|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:36 Gravan wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 23:53 imallinson wrote:I think the general consensus is that Ottox is scum and needs to get vig shot and I've said enough about him already so I'll leave that as is. On to who needs lynching tomorrow. I'm convinced at this point that Gravan needs lynching. His filter reads like textbook scum tactics. On September 05 2012 09:38 Gravan wrote:First, the straightforward part. It seems to me that Matt is most likely an assassin, or a very careless player. As many have said before me, there is no case for him to do what he did from a town perspective. To me, it seems that if he were mafia or town, we would likely have seen at least some kind of attempt at an explanation - either to strengthen his fellow mafia by giving them 'towncred' as they jump on his bandwagon or to try to convince us we are making a mistake as a town blue. As an assassin, he could just be seeing his end and giving up - this is of course moot if he decides to put in his piece later. Since he is apparently not a random newbie (who is a random newb, anyway  ?), and clearly likes to be an active player, it shouts assasinto me. Since it is day 1 and we only have so much information, we essentially have to lynch him anyway (even if we were nearly certain he is an assassin. At this time, I'll be throwing my vote his way. On September 05 2012 13:30 Gravan wrote:On September 05 2012 13:00 Hapahauli wrote:
Why is he voting Mattchew if he's convinced he's an assassin? Hell that post doesn't really explain why he's even voting - "we essentially have to lynch him anyway" - wut? This is my fault for wording this sentence poorly. Although I am still leaning towards Matt being an assassin, he certainly looks all kinds of scummy as well. There isn't enough information at this point to lynch someone else - this lynch will, at worst, be neutral. I feel that, unless someone who has better evidence against them comes up (unlikely) we are better off to make this lynch and gain the information (Matt's flip) than sit idle. I am just asserting that I personally think he is an assassin. I'm done on the whole Matt issue now; still working on making my posts more constructive and less parrot-y. If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at. Ottox has been making his bizarre crusade about the potential innocence of Matt, as everyone knows. To me, Toad's last few posts have seemed a little aimless and very personally aggressive with little content. He spends a considerable amount of time shutting down and pointing at Ottox (who is looking obviously scummy or very misguided) in a well written post, then shifts to personal attacks and negligent remarks. His first post with any content is a soft defence of Matt. Along with Ottox this is meant to take town discussion away from anything useful and focussing it on whether Matt is assassin or scum. The second post is the same soft defence as the first but also starts trying to put Toad under the spotlight. The last part makes no sense because he thinks Toad is scummy for attacking Ottox who he also thinks is scum. The shift from well written to angry attacks isn't due to toad being scummy it's due to Ottox not listening to anybody. Once everyone piles on Ottox he backs away from this position while Ottox is taking the spotlight. When Matt is lynched and flips red there is no follow up to the previous posts. He avoids the subject entirely hoping it will slip under everyone's radar. On September 06 2012 10:16 Gravan wrote:I think Bill Murray is scum. Also, Hapahauli, what is your read on Gravan? Scum or town? I don't want you using the word Null. Pick one. Scum or town? Consider yourself having a Gun to your head. This is the first time he mentions me. At this point, he hasn't put forward any kind of read on me at all. In addition, many of his posts up until this point (not to mention quite a few afterward) are pointless one-liners, or just generally non-contributing. The next thing he does is tell austin to read my filter as if I was scum (again, not argument put forward on his part - he is talking as if me being scum is a forgone conclusion). + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:18 austinmcc wrote:
Show nested quote +
Looking through his profile, I see his only other game was LIII. So he's at least played, although not with me. But he knows that some of the people in this game played that game, he played with them, he knows they are competent individuals with functioning brains.
It's the first time I've ever seen someone cling to something absolutely wrong in this manner. I have posted paranoid rants in two games, stuck by them for a while as possibilities, gotten upset if people wouldn't consider them as possibilities, but I didn't get like this.
Right now (and if Matt flips scum I will be more certain of the read) I can't help but read the whole thing like this:
Matt got caught
Ottoxlol tried to save him, without realizing how bad an idea it was
Ottoxlol shortly realized how bad an idea it was
A decent scum player told him right after he got caught looking very odd that he couldn't back off his defense, because then he'd look even scummier
So he went full bore nuts, and that's why he won't listen to anyone or anything
It doesn't feel like he's just obtuse. At some point he'd get the message. It feels like he's clinging to this.
