|
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
Isnt posting meaningless lists about every one in the game a way that mafia try to do to buy town cred. By being non commital you are trying to keep you options open so nothing can be used against you later. In fact the first guide that is posted in this thread states that what you just did is something scum do to try and hide. Why would a townie try and do something like that. I would say you are reading a diffrent section of the guide.
## Vote Obvious.660
On July 17 2012 20:39 calgar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 13:30 iamperfection wrote:
And two can play at this game calgar i still got my eye on you. You've managed to vaguely reply to my post, yet you've addressed none of the content. You've lurked and been generally unproductive. You come in and point two fingers immediately but fail to later support your case. You get your case from another person and add no thought to it. You use poor logic and disregard my direct questions to you. ##Vote iamperfection
I remove my FOS calgar
I dont think a scum player would just outright vote for me after i acussed them.
And if anyone elses wants to come after the perfect one i say bring it.
|
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
Your "contribution" is a giant summary post listing each person and a thought about them? Even tube's posting wasn't this bad, because it would have taken him about a week's worth of posting to provide this much clutter. My vote is in the right place, and going nowhere.
|
You didn't actually make a strong case against anyone, so that post honestly just makes me think scum.
Additionally, your responses to the initial votes against you seemed a little too concerned on your part.
This one in particular:
On July 17 2012 10:29 Obvious.660 wrote:
@JingleHell hi. I'm the guy who noted you used a colloquialism and defended you for it earlier. Anyone can throw anyone to the wolves. Take them out in back of the barn and shoot them. Leave them for dead. Thanks for letting me know my figures of speech are tells when they match anything ever said or used in a mafia game. I'll try to avoid them if it makes you feel better.
Please, take everything I say and compare it to everything ever written about scum. When you're done, you can lynch me and watch me flip town.
Such nonsense.
You took YourHarry's early vote against you seemingly way too seriously, it was obvious he had no case whatsoever at that point.
This combined with your sudden misread on me and then backtrack immediately after you get called out for it leads me to
## Vote Obvious.660
Also, I'm still suspicious of Mufaa and Evul simply because of their conspicuously inactive play. Furthermore, what few posts they made ended up useless to town.
Fulla you really need to post more, you're probably in the same boat in everyone else's eyes.
|
My (Mini) Case against YourHarry
So far, YourHarry’s play is ringing a lot of alarm-bells for me. He’s posted very little content, he’s never explained his opinions, and he’s displayed a very different mentality from his town play in his last game (Newbie Mini Mafia XX).
A Quick Meta Summary
NOTE: “Meta” is strictly supplemental evidence. Consider my entire case before dismissing it a as a simple meta argument.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066&user=106290
A quick look at YourHarry’s first two pages of filters reveals an active and genuine player.
He makes genuine cases, real analysis, and longer posts. He’s willing to throw his votes around, but does so decisively and explains his reasoning. Take a look at some of the below posts to get a feel for YourHarry’s town play in Newbie Mini Mafia XX:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=5#94 - Defends LazerMonkey early in the game.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=7#129 - Votes JingleHell for pressure, explains reasoning
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=8#152 - Clearly explains reasoning for Unvoting JingleHell
In summary, he clearly gives reasoning for all his actions, displays urgency to catch scum, and is willing to defend people he believes are coming under unjust attacks. Very townie behavior.
YourHarry in this game is a very different person in a Mafia-Oriented Way
YourHarry’s Scummy Play
YourHarry’s actions have no reasoning. His vote against Obvious.660 consists of the following justifications:
On July 16 2012 14:07 YourHarry wrote:
##Vote Obvious.660
Obvious scum
BTW, "wait and see" does not mean that we should actively stop what we are discussing to see what happens. It could mean, carry on with discussions and finger pointing and see where our scum hunting leads us.
On July 17 2012 11:31 YourHarry wrote:
Obvious.660 is obviously mafia. Kill with fire.
On July 17 2012 11:36 YourHarry wrote:
KILL OBVIOUS.660!!!
He still has not provided justification for this, and despite his early provocations, withdrew his vote without any justification, AGAIN. Note his wishy-washy tone and emphasis on stalling.
Despite what I said about needing to start voting, I don't know who to vote. I will reconsider tomorrow morning
##Unvote
Furthermore, this contradicts directly with a post he made earlier:
On July 17 2012 14:59 YourHarry wrote:
With 17 hours left, we should start making votes - just to allow us to see the direction of the lynch.
