|
On December 31 2014 15:35 Eden1892 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:24 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On December 31 2014 15:22 Eden1892 wrote:On December 31 2014 15:14 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Uh, I don't want to make your dick hard. I don't think anything about anyone yet. On December 31 2014 15:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
That being said I'd like to show everyone my spreadsheet ranking Day 1 joke posts from least to most scummy. what's up with the second post here though? seems like if you have opinions about which posts are suspicious you have opinions about which people are suspicious. non? Seems like you take everything literally, we're gonna have problems if you waste your time with shit like this. just checking, it seemed like a joke but i didn't want to supply that answer in case it weren't~ Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:32 geript wrote:On December 31 2014 15:27 geript wrote:
I'm more concerned about how you find a post that is "stiff and awkwardly timed," two traits that are more often considered mafia tells, towny? Can you explain that more fully? It's also pretty weird that you reasonably correctly point out that his post is going nowhere while simultaneously responding to it. @Eden Explain. sure, i'm not sure what you meant by "shut down this line" in the previous part of the post btw so if you want a reply to that please clarify for my addled brain as for why i read it townie, like i said, it seemed like an effort to get discussion somewhere besides early-game banter, which imo wasn't going anywhere. i followed up on the post because even if the object-level discussion ends up being pretty pointless, i can get some possibly useful meta-level reads from it - and hey, maybe it is going somewhere and i miss it, y'know?
By shut it down, I mean shut down any further discussion on useless policy. Nobody needs to find policy to find discussion.
The problem with your "townread" is that your reasons for finding him town are complete bullshit. That post is a throwaway post that I could recite to newbies to "get discussion going" as either alignment and potentially useful dependent on how it's driven and moved (even moreso to scum imo not that it matters). There actually were things to be talked about in the thread already (my townread on Damdred, the ??? on sicklucker who IIRC also made a passing townread on Damdred, Robik not posting anything while making a few posts, etc.). It's odd that you comment that his post was stiff and awkwardly timed, two bad reasons that people's posts are often called scummy for and then settle on a bad reason to call him town for it. As for meta reads, what type of meta reads do you expect will lead to any sort of meaningful read off of policy discussion?
|
On December 31 2014 15:44 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Yes. Slam dunk case. No point in him even defending himself really.
Then why didn't you follow this up with a vote on him?
|
On December 31 2014 15:36 ritoky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:06 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
What's up nerds. Let's talk policy - unlike a lot of people I think it's plenty useful on Day 1.
I believe strongly in Lynch All Liars. What's your policy on lynching people who claim scum?
@Damdred. Here's your check baby boy.
|
|
|
I think you're overestimating how useful the previous discussion was. I was actually shocked anyone is trying to seriously analyse jokes and firdt first page throwaways. I never read that shit and it has never helped. You keep coming back to it and I think it's because you want to believe you're awesome for finding it but suuuuch a reach.
I agree that its scummy to throw a case like that down. It seemed like he had a template for a day 1 scum read but he jist changed it to "towny" at the end. In a way there is a subtext od of "i think youre town for acting like scum" which is the kind of mistake made vy by mafia who are scared to really push but just wanna thro doubt and ruin crefibility. Its not that serious or insidious and i think he should just clarify his reasoning, but its a syart syartstart . Fucking start.
|
On December 31 2014 15:45 ritoky wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:44 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Yes. Slam dunk case. No point in him even defending himself really. Then why didn't you follow this up with a vote on him?
I want the scum to show up in the thread before I shove it in his face. I"m an awesome vet and this guy is a chump if I've ever seen one. Keep it up, you'll nail everyone soon. I think ad that damdred has some splaining yo do. To do.
|
On December 31 2014 15:50 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:45 ritoky wrote:On December 31 2014 15:44 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Yes. Slam dunk case. No point in him even defending himself really. Then why didn't you follow this up with a vote on him? I want the scum to show up in the thread before I shove it in his face. I"m an awesome vet and this guy is a chump if I've ever seen one. Keep it up, you'll nail everyone soon. I think ad that damdred has some splaining yo do. To do.
I don't get the sense that you actually believe this in the slightest.
|
Like I thought it was weird that geript is suggesting hes gonna put in the effort to get a meta weird on me so early when I have done nothing scummy. (I made a semi joke/vote to vote) to mock his one. Like this could mean anything just pointing this out for someone whos played with him alot.
|
On December 31 2014 15:55 sicklucker wrote:
Like I thought it was weird that geript is suggesting hes gonna put in the effort to get a meta weird on me so early when I have done nothing scummy. (I made a semi joke/vote to vote) to mock his one. Like this could mean anything just pointing this out for someone whos played with him alot.
