|
Hi Scott!
What happens to the votes cast for sqrt?
|
On June 05 2016 06:26 MoosyDoosy wrote:The difference is I try to be annoying, vague, terrible, and disgusting at the game on purpose. That is, unless QuickTwist is trying to be all these things too. 
Why? Facade so it would be harder to read you?
|
On June 05 2016 09:33 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 09:03 Jealous wrote:On June 05 2016 06:26 MoosyDoosy wrote:The difference is I try to be annoying, vague, terrible, and disgusting at the game on purpose. That is, unless QuickTwist is trying to be all these things too. Why? Facade so it would be harder to read you? Well, it's supposed to be bait for D1 ya know? If you play bad,Mafia will go for you thinking you're an easy mislynch. Unfortunately it's just a case of low hanging fruit and I've had Mafia's go for me every game. :D This style's actually worked out every game I've used it in except for two. One where I nailed 2 Mafia on D1 but got lynched because a major town with a lot of pull said to kill me and the second where I was tunneled.  But regardless, town's managed to get a Mafia from my antics most of the time.  Unfortunately, everyone in TL who's a veteran has pretty much wised up to my antics which means no one falls for my BS anymore. But I find it pretty fun so I just go ahead with the style anyway. So yeah, I guess it's a facade to make it difficult to read me but at this point every veteran can read me.
I see. Too bad you've shown your hand to all the newcomers as well ^^ Stay safe!
What does tunneled mean btw?
|
On June 05 2016 11:30 nnn_thekushmountains wrote:
driving from maine to kentucky. please kill me.
Try to enjoy it I used to like long drives like that, lots of introspect time.
|
On June 05 2016 12:02 MoosyDoosy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 10:12 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 03:02 MoosyDoosy wrote:On June 05 2016 01:25 Tumblewood wrote:
Upon further review, QT v. Jealous might be a town v. town argument, but I'm hesitant because it's not quite a shitfight-- QT is townreading jealous while bickering with him, although I do get the sense that jealous believes and cares about what he says.
BTW, those arguments on the basis of "tryhard" are because tryhard has an inherent component of insecurity, which is a big scumtell in newbies. yes! the worst part of the argument for me is that QuickTwist is not upfront about his explanations. He answers questions in a roundabout manner and gets frustrated when people don't understand him halfway through it. I'm also fairly certain a couple of his explanations were lies such as the tests he seems to keep putting up for Jealous and Tumblewood in making sure they're "paying attention". It could be a sign of a townie very uncomfortable under pressure and lashing out about it, and I've certainly done it before but it's still very bothering for me. Show me proof of this. The real question here is how do you know? I can't prove it unless I'm you but that's just the feeling I get. Players do it all the time to get others off their backs. Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 10:16 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 03:02 MoosyDoosy wrote:On June 05 2016 01:25 Tumblewood wrote:
Upon further review, QT v. Jealous might be a town v. town argument, but I'm hesitant because it's not quite a shitfight-- QT is townreading jealous while bickering with him, although I do get the sense that jealous believes and cares about what he says.
BTW, those arguments on the basis of "tryhard" are because tryhard has an inherent component of insecurity, which is a big scumtell in newbies. yes! the worst part of the argument for me is that QuickTwist is not upfront about his explanations. He answers questions in a roundabout manner and gets frustrated when people don't understand him halfway through it. I'm also fairly certain a couple of his explanations were lies such as the tests he seems to keep putting up for Jealous and Tumblewood in making sure they're "paying attention". It could be a sign of a townie very uncomfortable under pressure and lashing out about it, and I've certainly done it before but it's still very bothering for me. you have to ask yourself if that is all I've done. Do you think I explained myself well enough with me debate with Jealous? Maybe I'm just not coming up with the way you would answer and that is scummy to you? As I said in my post, I understand why you would do something like that so that should say to you I've answered like that before. As for whether it's scummy or not, I did say it could be town struggling or scum so that's answered too. Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 10:21 QuickTwist wrote:
OK, I feel like Jealous could be town or scum right now depending.
If he is being honest in saying I am detriment to Town then he is prolly town. If he is being dishonest, then he is just pushing an agenda.