More than just the contradiction, this is anti-town mentality. He basically suggests us to throw votes for no reason, which will serve no purpose other than to create chaos and panic. 17 hours from the deadline is no time to be panicking over a lynch, especially with the burst of posting over the last few hours.
Finally, I find his “suspicion” against me the polar opposite of his townie play.
On July 17 2012 14:56 YourHarry wrote:
Based on meta alone, I find Hapha suspicious. He hasn't yet to post his signature lengthy analysis on players he find suspicious.
Of course, the easy answer is that he hasn't found anyone suspicious.
Look how indecisive this post is. He gives unclear reasoning, then quickly backtracks on it with an explanation. The ENTIRE goal of the post is to spread suspicion instead of making a read.
Overall, I think YourHarry is the most suspicious player so far. His thought process and character has been very different than that of his townie persona. Furthermore, he’s produced no content, posted many one-liners, and his posts incite panic and suspicion without providing reasoning.
##Vote YourHarry
|
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again.
|
@ Fulla - Start posting NOW. It's inexcusable to have 1 post at this point in the game.
|
On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
I would appreciate it if you explained what I did that was suspicious.
On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again.
"Many lengthy posts" doesn't indicate townie in any way.
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote:
There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
You call this "clear reasoning"?
He still wants to lynch me because supposedly I didn't use enough quotes and should be read more carefully. -No analysis provided-
And again, I don't think someone truly playing recklessly would be so offended by an early, empty vote; nor would they be so heavily concerned that they may not survive that they would make a summary post rather than address the accusations against them.
|
On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again.
And Hapahauli kicks off his usual behavior of trying to railroad the town, based on his oh so exemplary record of finding one whole scum in Newbie XX, and conveniently ignoring all the bad cases he personally had going there while knocking any cases he disliked from it.
/yawn
I'll just stick with ignoring you, thanks.
|
Going through Obvious's filter:
- Obvious.660 looks at YourHarry's early vote and manages to turn it into a big 'sacraficial lamb' strategy involving iamperfection and some unknown third scum (soon to be accused: tube)
- Responds to Jingle with an 'If I was Mafia...blah blah blah" Unacceptable as a defense due to WIFOM.
- Spends time trying to get tube to contribute. When tube finally steps up, he goes through a 'coached response, kill it' phase.
- Gets called out and somehow relates his vote back to his crazy sacrificial lamb strategy
- Says he got thrown off by the Capitalization, punctuation and paragraphs used by tube - after we spent so long ragging on tube for being useless and asking him to improve his posting. Obvious.660 was involved in asking tube to improve his posting.
Obvious.660's whole interaction regarding tube looks scummy. More to follow later, my vote remains on Fulla for the time being, but I'm heavily considering switching to Obvious.660
|
I don't find Obvious.660's "list" suspicious at all. While he lists people, his motive is to make all his thoughts and reads known as opposed to pointing out individual suspicious. In addition, look at his posts on drwiggl3s and Calgar - why on earth would he establish the "townieness" of people if he was mafia? It goes against mafia motive to cast suspicion on as many people as possible.
There was a similar player in the last game I played (Mackin). He was a townie, but often provided his information/reads in "list" posts like these.
In short, while it can be interpreted as suspicious, it doesn't read as such.
|
On July 18 2012 00:02 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again. And Hapahauli kicks off his usual behavior of trying to railroad the town, based on his oh so exemplary record of finding one whole scum in Newbie XX, and conveniently ignoring all the bad cases he personally had going there while knocking any cases he disliked from it. /yawn I'll just stick with ignoring you, thanks.
Jingle. I don't want us getting into a dickfight again in this game. It'll only create chaos in the town. I will make every effort to remain civil with you, and all I ask you provide reasoning for your opinions as opposed to dismissing my case based on my "ego" or whatever.
|
On July 18 2012 00:10 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:02 JingleHell wrote:On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again. And Hapahauli kicks off his usual behavior of trying to railroad the town, based on his oh so exemplary record of finding one whole scum in Newbie XX, and conveniently ignoring all the bad cases he personally had going there while knocking any cases he disliked from it. /yawn I'll just stick with ignoring you, thanks. Jingle. I don't want us getting into a dickfight again in this game. It'll only create chaos in the town. I will make every effort to remain civil with you, and all I ask you provide reasoning for your opinions as opposed to dismissing my case based on my "ego" or whatever.
