|
On July 27 2015 02:40 n00bKing wrote:Alright, let's put this thing with Rels to bed. Is everyone ready for the GRAND FINALE? I have to admit, I'm pretty excited.  So, I had said this: Show nested quote +Obviously, Rels is one of the people that I'll be re-reading before posting the reads list that ruXxar asked me for. And apparently, I'm the ONLY ONE who re-read his filter, or someone else would have caught this. Don't worry though, I'll do everything myself for the rest of this game, if I have to, until the bad guys can't take it anymore and kill me. Here's this post from Rels. I normally trim down quotes to keep things shorter and more focused, and easier to read. But I'll quote it in its entirety, just to maximize the context. Show nested quote +On July 25 2015 18:26 Rels wrote:On July 25 2015 17:34 n00bKing wrote:
You keep telling people that the "fact" that he prepared his post may not be scum-indicative for them, but IS scum-indicative for you. What I keep reminding you of is that this "fact" is NOT a fact. It's only something you've presented as fact. And when I've challenged you (twice) to explain how those remarks require forethought, instead of just being off-the-cuff instant reactions, you've come up empty (twice).
On July 25 2015 05:59 n00bKing wrote:
YOU ARE MISREPRESENTING MY POSITION. Read it again.
Never said his remarks required thought. I said he had three different subjects in his first post, which means he didn't post immediatly after writing the first one. This was confusing to me. I didn't understand how Rels could tell me that he never said the remarks required thought. If I was under the impression that he HAD told me that, then it probably had to come from somewhere. I had meant to go back and check, but then got distracted by other goings-on, and just happened to run across the answer while re-reading his filter for other reasons. And VOILA, there it was: (again, I apologize for leaving the quote uncut. It's a huge, cluttered mess. But I'm making sure full context is available. The end is the part you want, though. The last post.) Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 18:46 Rels wrote:On July 24 2015 18:42 ruXxar wrote:On July 24 2015 17:53 Rels wrote:Alright here I go. On July 24 2015 07:08 NocturneMage wrote:
RNG gave me town, thank God. I'm having a beer or two. Might be three. Not sure yet.
ruXxar sounds like he's sick of playing scum though.
Although if the moderator is going to make this a Pokemon themed game, I really don't know what to say. This first post from NocturneMage seems very prepared to me. And prepared post = scumlean. Why is it prepared ? Let me show you. RNG gave me town, thank God. I'm having a beer or two. Might be three. Not sure yet. <= VT claim + fluff about beer. ruXxar sounds like he's sick of playing scum though. <= Discussion about something in game. Although if the moderator is going to make this a Pokemon themed game, I really don't know what to say. <= Funny remark about host. So three different subjects in first post = prepared post. And prepared post means he may be afraid to post, hence why he prepared it so much. Plus in his later posts there are lots of questions + "i'm a noob" statement. See spoiler for source. It could mean he is mafia doesn't know what to talk about; could also just mean he's newbie and doesn't know what to talk about. So NAI. + Show Spoiler +On July 24 2015 07:22 NocturneMage wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 07:16 MoosyDoosy wrote:
ruXxar stop speaking like that. You're not speaking honestly you're flavoring your tone and what we need is your regular tone. He seems relieved to be town, assuming he's telling the truth, though the poetry makes me think he's more high than he is mafia. Do you think he's mafia? On July 24 2015 07:27 NocturneMage wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 07:19 MoosyDoosy wrote:
On a different note, if you tunnel on me again I will make sure you die. Is that alignment indicative for ruXxar? I'm guessing it is if that was a scum game of his? On July 24 2015 07:32 NocturneMage wrote:
Well it's my first game here and most of my mafia experience is from real life. It seems harder to fake being town in real life and I can't see it being much different on forum mafia with the body language and tone of voice aside. On July 24 2015 07:39 NocturneMage wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 07:34 ruXxar wrote:On July 24 2015 07:32 NocturneMage wrote:
Well it's my first game here and most of my mafia experience is from real life. It seems harder to fake being town in real life and I can't see it being much different on forum mafia with the body language and tone of voice aside. Tell me of your experience with real life mafia. My curiosity is peaked. I played it a lot at parties in uni and in grad school. It was the party game of party games. I also have played a board game called Resistance which is somewhat similar except people don't die but you also do figure out if people are lying or not and try to include them on your team or not and then pass or fail the expedition party. What is your experience with mafia or is forums just it? On July 24 2015 07:41 NocturneMage wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 07:24 disformation wrote:
Hm I would read ruxxars posts so far as NAI.