For that reason we need to find out the way Jealous plays this game. IIRC no one has meta on him? This is a problem. So I suggest people try to catch him lying and see where that leads. Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 09:36 Jealous wrote:On June 05 2016 09:33 MoosyDoosy wrote:On June 05 2016 09:03 Jealous wrote:On June 05 2016 06:26 MoosyDoosy wrote:The difference is I try to be annoying, vague, terrible, and disgusting at the game on purpose. That is, unless QuickTwist is trying to be all these things too. Why? Facade so it would be harder to read you? Well, it's supposed to be bait for D1 ya know? If you play bad,Mafia will go for you thinking you're an easy mislynch. Unfortunately it's just a case of low hanging fruit and I've had Mafia's go for me every game. :D This style's actually worked out every game I've used it in except for two. One where I nailed 2 Mafia on D1 but got lynched because a major town with a lot of pull said to kill me and the second where I was tunneled. But regardless, town's managed to get a Mafia from my antics most of the time. Unfortunately, everyone in TL who's a veteran has pretty much wised up to my antics which means no one falls for my BS anymore. But I find it pretty fun so I just go ahead with the style anyway. So yeah, I guess it's a facade to make it difficult to read me but at this point every veteran can read me. I see. Too bad you've shown your hand to all the newcomers as well ^^ Stay safe! What does tunneled mean btw? Yeah, there's no point in hiding my meta right now. It's my gimmick against vets but doesn't work against new players. It just distracts them which is a detriment especially with town players like beentheredonethat. tunneled means focusing on one person so much you can't see anything else and basically convince yourself that you're right.
I see, thanks for the response. Seems like a pretty easy pit to fall into, haha.
|
What happens if someone doesn't vote once?
|
On June 05 2016 14:12 QuickTwist wrote:
This thread is completely dead.
I'm curious about that too. I'd expect veteran players to be more active than this and applying at least a little pressure. However, I guess that without any flips or role results, there isn't much to work off of.
|
On June 05 2016 15:00 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 14:27 Jealous wrote:On June 05 2016 14:12 QuickTwist wrote:
This thread is completely dead. I'm curious about that too. I'd expect veteran players to be more active than this and applying at least a little pressure. However, I guess that without any flips or role results, there isn't much to work off of. Maybe maybe not, but that's no excuse not to post.
Also, it's around midnight-2 am in America, which is where most of the posters on this forum are from I'm guessing.
|
On June 04 2016 08:30 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2016 08:24 QuickTwist wrote:On June 04 2016 08:23 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 08:21 Superbia wrote:On June 04 2016 08:20 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 08:18 Superbia wrote:On June 04 2016 08:17 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 08:12 Superbia wrote:On June 04 2016 08:12 Jealous wrote:On June 04 2016 08:08 Superbia wrote:
[quote]
Wow I'm already pocketed. Nice.
Good job calling me town. I like that. I may be inclined to call you town too at some later stage. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/collusion What could it mean? It could mean that your playful tete-a-tete in the early stages of Day 1 could be a means to generate posts, thus aiming to remove any suspicion placed upon you for inactivity when one clicks your posting summary, and could be a means to suggest that you are both green or blue. Both of these aims could signify the opposite. So essentially.. nothing and everything? :D Not at all. It is the most suspect thing I've seen in this thread so far. Usually it's NAI (wow these pro acronyms, amirite). Depends on the person. I spam as either alignment. That's a convenient strategy, but why would a newcomer to TL Mafia whom I imagine you have no prior experience with respond in the same manner besides collusion? Try not to confirmation bias, please. Confirmation bias is attributing new information as support for preconceived notions. I am using only one piece of information as support for a notion that was conceived as a result of this information and not any prior interpretation I had of you or Superbia (of which there was none, as I know none of you).
I don't think people want to re-read this conversation which ended with you not responding to this.
|
On June 05 2016 18:50 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 17:51 Fecalfeast wrote:On June 05 2016 17:16 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 16:55 Fecalfeast wrote:
I'm honestly not going to have much time to play until later tomorrow so I'm parking my vote on my preliminary scumread.
I promise to go through the day in the night and maybe some d1 vca but i haven't been home in days. I will be tomorrow though I'm sorry what? You have no vote yet. WTF, man?!?! Yeah I do I see no vote in the vote thread by you. Mind explaining?
Bruh
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/509798-newbie-student-mafia-xxi-voting-thread?page=2#23
|
On June 05 2016 19:08 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 19:07 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 18:58 Jealous wrote:On June 05 2016 18:50 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 17:51 Fecalfeast wrote:On June 05 2016 17:16 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 16:55 Fecalfeast wrote:
I'm honestly not going to have much time to play until later tomorrow so I'm parking my vote on my preliminary scumread.