Are you blind, or just ignoring everything you disagree with again? I already provided my reasoning for voting on Obvious, and you dismissed it completely, based purely on WIFOM and assumptions. You're a brick wall in an argument, so I'm not going to bother. Would you like me to link some posts (which you ignored completely) explaining why you're at the very least not worth the bother of arguing against, and in some ways, have the potential to be bad for town?
Would you like me remind you of the BassInSpace case you were busily trying to tear to shreds? You know, the guy we lynched in part because of my ego, who was the LAST SCUM?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1001
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1007
|
On July 18 2012 00:18 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 00:10 Hapahauli wrote:On July 18 2012 00:02 JingleHell wrote:On July 17 2012 23:43 Hapahauli wrote:
I believe YourHarry to be a better lynch case than Tube or Obvious.660 at this stage of the game.
While Tube has made some suspicious posts, he's waaaaay too upfront/naieve about his suspicious behavior, and comes across as a really really bad townie player. Suspicion alone is not enough to lynch someone - its more important to look for Mafia Motive.
Obvious.660 reads as pretty townie to me. He has many lengthy posts, provides clear reasoning for his actions, is playing recklessly. I don't understand the bandwagon at all, and this looks all too similar to the "LYNCH LAZERMONKEY" bandwagon on Day 1 in Newbie Mini Mafia XX. I don't want to spend pages and pages screaming in his defense this game, but I will do if we do this bandwagon shit again. And Hapahauli kicks off his usual behavior of trying to railroad the town, based on his oh so exemplary record of finding one whole scum in Newbie XX, and conveniently ignoring all the bad cases he personally had going there while knocking any cases he disliked from it. /yawn I'll just stick with ignoring you, thanks. Jingle. I don't want us getting into a dickfight again in this game. It'll only create chaos in the town. I will make every effort to remain civil with you, and all I ask you provide reasoning for your opinions as opposed to dismissing my case based on my "ego" or whatever. Are you blind, or just ignoring everything you disagree with again? I already provided my reasoning for voting on Obvious, and you dismissed it completely, based purely on WIFOM and assumptions. You're a brick wall in an argument, so I'm not going to bother. Would you like me to link some posts (which you ignored completely) explaining why you're at the very least not worth the bother of arguing against, and in some ways, have the potential to be bad for town? Would you like me remind you of the BassInSpace case you were busily trying to tear to shreds? You know, the guy we lynched in part because of my ego, who was the LAST SCUM? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1001http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=349066¤tpage=51#1007
So what? I made a mistake about Bass. Most of my case was based off his voting pattern rather than the content of his posts, which were suspicious in hindsight (took wishy-washy stances on Mackin/YourHarry).
However, may I remind you about LazerMonkey, who you relentlessly tried to lynch D1 despite him flipping townie at the end? Obvious.660 reminds me more of LazerMonkey - I'm defending him based on his posting style and tone. How on earth is he more suspicious than YourHarry?
|
Do you not see the inherent hypocrisy of your last post, Hapa? Do you not see how you're doing exactly what I was talking about in the posts I linked?
|
Haph. Regards to meta. While I believe that meta is very useful in determining town/scum alignments, I do not think it's useful to simply compare the length of the posts. Scum Harry does know that people like you, jingle, and hopeless would keep his eyes on my posts to compare meta from our previous game. I would be motivated to emulate the types of posts I made in Newbie XX, to mislead you guys that I am, yet again, town. And it would be easy to do - especially, if the length of the posts is the one thing I need to emulate. Look for my motivation of the posts - which I admit is lacking - because I am not sure who is suspicious. But in my defense, I did read every post in this thread.
As for your accusation for wishy-washy comments and voting Obvious.660 without reason... do you really think this goes against my meta? I think I have also done quick voting in XX without much reason. It is true that in this game I practically provided 0 reason, LOL, but hopefully that should not make me more scummy. Also, sometimes I would like the person I am accusing to make a guess at why I am accusing him.
You also accused me of trying to "spread suspicion" rather the give reads. I haven't given much read, except to point out that you Hapha were suspicious for not making one of your signature analysis. In my original post, I too cited the length of the posts in analyzing your meta, so yes that would be a contradiction to what I am writing in this post.