Do me a favor, and go read Gravan's filter as if he were a scum idiot Then he goes on to say that hap is on his scumlist for "coaching" me. + Show Spoiler +On September 06 2012 07:23 Hapahauli wrote:
Show nested quote +
Null. Deal with it.
His posts/logic right now could come from either mafia or bad-townie. I don't have enough information to make a decision since hasn't posted much. Fortunately we have 48 hours to make a read on him.
yeah youre on my scum list
so is gravan
you openly coached him Afterwards, he includes doyouhas in this list. + Show Spoiler +filter
On September 06 2012 07:27 imallinson wrote:
Show nested quote +
I'd say Gravan looks real scummy right now. He attempted the same thing as Ottox, defending Matt by saying he was probably an assassin, but much more quietly and backed away as soon as he realised it was a bad idea. If anything that looks more scummy than Ottox at the moment.
THANK YOU.
Go read Gravan's filter, and tell me if you don't find hapa coaching him?
2nd person I've caught him coaching that looks like scum with him (Doyouhas is the other) His next two posts that mention me go on to mention (offhandedly) the apparently obvious need to have me shot by a vig. Further, if you read his filter he is very non-comittal on the otto-defending-matt-and-generally-acting-scummy issue. His posts are passively worded and just softly agree with the flow of the thread at the time. At this point he has contributed very little and people are starting to notice. So he does what any scum would in that situation and makes a case. The problem is, and what makes the case seem really scummy, the case reads like it is there just to be there, to look like he is contributing. It seems to be entirely based on the fact that BM hasn't contributed much yet which Gravan is more guilty of himself. It reeks of OMGUS. The rest of his few posts are trying to defend this terrible case on BM and some vague mentions of being suspicious of DrH. No where did I say Toad was scummy, I was just trying to focus the discussion elsewhere - at that time, everyone was going on and on about otto, which felt like a dead-horse topic to me. I suppose I could have also talked about matt, and said something to the effect of "oops, I guess I was wrong". What do you want from me here? I keep getting harped on for my 'terrible' case on Bill, but I still don't really see why he can aimlessly say I need to get shot and get away with it. From a scum perspective it makes sense to casually try to get townies killed by a vig/mislynch. But, from a townie perspective it makes sense to do what you are doing right now if you want someone to die; you make a reasoned case against them - pulling out all kinds of information in the process.
You didn't outright say toad was scummy but "If Matt flips scum, Ottox and Toad really need to be looked at" sounds like you think that's the case. The thing that makes you most scummy to me is that you don't stick to your reads and you don't back them up with good arguments. It makes it look like you know the people you say are scummy aren't actually scum, something you would only know if you were scum.
|
On September 07 2012 00:56 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 00:54 Shady Sands wrote:On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions. What town motive do you see? Welcome back - where the hell have you been? Did you not just read my damn post? I told you exactly why it's not scum motivated. The town motivation lies in him questioning a read he believes not to be true. Stupid? Absolutely. But as stated above, NOT mafia motivated.
Fell behind in this game and never got the chance to catch up. Voted Mattchew in this thread and got warned for it =S
Alright, got it. I'm still leery of players like this though, because if this is how he plays town, are you sure we want him around at MYLO/LYLO?
|
On September 07 2012 01:00 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 00:56 Hapahauli wrote:On September 07 2012 00:54 Shady Sands wrote:On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions. What town motive do you see? Welcome back - where the hell have you been? Did you not just read my damn post? I told you exactly why it's not scum motivated. The town motivation lies in him questioning a read he believes not to be true. Stupid? Absolutely. But as stated above, NOT mafia motivated. Fell behind in this game and never got the chance to catch up. Voted Mattchew in this thread and got warned for it =S Alright, got it. I'm still leery of players like this though, because if this is how he plays town, are you sure we want him around at MYLO/LYLO?
Yes, because there's a pretty good chance he's town. Again, does this make sense as mafia?