I promise to go through the day in the night and maybe some d1 vca but i haven't been home in days. I will be tomorrow though I'm sorry what? You have no vote yet. WTF, man?!?! Yeah I do I see no vote in the vote thread by you. Mind explaining? Bruh http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/mafia/509798-newbie-student-mafia-xxi-voting-thread?page=2#23 My mistake. I didn't see there was a second page, herp derp.
When viewing your posts, you can either go here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/mytlnet/myposts.php
And click on the grey arrow by the end of the thread name to jump to the most recent page, or
http://www.teamliquid.net/mytlnet/mythreads.php
And click on the grey number in the parentheses to jump to the first post you have not yet seen in the thread.
Both of these are on the top right of the site header, next to your account name (My Posts under your name, My Threads is the folder icon).
|
|
|
tOn June 06 2016 01:02 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2016 00:34 Tictock wrote:
Ok first thing I feel like talking about, reading based on activity.
Generally I find this to be an unreliable metric. There is some correlation, but it depends pretty heavily on the player in question. Scum can be tryhard and post a ton and town can loose interest or get busy and post very little.
My point?
Plynches based on activity tend to be coin flippy and giving someone a townread kus they are active and posting is weak at best.
It's generally better practice to try and look at the reasons and modivations behind when and why people are posting rather than try and use filter length as a metic. There are some exceptions such as scum-burn out, but even then activity alone is usually not your only indicator.
So the reads I've seen so far like "This dude made a hello post then left! Lynch the scum!" or "Well he's posting a lot so I think he's town" are pretty piss poor imo. IIoA
What's that? Inconclusive indicator of alignment?? <- Just a guess.
On June 06 2016 02:47 QuickTwist wrote:
So apparently, I am getting lynched today for giving town a shit ton of stuff to talk about. OK.
That's a false generalization of the arguments presented against you and your defeatist tone reminds me of how I posted when I was Mafia in one of my games way back when. This post to me reads like a weak and desperate last-minute defense.
|
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago.
|
On June 06 2016 04:08 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 04:06 Jealous wrote:t On June 06 2016 01:02 QuickTwist wrote:On June 05 2016 00:34 Tictock wrote:
Ok first thing I feel like talking about, reading based on activity.
Generally I find this to be an unreliable metric. There is some correlation, but it depends pretty heavily on the player in question. Scum can be tryhard and post a ton and town can loose interest or get busy and post very little.
My point?
Plynches based on activity tend to be coin flippy and giving someone a townread kus they are active and posting is weak at best.
It's generally better practice to try and look at the reasons and modivations behind when and why people are posting rather than try and use filter length as a metic. There are some exceptions such as scum-burn out, but even then activity alone is usually not your only indicator.
So the reads I've seen so far like "This dude made a hello post then left! Lynch the scum!" or "Well he's posting a lot so I think he's town" are pretty piss poor imo. IIoA What's that? Inconclusive indicator of alignment?? <- Just a guess. On June 06 2016 02:47 QuickTwist wrote:
So apparently, I am getting lynched today for giving town a shit ton of stuff to talk about. OK. That's a false generalization of the arguments presented against you and your defeatist tone reminds me of how I posted when I was Mafia in one of my games way back when. This post to me reads like a weak and desperate last-minute defense. I told you not to confirmation bias, but you continue to do it nontheless. Very disappointing.
That's a weak defense as well, because I called you on your false generalization, which is the contributing factor to my consequent line of reasoning.
|
Also, I would like to note that Superbia's unvote in the voting thread wasn't counted by the most recent vote count. Why is that? Did he use the wrong syntax??
|
On June 06 2016 04:26 Jealous wrote:
Also, I would like to note that Superbia's unvote in the voting thread wasn't counted by the most recent vote count. Why is that? Did he use the wrong syntax??
Actually, he is just listed twice.
EBWOP
|
On June 06 2016 04:43 Superbia wrote:
I can't unvote. My vote is too strong for that.
Jealous, who are your strongest towns?