In regards to Obvious.660, I don't know why people find that suspicious. He was simply giving out his reads on all of the players. Non-noncommittal, you say? Just because he didn't vote? As a town, you often do feel unsure about town/scum alignments of players. Just because I express that I am not sure player X is town or scum, should not make me scummy. It's true.
|
EDBWOP: You also accused me of trying to "spread suspicion" rather the give reads. But giving reads is, in effect, spreading suspicion. I make a town read, and I am trying to share my analysis with other players to discuss and affirm my reads. Another way to call that would be "spread suspicion". It is true that I haven't given much read, except to point out that you Hapha were suspicious for not making one of your signature analysis. In my original post, I too cited the length of the posts in analyzing your meta, so yes that would be a contradiction to what I am writing in this post.
|
Considering he's accusing me of tunneling too much, and you of spreading too much suspicion, I'd just assume it's yet another case of Hapa being Hapa.
|
On July 18 2012 00:44 YourHarry wrote:
Haph. Regards to meta. While I believe that meta is very useful in determining town/scum alignments, I do not think it's useful to simply compare the length of the posts. Scum Harry does know that people like you, jingle, and hopeless would keep his eyes on my posts to compare meta from our previous game. I would be motivated to emulate the types of posts I made in Newbie XX, to mislead you guys that I am, yet again, town. And it would be easy to do - especially, if the length of the posts is the one thing I need to emulate. Look for my motivation of the posts - which I admit is lacking - because I am not sure who is suspicious. But in my defense, I did read every post in this thread.
As for your accusation for wishy-washy comments and voting Obvious.660 without reason... do you really think this goes against my meta? I think I have also done quick voting in XX without much reason. It is true that in this game I practically provided 0 reason, LOL, but hopefully that should not make me more scummy. Also, sometimes I would like the person I am accusing to make a guess at why I am accusing him.
You also accused me of trying to "spread suspicion" rather the give reads. I haven't given much read, except to point out that you Hapha were suspicious for not making one of your signature analysis. In my original post, I too cited the length of the posts in analyzing your meta, so yes that would be a contradiction to what I am writing in this post.
In regards to Obvious.660, I don't know why people find that suspicious. He was simply giving out his reads on all of the players. Non-noncommittal, you say? Just because he didn't vote? As a town, you often do feel unsure about town/scum alignments of players. Just because I express that I am not sure player X is town or scum, should not make me scummy. It's true.
In regards to your Obvious.660 voting, it's extremely different from your previous game. Quick voting is one thing. Quick voting without reasoning is entirely another. In the previous game, you were very upfront about using Quickvoting for pressure. In this game, it looks like you're doing it for shits and giggles. Its also worth saying that my meta argument is entirely supplementary, and is used to reinforce the other points: your one-liners, lack of reasoning, and lack of content are all extremely suspicious. I also highly doubt you all of a sudden switched your townie posting style to this in order to prove your innocence via. some crazy WIFOM meta thing.
In regard to "spreading suspicion" - the tone and manner is highly scummy. I would have no objections if you immediately FOS'd me, saying that me not having posted a long case was a scumtell. However, you backtracked on it immediately after you said it. What purpose could that post have other than creating suspicion? I KNOW you're capapble of being decisive, yet you didn't do it.
|
@ JIngle - This is your case on Obvious:
You voted for Obvious based on his "suspicious" vote for tube. While it was a bad read and a stupid play, I don't find it suspicious. His tone is genuine, and he acknowledges the reasons for his mistake - in no way does it "deflect" or "mislead." Bad votes =/= suspicious votes, there has to be an identifiable mafia-motive/manner, and there isn't one.
You're suspicious of the "sacrificial lamb thing" - this again comes across as reckless/stupid, not suspicious. Do you honestly think mafia would post something like that? Its reckless, and even if its "stupid", its a townie trait.
Your'e suspicious of his "give you a chance before I throw you under the bus" quote. You just take him out of context and misinterpret his definition of "bus".
You're supsicious of his "list" post. I explained why I don't think its suspicious. Remember Mackin?
...and that's it. Now why are you not suspicious of YourHarry? I think he's a far better D1 lynch.
|
On July 18 2012 00:50 JingleHell wrote:
Considering he's accusing me of tunneling too much, and you of spreading too much suspicion, I'd just assume it's yet another case of Hapa being Hapa.
For christ sake Jingle - the backhanded comments are getting rediculous. Exactly how do you think this helps the town? Cut it out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