It's ok babygirl. I've never meta'd anyone ever before. You'll be getting my meta v-card.
|
On December 31 2014 15:20 Eden1892 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:06 DoctorHelvetica wrote:I believe strongly in Lynch All Liars. i don't, why do you? i feel like i can just look at a particular situation and decide for myself if someone who was caught lying was town and trying too hard to do something cool or if they're mafia. and i'm putting all my votes on my best mafia read not on any policy. Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:06 DoctorHelvetica wrote:I will also more or less ignore every single "town" plan involving mass claims, trying to rig/game the setup, it's way too hard to get everyone on the same page and it has never ever worked in my experience. just peeking at the setup real quick i'm almost positive this isn't going to be an issue, not seeing anything to game Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:06 DoctorHelvetica wrote:How does everyone feel about lurking players? Lower than expected activity can indicate blue just as much as scum. I like when DTs focus their checks on the lurkers rather than players who are active. There isn't a great in thread way to deal with lurkers. If I analyse lurkers post history at all, I usually wait until Day 2 or 3, that's enough time for the people who are lurking for a reason to make themselves more apparent I think. not to be rude but this all seems obvious to the point of fluff... i rather just put all my votes on best mafia read and attempt to discern b/t town lurkers and mafia lurkers as the game goes along instead of making activity a point of interest. i don't worry about them until i get a vote record unless i'm really stumped verdict: Doc's post seems stiff and awkwardly timed, and I feel like most of the policy discussion that might ensue from this won't really get anywhere, but it beats chasing people up trees for opening game banter. I guess I like Doc as town for now
This sure is a lot of words and not a lot of follow-up looking for alignment indicative information for you to arrive at a wishy-washy non-committal conclusion. I read this and learned basically nothing. Scum leaning.
|
On December 31 2014 15:44 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:35 Eden1892 wrote:On December 31 2014 15:24 DoctorHelvetica wrote:On December 31 2014 15:22 Eden1892 wrote:On December 31 2014 15:14 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
Uh, I don't want to make your dick hard. I don't think anything about anyone yet. On December 31 2014 15:07 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
That being said I'd like to show everyone my spreadsheet ranking Day 1 joke posts from least to most scummy. what's up with the second post here though? seems like if you have opinions about which posts are suspicious you have opinions about which people are suspicious. non? Seems like you take everything literally, we're gonna have problems if you waste your time with shit like this. just checking, it seemed like a joke but i didn't want to supply that answer in case it weren't~ On December 31 2014 15:32 geript wrote:On December 31 2014 15:27 geript wrote:
I'm more concerned about how you find a post that is "stiff and awkwardly timed," two traits that are more often considered mafia tells, towny? Can you explain that more fully? It's also pretty weird that you reasonably correctly point out that his post is going nowhere while simultaneously responding to it. @Eden Explain. sure, i'm not sure what you meant by "shut down this line" in the previous part of the post btw so if you want a reply to that please clarify for my addled brain as for why i read it townie, like i said, it seemed like an effort to get discussion somewhere besides early-game banter, which imo wasn't going anywhere. i followed up on the post because even if the object-level discussion ends up being pretty pointless, i can get some possibly useful meta-level reads from it - and hey, maybe it is going somewhere and i miss it, y'know? By shut it down, I mean shut down any further discussion on useless policy. Nobody needs to find policy to find discussion. The problem with your "townread" is that your reasons for finding him town are complete bullshit. That post is a throwaway post that I could recite to newbies to "get discussion going" as either alignment and potentially useful dependent on how it's driven and moved (even moreso to scum imo not that it matters). There actually were things to be talked about in the thread already (my townread on Damdred, the ??? on sicklucker who IIRC also made a passing townread on Damdred, Robik not posting anything while making a few posts, etc.). It's odd that you comment that his post was stiff and awkwardly timed, two bad reasons that people's posts are often called scummy for and then settle on a bad reason to call him town for it. As for meta reads, what type of meta reads do you expect will lead to any sort of meaningful read off of policy discussion?
I don't think they're bullshit, not sure what else to tell you there. I think we disagree about the value of what you were talking about before, which is leading to our divergent views on this particular post; I got nothing out of what had happened to that point and briefly dug into the only thing that was interesting to me, so where you saw things to be discussed, I didn't.
