EPTImperial Mafia - Page 128
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
sicklucker
Canada16987 Posts
| ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On January 03 2015 09:36 KelsierSC wrote: eden you case was roughly 1) bats read on robik was weird 2) his misrepresenting chyz 3) his last pages not having anything substantiaal I guess that's a decent breakdown, but I still find it misrepresenting to say that I broke it down into those three subsections, when it clearly (to me) reads more as a freeflowing assessment of batsnacks. Doubly so when you start couching it in terms of "isn't it weird how he had these 3 points he was instantly ready to make on batsnacks," as you've essentially been looking to do. (1) is not quite correct. The read was off, as I explained; what made it suspicious to me is that there wasn't any followup to it, nor did it seem any other suspect had commanded his attention to distract him from following up. It just kinda gets dropped without any explanation. I admit I wasn't as clear on this as I should have been, though. (2) is also not quite correct, and I feel like it's more clearly not quite correct than your reading of (1). Again, it's this attempt to read/contribute something about Chyz that doesn't make much sense that's weird, and the lack of meaningful direction or followup to it that's suspicious. I did call it a "horrible misinterpretation" but that's not why I found it suspicious. (3) is pretty much correct, and is indeed suspicious given (1) and (2) constitute his main focuses in the thread. And while it's not in the case itself, I feel it would be remiss to overlook the point I hammered home the most in my arguing for batsnacks to be lynched, which was that batsnacks was defaulting to a policy lynch on Chyz and pointedly refusing to tell me whether or not he actually thought Chyz was mafia. And yeah, I know you're reading it, my point is that you've made multiple significant errors of fact and that you're not reading the case fairly. You entered your read of it wanting to find a way to make it fit into your preconceived notion that I came out of nowhere with 3 points I'd been sitting on in order to bury a townie, instead of reading it with a genuine interest in determining my alignment and the alignment of the people that followed my vote onto batsnacks. | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On January 03 2015 09:40 Vivax wrote: Do you remember that monologue you started when DrH gave you ways of suspicion? Care to explain why you'd somehow talk like you're silently making the narrative up to yourself other than simply calling these things out in the thread and get DrH or anyone else to get some feedback on it? What did you think me posting that list of reasons I found Doc suspicious was for, other than calling them out in the thread and getting feedback on them? If I simply needed a mental note to remember to revisit Doc in the morning, I'd have written it on my notebook and checked it in the morning, no post needed. The point of that post was (a) to highlight it for other people so they could discuss it while I went to bed, and (b) to give a clean reference point when I inevitably revisited it tomorrow, anticipating that just bringing it up cold turkey would be more confusing than helpful. | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On January 03 2015 09:47 Eden1892 wrote: I guess that's a decent breakdown, but I still find it misrepresenting to say that I broke it down into those three subsections, when it clearly (to me) reads more as a freeflowing assessment of batsnacks. Doubly so when you start couching it in terms of "isn't it weird how he had these 3 points he was instantly ready to make on batsnacks," as you've essentially been looking to do. (1) is not quite correct. The read was off, as I explained; what made it suspicious to me is that there wasn't any followup to it, nor did it seem any other suspect had commanded his attention to distract him from following up. It just kinda gets dropped without any explanation. I admit I wasn't as clear on this as I should have been, though. (2) is also not quite correct, and I feel like it's more clearly not quite correct than your reading of (1). Again, it's this attempt to read/contribute something about Chyz that doesn't make much sense that's weird, and the lack of meaningful direction or followup to it that's suspicious. I did call it a "horrible misinterpretation" but that's not why I found it suspicious. (3) is pretty much correct, and is indeed suspicious given (1) and (2) constitute his main focuses in the thread. And while it's not in the case itself, I feel it would be remiss to overlook the point I hammered home the most in my arguing for batsnacks to be lynched, which was that batsnacks was defaulting to a policy lynch on Chyz and pointedly refusing to tell me whether or not he actually thought Chyz was mafia. And yeah, I know you're reading it, my point is that you've made multiple significant errors of fact and that you're not reading the case fairly. You entered your read of it wanting to find a way to make it fit into your preconceived notion that I came out of nowhere with 3 points I'd been sitting on in order to bury a townie, instead of reading it with a genuine interest in determining my alignment and the alignment of the people that followed my vote onto batsnacks. that is how the case looked broken down to me eden, just how it felt in my mind. I think you defended your case pretty well and you are right it wasnt just before deadline. you feel town | ||
|
Vivax
22423 Posts
| ||
|
IAmRobik