This is the last I'll say on Ottox, but I'll restate my main point one more time:
"Mafia Ottox" would have known Mattchew's alignment. Given this, it makes no sense for Ottox to hard-defend Mattchew after the lie is confirmed. Think about it - you know your teammate is mafia, and you know the entire thread knows he fakeclaimed. He just lost a member of your team, and his first impulse is to hard defend him?! Not only that, but to roll with it for pages?!
Key here is the information advantage of mafia.
|
I'mallinson, any trouble with this?On September 06 2012 08:22 austinmcc wrote:
But I'm having trouble with the timing of it all, and it's one reason I'm not too convinced about scum Gravan.
Matt claims nosy neighbor at 9:12 TL time, 9/4
Palmar confirms nosy neighbors are not self-aware at 18:17 TL time, 9/4
Gravan comes in with his passive post at 5:41, 9/5
Gravan starts talking about Matt and the assassin stuff at 9:38, 9/5
That bugs me. If Gravan is scum, then either he posted in thread without checking in QT, or checked QT before posting in thread. If he checked it, there's NO WAY that he wrote that crap. Right? No way do you limp into thread 20 hours after your scumbuddy got caught and 11 hours after it was confirmed he was caught and go "Hey guys, sorry." Then ESPECIALLY NO WAY do you wait 4 hours after that post and go "Okay I think he's an assassin." Right? And if he didn't check QT, he came back, posted that bad post, then had 4 hours. I'm guessing in that time he would have checked QT while reading thread, and same thing...you don't get that next post.
I know he's got more posts now, and I agree that the BM case is weak/OMGUSy. But I still don't see this guy as scum because I can't believe that scum would post that assassin bit so far after the time that Matt's goose was mod-cooked.
Are you okay with that timing? Do you think he just didn't read QT? You think that over the course of more than 10 hours scum didn't give explicit instructions for how to handle Matt in thread? You think they crafted this weird post for one scum member to call out matt as an assassin (and, if so, to what end, because clearly it's not making people find him town)?
|
imallison have you considered Gravan as newbie town or do you think the evidence shows otherwise? Also what do you make of his stance on Otto if you think both scum?
Because I'm seeing new town learning as he goes along. You can see how his post reflect the thread information at the time (indication that he is reading), and making what you consider bad arguments is alignment null. His case against BM is very reasonable - as a new player what would you do when you see someone dropping strings of 8 1-liners and being vague in general, and people ignoring him?
|
On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions.
Yes there might be!
It would fit his meta as posting without thinking! The first instinct a scum would have is defending his little buddy.
Nevertheless, you CANNOT use that as an argument to lower suspicion on someone. It boils down to WIFOM, how do you know that he didn't want you to think that? This exactly what I did, as scum, in XIV, I tried to desperately voteswitch on YH last minute thinking it would make me seem townie, but it had the extreme opposite effect.
It can easily be both things, so no conclusion can be drawn from his actions.
The reason I am inclined to think it goes on the scummier side of the fence is because of his meta, of how he just go ahead and sends posts without thinking about them. I am not convinced he is scum (I was after the "scumslip", but as you pointed out, it might have been meaningless as it implied having four mafia), but right now I am convinced that he is our best lynch. I don't think your case on Milton has enough on him to a point where he seems more scummy than otto.
Not at this moment anyways. Can you explain this point in made on him: A couple of questions he never pursues? I don't recall this from your posts. Also, why is When backing down from bad case, he passively questions another player pointed out to him w/out taking a stance" scum-motivated?
Also, if you want to include not going after his scumreads, making bad contributions, and general lurkiness, why do you still choose him over Mav? I personally think mav seems scummier because, unlike milton, he didn't even bother making a case on anyone. To me, that's scummier than making a bad case, as townies do it all the time.
|
@Hapa:
The mafia motivation for otto's actions is chaos and derailment of the thread. Look how much time has been spent between him ignoring cases and us still discussing the choice of putting a bullet through his head/noose around his neck tomorrow. It's almost as foregone as Mattchew's lynch was at this point. The question is whether we have to spend yet another cycle tomorrow discussing Ottoxlol.
