF, PUMP CAN'T KEEP UP SO I FLOORED IT & SUCKED THAT CHEEKY BUGGER RIGHT IN! I LOVE THAT CAR MAN! And my wife said "sell it" //-:@&;$/@-@-&$$:$;@(":&&:$1&.$;&@:&-$::@@,89(@;;&&.&;&@;@/$:"(/$&:8; So I went to the video store and tried to rent a movie... I couldn't find it so I started to describe it to the clerk... "I think it stars Jackie Gleason and Nicholas Cage, it's about the Cold War except we lost because somebody messed up and we made all the subs out of styrofoam so they couldn't sink" And I stopped myself because the clerk is just looking at me with his mouth open and staring... And I realize This isn't a movie This is a dream I had... I just tried to rent one of my own dreams... Which would be pretty cool actually. Then the clerk spoke up and said "that isn't a movie, that's a dream you had" And I am like "how did you know?" And he says "you were in here trying to rent the same thing last week" | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
On July 12 2014 15:41 Eden1892 wrote: "i intentionally played scummy to get the scum to push me as a mislynch, bow before my scumhunting glory" Ways if intent to misconstrue? How true! For great is the woman who does not sink! And she that sinks, well, who misses her! For you understand the way of a goose/ a goose is made of wood? No But yes Also many hitler such Stalin soon mao | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
![[image loading]](http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2qr1ojnqN1r196nto1_500.jpg) | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
![[image loading]](http://d1mxyp5ceukbya.cloudfront.net/images/bbt-feb22-cbs.jpg) | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
![[image loading]](http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/02.13/images/Malice.jpg) | ||
|
Chairman Ray
United States11903 Posts
| ||
| ||