At the moment, my strongest town leanings are on Tictock and Skynx. I will have to re-read the past few pages again because I feel I may not have fully understood the scumreads other people have about them, but I found their posts to be constructive and deductive, and are simply people I feel I could work with as a town circle based on demeanor. I guess I will summarize these as largely gutreads. I don't think I'm as good at reading town as I am inclined to read scum, perhaps because I am prioritizing finding scum as opposed to finding town, which when I put it this way sounds like a strategy with some holes in it haha.
|
On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous
Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you.
I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours.
I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop.
Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you.
|
On June 06 2016 05:02 Fecalfeast wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2016 05:01 Jealous wrote:On June 06 2016 04:45 QuickTwist wrote:On June 06 2016 04:21 Jealous wrote:
As far as the other posters, I'm glad that people have started pushing some ideas around as we approach the deadline. Here are some thoughts I have on the game so far:
1. I think that a lot of people in this thread are grasping at straws right now, which is understandable because there isn't much to go off of on Day 1. I don't see any utterly clear alliances here as of yet. It seems like a lot of A thinks B is scum who thinks C is scum who thinks D is scum who thinks A is scum, or something of the like.
2. Given the seemingly inconclusive finger-pointing patters so far, we will have to wait to see the results of the lynch and who voted for whom as our next indicator. As of right now, if my hypothesis is correct and QT is scum, then the people who voted alongside him without much early justification would be kushmountains and Tumblewood, who have not changed their vote despite the player being changed out and I found their arguments for removing sqrt to be weak in the first place (inactivity plynch 2 hours into the game, if I recall correctly? on top of that, other people were just as inactive). This is the most alliance-y thing I can point at so far, but it's too early for me to concretely say I feel that they are scum.
3. Following this line of logic, I don't feel that the votes/inclinations on QT are indicative of a scum alliance because most people have shown their own reasons for voting for QT, most of which are valid, or at least more valid in my eyes than a Scott lynch. Of course, if QT flips town it is possible that one or two scum bandwagoned in order to ensure that he wins over Scott in the last voting push, but it will be hard to tell who. It's simply too early to speculate in specific terms about who would be scum or not in this hypothetical scenario, so I will wait until I see all of the votes and their results.
4. I haven't gotten a strong read on anyone, which is probably because I'm newbie. So far my "could be scum" list is:
1. Kushmountains
2. Tumblewood
3. Superbia (weak read on this, don't have much certainty at all)
4. Fecalfeast (too absent, regardless of whatever excuses he may have)
and of course QT.
Everyone else, as far as I can tell, is townie. Scott can be thrown up there as well for his relative inactivity but I don't think it's fair to judge as quickly because he only learned he was in the game less than 24 hours ago. What if I said YOU could be scum if I turn out to be Town. Baseless you think? Honestly it is really freaking annoying you haven't re-evaluated your read on me and somehow everything I do is scummy to you. That is the definition of confirmation bias. So because you have chosen to no re-evaluate your read on me, even though my content has improved as the shit posting of day 1 decreases. can't help but think you are pushing an agenda. Claiming VT. ##Vote: Jealous Your only concrete argument as far as I recall is the one you just made, which is that I am pushing an agenda, so it's not entirely baseless. However, as objective as I can possibly be about this, I would have to say that your argument is weak. The majority of the town has read me as town, and for some that was a choice between scumreading me or you. I will concede that your posting has definitely improved since the first 24 hours. I see what you mean by confirmation bias now more clearly. I will justify by saying it is akin to how one approaches science: you formulate a hypothesis, run a test, gather some data, try to ascertain a conclusion. Then you present your article for peer review. So far peer review has corroborated my initial findings. The initial results will be put to the test after we see the flop. Although you claimed Blue PR since the first minutes of the game, which could've meant anything since you were shitposting a lot in that time, this is the first time you've claimed VT. MoosyDoosy also claimed VT, if I'm correct in assuming VT = Veteran, but his posting has been inconsistent too. I'm not saying this to make any sort of point, just doing stream of consciousness at the moment. I don't think it'd be wise of you to claim Blue PR if you actually were a Blue PR in the first minutes of the game, because scum would know that you are not scum, and thus when both the Day 1 lynch and the first scum kill are relative stabs in the dark, this seems like a poor strategy because it paints a target on your back. Of course, this could backfire and cause us to do scum's work for them, but I believe that there is no stronger case right now for anyone else and thus I will maintain my vote for you. VT is Vanilla Townie which makes his new claim more dubious imo
Ah, oops. My apologies, disregard the last line of reasoning in its current form.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