I'm going through DYH's case on me to respond to it. If there's anything you want me to chime in on in the meantime I'll get to that after I respond to his case.
|
On September 07 2012 01:11 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 00:52 Hapahauli wrote:On September 06 2012 23:02 DarthPunk wrote:
...
You have not answered me previously so I will ask again. Why are you so intent on defending who you seem to believe to be town Otto? Especially when you have leapt all over other players for far less scummy actions? There is no scum motivation. Think about what the objectives of hard-defending a teammate as mafia are. The goal of hard-defending a teammate is to prevent their lynch. It’s pretty clear that defending someone after they have 20-something votes on them is not going to prevent said lynch, so how can it be a mafia objective? It’s not a mafia objective, it’s screamingly bad townie. By contrast, If the lynch was close between two candidates, hard-defending makes sense from a mafia perspective. It’s not smart, but there’s mafia-motive. Regarding the whole “Mattchew was stupid therefore Ottox could be stupid mafia” – that’s a load of BS. As stated above, there’s a huge difference between stupid and mafia-motivated stupid. So as for your questions: I don’t find Ottox scummy. I see a lot of town motivation (even if stupid) behind his actions. Yes there might be! It would fit his meta as posting without thinking! The first instinct a scum would have is defending his little buddy. Nevertheless, you CANNOT use that as an argument to lower suspicion on someone. It boils down to WIFOM, how do you know that he didn't want you to think that? This exactly what I did, as scum, in XIV, I tried to desperately voteswitch on YH last minute thinking it would make me seem townie, but it had the extreme opposite effect. It can easily be both things, so no conclusion can be drawn from his actions. The reason I am inclined to think it goes on the scummier side of the fence is because of his meta, of how he just go ahead and sends posts without thinking about them. I am not convinced he is scum (I was after the "scumslip", but as you pointed out, it might have been meaningless as it implied having four mafia), but right now I am convinced that he is our best lynch. I don't think your case on Milton has enough on him to a point where he seems more scummy than otto. Not at this moment anyways. Can you explain this point in made on him: A couple of questions he never pursues? I don't recall this from your posts. Also, why is When backing down from bad case, he passively questions another player pointed out to him w/out taking a stance" scum-motivated? Also, if you want to include not going after his scumreads, making bad contributions, and general lurkiness, why do you still choose him over Mav? I personally think mav seems scummier because, unlike milton, he didn't even bother making a case on anyone. To me, that's scummier than making a bad case, as townies do it all the time.
Big misapplication of "WIFOM." There's nothing WIFOM about it - there's no mafia objective that can be seen!
Regarding your voteswitch on YH at the last minute, that's a hell of a different scenario. You were wildly inconsistent on YH, hence suspicion on you. Does Ottox look inconsistent about Mattchew? Hell no - he was up to his eyeballs in confirmation bias.
I'm done discussing Ottox. You all are running around looking for suspicious things in his filter and ignoring the one thing that makes him blitheringly townie. He is not thinking like mafia. If he knew allignments, defending Mattchew after having his lie confirmed does not make any sense. Defending a confirmed mafia member and doing everything to attract attention to yourself when 20+votes are on said mafia member does not make sense, especially if you're 99% sure to get shot for it the next day.
Regarding Milton -
Milton is doing the bare minimum to act like he's contributing. His bad case (regardless of it being against me or not) doesn't help him. Also, his case was filled with misinformation as opposed to bad logic. The latter is townie, while the former is not. It's consistent with scum trying to contribute without actually contributing.
Regarding Mav -
We're just reading him differently. Again, I need to hear much more from him before I make a solid read. His meta suggests that his play so far is not indicative of his alignment. Bad townies are perfectly capable of not making cases, especially given the atmosphere of D1 (voting for confirmed scum, huge temptation to slack off).
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On September 07 2012 01:06 austinmcc wrote:I'mallinson, any trouble with this? Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 08:22 austinmcc wrote:
But I'm having trouble with the timing of it all, and it's one reason I'm not too convinced about scum Gravan.