United States5878 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:05 Vivax wrote: Kinda bugs me how Eden first scumreads Doc, then scumreads Chyz, then goes on with saying "One or the other is mafia" when they have been in such a clińch. Excluding a bussing here cause of that ragequit from Chyz. But I feel like Eden has been way less vocal about DrH than say TheCyyz. vivax, stop shitposting or you will get lynched per koshi's request | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:10 IAmRobik wrote: vivax, stop shitposting or you will get lynched per koshi's request lol whats the story about that pot and the black kettle, shit i forgot | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:05 Vivax wrote: Kinda bugs me how Eden first scumreads Doc, then scumreads Chyz, then goes on with saying "One or the other is mafia" when they have been in such a clińch. Excluding a bussing here cause of that ragequit from Chyz. But I feel like Eden has been way less vocal about DrH than say TheCyyz. Er... sorry, what was the end point here? I know what you're referencing but I'm not following what you mean. I scumread Doc about an hour into d1 for reasons I don't remember now, I scumread Chyz for his entry post. Don't remember exactly when I said "one or the other is mafia" (fairly certain it was in the morning/early afternoon of NYE my time, which would be first half of d1) so I don't remember what prompted me to say it, but I do remember saying this. It ended up not being important because both Doc and Chyz helped me clarify my reads on them with certain other actions later into d1. Where are you going here? It is a little odd to me that you're bringing up some things I said about Doc and Chyz from relatively early in d1 that aren't really relevant to my reads on them now. | ||
|
Eden1892
United States5866 Posts
On January 03 2015 09:52 KelsierSC wrote: that is how the case looked broken down to me eden, just how it felt in my mind. I think you defended your case pretty well and you are right it wasnt just before deadline. you feel town Enh... that felt a little quick. You seemed awful sure earlier. I'll sort it out later I guess. | ||
|
IAmRobik
United States5878 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:12 KelsierSC wrote: lol whats the story about that pot and the black kettle, shit i forgot did you read his post? He literally said a bunch of nothing and didn't even come to a conclusion about the bullshit he posted. I almost fell asleep reading the 55 words | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
| ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:19 DoctorHelvetica wrote: vivax case on jat was bullshit if anyone wanna.revisit that gem Not only that but the fact that he spent so much time pushing for someone almost everyone has as town or at least leaning town in some way. Why not post about the more relevant players? | ||
|
justanothertownie
16343 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:19 DoctorHelvetica wrote: vivax case on jat was bullshit if anyone wanna.revisit that gem You don't say! | ||
|
KelsierSC
United Kingdom10443 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:17 Eden1892 wrote: Enh... that felt a little quick. You seemed awful sure earlier. I'll sort it out later I guess. it's called applying pressure | ||
|
Vivax
22423 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:14 Eden1892 wrote: Er... sorry, what was the end point here? I know what you're referencing but I'm not following what you mean. I scumread Doc about an hour into d1 for reasons I don't remember now, I scumread Chyz for his entry post. Don't remember exactly when I said "one or the other is mafia" (fairly certain it was in the morning/early afternoon of NYE my time, which would be first half of d1) so I don't remember what prompted me to say it, but I do remember saying this. It ended up not being important because both Doc and Chyz helped me clarify my reads on them with certain other actions later into d1. Where are you going here? It is a little odd to me that you're bringing up some things I said about Doc and Chyz from relatively early in d1 that aren't really relevant to my reads on them now. Would you kindly point out how Doc and Cyz helped you clarify your reads on them and what the outcome was? | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17336 Posts
Which is a little ironic. But it really is bad for games when someone does this- if you want out I can replace you, as long as you give me some advance notice. /end rant | ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
On January 02 2015 09:35 sicklucker wrote: Like no whoever switches from gert im going to think is mafia because in your world their together so it doesint matter dont switch your votes this is a great lynch/ On January 02 2015 10:20 sicklucker wrote: Gerit actually tried to play on new years and failed. Lynch him we can clear me and all sing kumbayas. Then start a new game tomorrow when I dont have a headach and no one has excuses. On January 02 2015 10:46 sicklucker wrote: [/blue][/b]On the confirmed scum who has literally conceded If this isn't confidence, I don't know what is... SL looking really scummy. | ||
|
sicklucker
Canada16987 Posts
On January 03 2015 10:33 Lazermonkey wrote: [/blue][/b]After reading through SL's filter I really don't buy into the fact that he wasn't confident in his reads. If this isn't confidence, I don't know what is... SL looking really scummy. I was confident tho. Good read | ||
|
sicklucker
Canada16987 Posts
On January 03 2015 09:47 sicklucker wrote: Yes I was confident in the original lynch. I was confident in the other one too because of who was voting | ||
|
Lazermonkey
Sweden2176 Posts
I really really have a hard time to believe that you would go from that level of confidence in geript to an even higher level of confidence in batsnacks just because your townreads voted him. Because you had hardly mentioned batsnacks at that point. | ||
| ||