Not alignment indicative. The poetry stuff could have been preplanned. The tone is all fluff. *shrugs*
But then again, breaking the ice on D1 is kinda hard. xD It would seem like it. I don't know if I should make anything the way he's addressing people, ignoring his poetry, that could come from town or mafia. I'm assuming no ill-will means a town read? or a null read? I can't tell actually. ruxxar is that even a read on noobking? So, ##Vote NocturneMage@NocturneMage: if you're town, I want you to read Flexes' filter, who is also playing his first game. Only two posts, but he already discussed something relevant to the game. If you don't know: in the OP, if you click Flexes' name, you have access to all the posts he did in this thread. Ah, the pre-planned accusation. Classic mafia style. #self-meta. Your prepared argument is non-sense. How are they prepared when #2 and #3 are based on events that happened after the game started? No you don't get it. I'm not saying NocturneMage prepared his post before the game started. I'm saying he thought long and hard before he posted it, instead of being free of mind and posting what he felt. The evidence that he thought long and hard before posting it is the fact that there are 3 different subjects in the post. Then, I'm saying that the fact that he is not free of mind posting his first post may indicate he's mafia. Simple enough? Show nested quote +Rels wrote: As you say, each SEPARATE remark is a "off-the-cut instant reaction". vs Show nested quote +Rels wrote: I'm not saying NocturneMage prepared his post before the game started.
I'm saying he thought long and hard before he posted it, instead of being free of mind and posting what he felt. OOPS. So, ruXxar had tried to tell me stuff like this: Show nested quote +ruXxar wrote: Your case on rels is based on a faulty premise.
He already explained what he meant by prepared statement, yet you get stuck in details if his original accusation instead of evolving reads from the post where he clarifies his post. Well, I will have NO more of that, sir. Yes, Rels has clarified his posts. And it's gotten him caught in a lie. So either he is a Townie that is a terrible teammate, and due to his pride and ego, refused to admit to a mistake that he had made, and instead lied about it so he wouldn't look bad...or...he is Scum. We can have a discussion about why he lied. But the discussion about WHETHER he lied, is OH-verrrr.
Okay i understand this.
Rels, please elaborate.
|
I am also not entirely sure how VT turns into "town".
I jsut think that was not important enough on D1.
|
So either he is a Townie that is a terrible teammate, and due to his pride and ego, refused to admit to a mistake that he had made, and instead lied about it so he wouldn't look bad...or...he is Scum.
We can have a discussion about why he lied. But the discussion about WHETHER he lied, is OH-verrrr.
Saying things like this doesn't really help n00bKing, because not only it deduces your credibility because of ad-hom but it is also impossible he is lying here and is town as he has repeatedly discredited your point.
Keep things simple.
|
and for the record my last point on Barakos was the best one, not bad. It literally proves he cannot possibly be reaction testing. Whether or not you understand it it is true, we can ask him after the game.
|
On July 27 2015 03:20 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 02:56 Damdred wrote:
I vote him third but misspell,his name so on the wagon later rather than third.
I think everyone understands you were early on the voting wagon, and isn't counting the misspelling against you. Like you say, you were effectively third, not sixth. Rels was sixth. Which is part of why I find it funny that people want to credit him for getting behind the lynch "early" or criticize me for switching to him "late" when he was the 6th vote and I was the 7th vote. *shrug*
I am giving him credit for getting behind the lynch early because;
- he was one of the first (if not the first) people to call out Barakos
- whether he voted for him or not at that point is irrelevant, it's relevant that he did nothing to push anyone else's lynch, which mafia normally does fi one of their own is under attack and there is a strong thread presence (like Rels) in the thread.
Like, in my opinion, it pretty easy to see that he never even entertains another lynch other than Barakos.
If i am wrong here feel free to correct me.
|
On July 27 2015 03:29 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:15 raynpelikoneet wrote:So either he is a Townie that is a terrible teammate, and due to his pride and ego, refused to admit to a mistake that he had made, and instead lied about it so he wouldn't look bad...or...he is Scum.