Matt claims nosy neighbor at 9:12 TL time, 9/4
Palmar confirms nosy neighbors are not self-aware at 18:17 TL time, 9/4
Gravan comes in with his passive post at 5:41, 9/5
Gravan starts talking about Matt and the assassin stuff at 9:38, 9/5
That bugs me. If Gravan is scum, then either he posted in thread without checking in QT, or checked QT before posting in thread. If he checked it, there's NO WAY that he wrote that crap. Right? No way do you limp into thread 20 hours after your scumbuddy got caught and 11 hours after it was confirmed he was caught and go "Hey guys, sorry." Then ESPECIALLY NO WAY do you wait 4 hours after that post and go "Okay I think he's an assassin." Right? And if he didn't check QT, he came back, posted that bad post, then had 4 hours. I'm guessing in that time he would have checked QT while reading thread, and same thing...you don't get that next post. I know he's got more posts now, and I agree that the BM case is weak/OMGUSy. But I still don't see this guy as scum because I can't believe that scum would post that assassin bit so far after the time that Matt's goose was mod-cooked. Are you okay with that timing? Do you think he just didn't read QT? You think that over the course of more than 10 hours scum didn't give explicit instructions for how to handle Matt in thread? You think they crafted this weird post for one scum member to call out matt as an assassin (and, if so, to what end, because clearly it's not making people find him town)?
That's getting into the same reasoning as Ottox's reason why Matt wasn't scum, that because scum can talk with team mates they don't make mistakes. Your point makes sense if the scum team is working well together but we've had Matt's fake claim which is obviously scum doing something stupid. If you add to that Ottox who I think is scum doing all the stupid shit he has done I can see Gravan posting the soft defence of Matt before thinking and before looking at the QT. Obviously this alone wouldn't be a solid case, in the same way BM's point about Hapa coaching isn't enough to push a lynch on him, but with the rest of Gravan's posting being so lurky and faux contributing I think that Gravan is the best bet to lynch tomorrow.
On September 07 2012 01:07 slOosh wrote:
imallison have you considered Gravan as newbie town or do you think the evidence shows otherwise? Also what do you make of his stance on Otto if you think both scum?
Because I'm seeing new town learning as he goes along. You can see how his post reflect the thread information at the time (indication that he is reading), and making what you consider bad arguments is alignment null. His case against BM is very reasonable - as a new player what would you do when you see someone dropping strings of 8 1-liners and being vague in general, and people ignoring him?
It's certainly possible he is newbie town but I don't think that is a sufficient explanation for his scummy behaviour. Personally I've never played a game with BM before and seeing everyone ignore him I figured that not everyone can be scum so it must just be how BM is. Even if Gravan didn't reach the same conclusion the case reeks of scum making a light case on someone they think will be an easy target to seem to contribute to the thread.
As for Ottox and Gravan both being scum I think it's certainly possible. Notice Gravan doesn't talk about Ottox being scummy until well after Ottox started his hole digging project. I think it is certainly possible that the scum team decided that Ottox had shafted himself and bussed him to blend in with everyone else attacking him.
|
On September 07 2012 01:26 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 01:06 austinmcc wrote:I'mallinson, any trouble with this? On September 06 2012 08:22 austinmcc wrote:
But I'm having trouble with the timing of it all, and it's one reason I'm not too convinced about scum Gravan.