Sorry for using the term "meta-level," I'm not referring to meta reads. What I meant is that even if people are talking about policy or jokes or whatever and the actual objects of that discussion aren't going anywhere, you can dig into other players' thought processes and perhaps get a read on them despite that, in which case it's hard to say the discussion was useless. As an example I'm bothered by this more recent post from the Doc:
On December 31 2014 15:37 DoctorHelvetica wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:29 Eden1892 wrote:
eh i don't really see it, doc. as mafia i'm not going to try to lie any more or less if townies start lying, i'm probably going to exploit townies lying by trying to push policy lynches on them. policy lynches on townies are free mislynches for mafia
and i mean yeah, "intense scrutiny and questioning" sure, but are you afraid people are actually NOT going to do this? this almost seems like an empty statement Yeah, I do fear that sadly enough. Ov course , in the timeframe of a single game it doesn't mean anything. I'm just talking general meta and from when I did most of my playing (a while ago) it was v eady to get away with fakeclaims as scum (ive been scum many times and done it myself many times) or set up weird vuses (buses) in themed games and sfuff (stuff). When towns in general are lax about that stuff (as i have once known them to be) i don't worry so much if i roll scum. Townies who lie just throw a wrench into everything by creatinf (creatinf /€ fuck) we Creating mislynch opportunities. Sorry for the typos amd weird formatting. Did it again. Can't backspace on my mobile for some reason, really abboying annoying seeing as I have enormous thumbs.
And the thought process behind it. I don't get why a townie would already be worried about people lying and other people not at all questioning it. It seems like something I'd expect a newer player to say without really realizing that it's not saying anything, except that as I understand it Doc isn't a new player. It's odd to me that he's taking an impression about the meta-environment from months ago and extrapolating concerns about it in the here and now, particularly since that impression contradicts my own. It comes off as just saying stuff to say stuff.
And the fact that he had this explanation behinds it takes it from, as you called it, geript, "a throwaway post that I could recite to newbies to "get discussion going" as either alignment" to being slightly suspicious to me, because the explanation attempts to justify it as genuinely-held concerns about the meta-environment instead of as a generic post to kickstart discussion, concerns which I don't believe would be genuinely held.
|
Hoo boy this is gonna be a fun one
|
On December 31 2014 15:57 geript wrote:Show nested quote +On December 31 2014 15:55 sicklucker wrote:
Like I thought it was weird that geript is suggesting hes gonna put in the effort to get a meta weird on me so early when I have done nothing scummy. (I made a semi joke/vote to vote) to mock his one. Like this could mean anything just pointing this out for someone whos played with him alot. It's ok babygirl. I've never meta'd anyone ever before. You'll be getting my meta v-card.
That just makes it scummy. Like if your not a person who makes meta cases like the only reason you ask for my previous games as mafia is for cheap town cred.
|
You seem like youre gonna get stuck in a way of playing where you feel that any unreasonable or perplexing behavuor warrants suspicions. Suspicion. I only knoe know as much about thr ethe the environment here as the last time I played. Just wanted to answer your question, I am getting a lot out of my useless posts so far. I might keep saying mothing nothing of value for a while.
|
On December 31 2014 15:55 sicklucker wrote:
Like I thought it was weird that geript is suggesting hes gonna put in the effort to get a meta weird on me so early when I have done nothing scummy. (I made a semi joke/vote to vote) to mock his one. Like this could mean anything just pointing this out for someone whos played with him alot.
"Weird" huh? I am interested in "weird". "Weird" how? What does this "weirdness" tell you about his alignment? Why do you have to "just point it out" for others instead of arriving at and sharing your own conclusions?
|
He just did post his own conclusions on geript lol. Why are you so on peoples nuts this early, you're treating everythinf like you're 5 minutes away from posting some earth shattering case
|
On December 31 2014 16:05 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
You seem like youre gonna get stuck in a way of playing where you feel that any unreasonable or perplexing behavuor warrants suspicion.
Not planning on it, guess we'll see. Not a lot going on right now imo. It just seems to me that if you were that bothered about a meta-environment from your last experience months ago, you might check a couple recent games to see if the meta-environment is the same, y'know?
|
Its weird because its either
a. scummy because of why I just said
b. A way to find a town for people who have played with him alot and know he does this.
Can we kill ritoky so far hes attacked doctor and missed the sarcasm and now this.
|
On December 31 2014 16:08 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
He just did post his own conclusions on geript lol. Why are you so on peoples nuts this early, you're treating everythinf like you're 5 minutes away from posting some earth shattering case
That's because Eden keeps on coming across as more and more scummy the more he posts. Plus it's kinda what I do.
|
On December 31 2014 16:08 DoctorHelvetica wrote:
He just did post his own conclusions on geript lol. Why are you so on peoples nuts this early, you're treating everythinf like you're 5 minutes away from posting some earth shattering case
He didn't really say anything at all. Plus he described someone's play as "weird" with no qualifying explanation which is prototypical mafia day 1 early play when they don't have reason to throw scum on someone so they use a shitty superfluous descriptor.
Why are you so interested in defending yourself instead of finding scum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