We can have a discussion about why he lied. But the discussion about WHETHER he lied, is OH-verrrr. Saying things like this doesn't really help n00bKing, because not only it deduces your credibility because of ad-hom but it is also impossible he is lying here and is town as he has repeatedly discredited your point. Keep things simple. Assume deduces = reduces? If so, then I don't think the fact that he continued to battle back makes it impossible that he's Town. Once he decided to make the lie, he could decide to try and stick with it, because admitting that it was a lie will be seen as suspicious. Like, let's say that he shows up and admits that he contradicted himself, and apologizes for it. You're going to then say it is "impossible" that he's Town, because he kept trying to discredit my point? In that scenario, you're actually motivating him to stick with the lie instead of coming clean, because if he tells the truth now you'll lynch him. See what I mean? You can say I'm overthinking it, but I don't think we should push him into a position where he feels like there is more downside to admitting the truth than continuing to lie.
If you always do this mafia can lie for whatever reason and you will never find mafia.
Townies should never lie, unless they can clearly point out why it's beneficial for the town (see for example fake claims).
|
On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself."
You are both arguing about semantics so feel free to point out how what Rels says here is clearly another lie, because i don't really understand it.
|
On July 27 2015 04:01 Damdred wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 04:00 ruXxar wrote:On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote:On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote:
So what you said:
"Rels said his post didn't require thought".
"Rels said his post required thought".
Is not what happened.
The situation is:
"Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not)
"Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." ?!!! His story checks out. Your grandiose witch hunt on this small little detail doesn't matter jack shit in the long run because what you want to look for is mafia motivation and not get hung up in small details like this that totally derail town productivity. I can perfectly understand rels logic here and nothing in that argument is him contradicting himself. Go look at the broader strokes of the game and try to discern mafia motivation from that, this topic of rels scum-read has been beaten to death and you're not going to convince me he's scum for it. Ruxxor makes a good post. Must be scum
|
i'll be honest i think Rels is town for this:
On July 24 2015 22:35 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Barakos i would like you to elaborate onto your read on Barakos.
Why is the post you have been called out for scummy?
On July 24 2015 22:38 Rels wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2015 22:35 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Barakos i would like you to elaborate onto your read on Barakos. =D
I don't care to elaborate further but he is totally town because he was the only one who gets this.
|
|
|
Like it sounds awfully lot like me and you in the last game.
|
Let's murder Flexes and then Tictock.
|
On July 27 2015 04:20 Damdred wrote:
I was kinda thinking that rayn lol, just makes people look bad. Nit picking usually doesn't catch scum lol.
What about Breske though rayn
iunno i have just kinda ignored him the whole game.
I don't know why mafia would not be pushing him in case he was town? he is an easy one to push, could be scum.
On his defense he voted for Barakos so he gets a D2 pass from me.
|
Like i find it absolutely impossible both remaining mafia were on Barakos, unless n00bKing and NocturneMage are scum but i also find this impossible.
|
On July 27 2015 04:26 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 04:24 raynpelikoneet wrote:
Like i find it absolutely impossible both remaining mafia were on Barakos, unless n00bKing and NocturneMage are scum but i also find this impossible. They might have flipped at different times. That's why I'm looking at Sulfurus/NocturneMage more closely. Or Breshke/NocturneMage.
ehhh, why do you want Flexes shot if you don't even think he is mafia?
|
I don't think your "i think Sulfurus is the GF" is a valid point.
|
Sulfurus is very early on Barakos. He is not mafia given he is new (which for example Breske is not).
|
On July 27 2015 04:47 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2015 04:38 raynpelikoneet wrote:
I don't think your "i think Sulfurus is the GF" is a valid point. It’s a joke. Sulfurus got Mafia Godfather for two games in a row before this. It would be pretty cool if this is his third time. I’m tempted to lynch him just to see.
How about you lynch mafia instead?
Like it's really cool when you play a perfect game and lynch mafia every day, i don't want to ruin it just because people are being lazy.
|
On July 27 2015 04:54 MoosyDoosy wrote:
I have never played a perfect game of Mafia before.
I'll tell you a secret, it can happen if townies don't get lazy and dumb after D1 mafia lynch.
Which usually happens.
so, instead of posting a list of people and say "lynch here and there and ggnore" continue find mafia. this goes to everyone, not only to you.
|
I promise i will look more closely onto Sulfurus in case i am alive on D2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