Matt claims nosy neighbor at 9:12 TL time, 9/4
Palmar confirms nosy neighbors are not self-aware at 18:17 TL time, 9/4
Gravan comes in with his passive post at 5:41, 9/5
Gravan starts talking about Matt and the assassin stuff at 9:38, 9/5
That bugs me. If Gravan is scum, then either he posted in thread without checking in QT, or checked QT before posting in thread. If he checked it, there's NO WAY that he wrote that crap. Right? No way do you limp into thread 20 hours after your scumbuddy got caught and 11 hours after it was confirmed he was caught and go "Hey guys, sorry." Then ESPECIALLY NO WAY do you wait 4 hours after that post and go "Okay I think he's an assassin." Right? And if he didn't check QT, he came back, posted that bad post, then had 4 hours. I'm guessing in that time he would have checked QT while reading thread, and same thing...you don't get that next post. I know he's got more posts now, and I agree that the BM case is weak/OMGUSy. But I still don't see this guy as scum because I can't believe that scum would post that assassin bit so far after the time that Matt's goose was mod-cooked. Are you okay with that timing? Do you think he just didn't read QT? You think that over the course of more than 10 hours scum didn't give explicit instructions for how to handle Matt in thread? You think they crafted this weird post for one scum member to call out matt as an assassin (and, if so, to what end, because clearly it's not making people find him town)? That's getting into the same reasoning as Ottox's reason why Matt wasn't scum, that because scum can talk with team mates they don't make mistakes. Your point makes sense if the scum team is working well together but we've had Matt's fake claim which is obviously scum doing something stupid. If you add to that Ottox who I think is scum doing all the stupid shit he has done I can see Gravan posting the soft defence of Matt before thinking and before looking at the QT. Obviously this alone wouldn't be a solid case, in the same way BM's point about Hapa coaching isn't enough to push a lynch on him, but with the rest of Gravan's posting being so lurky and faux contributing I think that Gravan is the best bet to lynch tomorrow. Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 01:07 slOosh wrote:
imallison have you considered Gravan as newbie town or do you think the evidence shows otherwise? Also what do you make of his stance on Otto if you think both scum?
Because I'm seeing new town learning as he goes along. You can see how his post reflect the thread information at the time (indication that he is reading), and making what you consider bad arguments is alignment null. His case against BM is very reasonable - as a new player what would you do when you see someone dropping strings of 8 1-liners and being vague in general, and people ignoring him? It's certainly possible he is newbie town but I don't think that is a sufficient explanation for his scummy behaviour. Personally I've never played a game with BM before and seeing everyone ignore him I figured that not everyone can be scum so it must just be how BM is. Even if Gravan didn't reach the same conclusion the case reeks of scum making a light case on someone they think will be an easy target to seem to contribute to the thread. As for Ottox and Gravan both being scum I think it's certainly possible. Notice Gravan doesn't talk about Ottox being scummy until well after Ottox started his hole digging project. I think it is certainly possible that the scum team decided that Ottox had shafted himself and bussed him to blend in with everyone else attacking him.
IMO reading through Ottox's filter, it's still a bit early to be drawing associative tells with him. We should probably wait for his flip to do that. In the meanwhile, I want to figure out when scum started to bus Matt, and which players ended up voting Matt with little to no explanation (or bad explanation) after Palmar essentially modkilled him.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
The problem is that everyone who didn't have a vote on Matt voted Matt after Palmar's post with little or no explanation because the explanation was obvious to everyone (except Ottox of course). I'm sure scum bussed Matt as soon as they saw Palmar's post. So our possible list of people who could be scum bussing Matt is everyone who voted Matt except Sloosh, Hapa and DYH which doesn't get us very far.
|
On September 07 2012 01:38 imallinson wrote:
The problem is that everyone who didn't have a vote on Matt voted Matt after Palmar's post with little or no explanation because the explanation was obvious to everyone (except Ottox of course). I'm sure scum bussed Matt as soon as they saw Palmar's post. So our possible list of people who could be scum bussing Matt is everyone who voted Matt except Sloosh, Hapa and DYH which doesn't get us very far.
Got it.
|
On September 06 2012 09:04 DoYouHas wrote:Now that we are sure about Matt, I think I have found scum in Hopeless1der. Hopeless and Broodking are the two people who posted cases on people other than Mattchew (Forumite and Toad, respectively) in the time period between when BC's attack and Palmar's confirmation. This I think is a very important period of time because the uncertainty of the town on how to deal with BC and Matt makes it the best time for scum to try and divert the wagon of their scumbuddy. Both Hopeless and Brood's cases could have been made with that intent, but I see Hopeless as scum easier than I see Brood. Brood had expressed his distaste for Toad earlier in the game and just doesn't fit the reluctant busser as well as Hopeless. I have already taken issue with some of his case on Forumite Here. But when you combine his case with the post he made a page earlier. You have to admit that it looks awfully like he is attacking BC (the main proponent of a Matt lynch) and then trying to divert to another target. Not convinced this is what he was doing? Here is the first line of his case on Forumite: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 13:18 Hopeless1der wrote:
Supposing we table the nosy-neighbor discussion(which appears to still be going strong), I would like to point out my take on Forumite:
Moving on to his "voteswitch" Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 23:45 Hopeless1der wrote:
1.I never actually did vote in the first place, but anyways:
##Unvote: Forumite
##Vote: Mattchew
2.Reasoning: See the entire fucking thread. 1. - He never did vote Forumite. this reads to me exactly like he was trying to use his case to divert the Matt bandwagon, and after Palmar confirmed the fakeclaim, is trying to save face. (Funny how nobody seems to call him out for this voteswitch despite searching for defenders of Matt.) 2. - He doesn't seem to happy to be switching to a guaranteed fakeclaim that is very likely scum right here, odd.
After Hopeless' vote has settled onto Mattchew I note 2 more things that read scummy to me. First, in these two posts (1)(2) Hopeless jumps at the chance to be the information provider, a very easy way to 'contribute' and with someone as inactive as Hopeless a definite scumtell. Second, Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 07:19 Hopeless1der wrote:
-snipped massive nested quotes-
The whole point of his case is that you pushing DP wasn't a real scum read, it was errant Day 1 bullshit. Which most of the thread was at that point. I still think he's scummy because that's a shitty case at the time it arose, but it's reasonably consistent, despite the misinformation. This waffley statement is definitely something I would expect from scum.
To sum up, I think Hopeless1der fits a reluctant busser that is trying to slide by extremely well and I want to lynch him ASAP.
In my filter, I have this post:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 04 2012 12:52 Hopeless1der wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 14:34 BroodKingEXE wrote:
Nosy neighbor is standard miller(the neighbor doesn't know they are nosy)?
Blues have to visit their target as well as Mafia, correct?
Check out this post on page 8. It was never answered in thread and it has been edited. In addition, the set-up appears to have been tweaked: Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 22:12 Palmar wrote:
Due to slight setup tweaks, mafia now has permanent 2kp. It will not change over the course of the game. Take note, however, that no member of the mafia can deliver more than 1 kp, so effectively the mafia will drop to 1kp when there is only one member left.
(page 9, again it's been edited) Moral of the story is we don't know and BC needs to stop bullshitting us if he does in fact know something that the rest of us seem to have missed.
Followed by my case on Forumite in this post:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 04 2012 13:18 Hopeless1der wrote:Supposing we table the nosy-neighbor discussion(which appears to still be going strong), I would like to point out my take on Forumite: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. "We're lynching you anyway" Not cool. First, I disagree with the notion that revealing yourself as a nosy neighbor is scummy. Oh wait, Forumite didn't really say that. He didn't really say much of anything here if you ask me, but back to the point of "lynching you anyways", I don't like the blanket statements from Forumite. Here's another one: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:46 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:42 BlackMamba24 wrote:On September 04 2012 09:27 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:07 BlackMamba24 wrote:
I mean that blues should do what they feel is best with their own judgment and ignore any direction from the "town" Sorry, I should have been more specific. I wondered about this phrase: On September 04 2012 07:55 BlackMamba24 wrote:
Never lynch someone just because they wouldn't claim to the town leader or whatever, that's asinine, asiten, asieleven, asitwelve, etc. What is there to explain? There's a difference between lynching someone for not backing themselves up after they're caught lying or whatever and lynching someone because they don't trust the town circle. It sounded weird. It´s common for the voteleader to be lynched unless he claims (convincingly). As an aside, "It sounded weird" is not a phrase I like to see. Immediately makes me suspicious. Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:55 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:43 Mattchew wrote:On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. Because there is no town benefit to me hiding this information. and for all everyone knows I could be a blue role trying to avoid being incorrectly tracked as well if I get tracked to a dead person atleast there will be something to think about before mislynching me Lying to town as a blue is a bad idea. If you fakeclaim nosy neighbor to fool scum, then you risk getting lynched by town. You are still going to draw a few trackers during the first few nights, just to make sure that you are really visiting people at random with no effect, so because of this you might actually be hurting town by distracting blues. Why are trackers going to be inclined to 'verify' a nosy neighbor claim? Even if Mattchew is scum, he just needs to do something and his claim is still up in the air. Why is Forumite trying to manipulate our blues? There's also the point about lying as a blue. How about lying in general to the town? There isn't any value in this statement. Town is supposedly harmed because our Trackers have to make sure Mattchew is really visiting random people with no effect. And then they get a confirmed townie out of the exchange. Wait, how does that hurt us again?
Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:00 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Let me rephrase: What is your problem with Toades play in this game? You were reacting very strongly to a random vote coming right at the beginning of the game. Dat Over-reaction: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 07:42 slOosh wrote:
Cool ... you wanna talk about something else? Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? And then of course slo0sh himself points out: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:17 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 10:00 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Let me rephrase: What is your problem with Toades play in this game? You were reacting very strongly to a random vote coming right at the beginning of the game. I reacted strongly because there was no grounds for the vote / read. I still have a problem with the fact that he keeps emphasizing the uselessness of the post (it isn't, because as clearly seen that people can miss setup information), which I take as soft discrediting of my posts in general. I'm not claiming my opening post is super useful, but to call it useless is unwarranted. That said I can see this coming from a town perspective, so my problem with his play thus far is a matter of taste rather than alignment. On September 04 2012 10:04 Z-BosoN wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Um... this: " My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not" You are saying that he tries to discredit you ---> you think he tried to discredit you ---> if he tried to discredit you, you are saying he wanted to do this and is being deliberately disruptive. Why not just straight answer the question without adding another one? There is a difference in someone discrediting me and someone being deliberately disruptive. Forumite phrased the question in a way that seemingly put words in my mouth as I said the former but not the latter (or never intended to so I checked with my question). Specifically the last paragraph is what I want noted. Then again, slo0sh addressed the 'strong reaction' in the first part of that quote, but I don't think slo0sh reacted 'strongly' at all. Forumite is just stirring the pot here and not really being helpful to me. He looks like he's pushing discussion, but slo0sh was taking care of that all on his own. We didn't need Forumite to prompt him.
I see a lot of roundabout advice from Forumite on why claiming self-aware miller is terrible and how our blues are screwed for it. But nowhere does he tell us that Mattchew is scummy, just that he'll still be suspicious no matter what. His prodding at slo0sh dead-ended pretty quickly and he's ducked out of the thread after making this post: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:01 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 10:00 Z-BosoN wrote:
Hello folks ^^
I would appreciate it if someone could clear some things up, since I've never played in this setup yet. Right now I've noticed this new mechanic: visiting someone.
A nosy neighbor will randomly visit someone. This will be caught up by the town watcher and/or tracker.
Now what I don't understand: if a medic saves someone, or if a roleblocker blocks some, or if a Suicide Bomber plants a bomb somewhere, or if a goon tks someone, will they also "visit" this person? Yes, all nightactions, including mafia nightkills, can be detected by watchers and trackers. I´ve never seen you before. Have you been on TL-mafia long? What do you think about the game so far? I don't think his posts have contributed anything to getting scum lynched, and I think it is because Forumite is scum. ##Vote: Forumite+ Show Spoiler +Pregame answer for Rewok, I got curious when going through Forumite's filter: On September 03 2012 01:49 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 00:51 Rewok wrote:
There's a word for arguing for arguments sake but I can't remember it. Anybody want to help me out? No there isn't! + Show Spoiler + Eristic
I was not convinced by BC's argument of "You're Lying, You're Scum" and didn't piece together the fact that I would need to PM the mods to confirm the miller self-awareness debacle. That was really stupid on my part but thankfully Palmar dealt with it for us.
The thread was in a shitty place and I wanted to focus on something other than just calling people liars. I wasn't necessarily attacking BC, I just wanted him to stop strong-arming the thread and actually put together a coherent thought towards HOW he knew he was right. His argument to me was "I'm right, suck it bitch" and I found that infuriating. (I completely understand why he did it after the fact, fear of modkillage and whatnot). In an effort to get away from that, I made a case on someone I found scummy and put it forth to try to get some other discussion going.
Once Palmar confirmed Mattchew's lie, I was 100% behind his lynch and didn't want to waste time being questioned about why. Nor did anyone bring it up, as you pointed out.
The reason why I didn't vote for forumite is...I forgot about the voting thread; Whoops?
The reason I pointed out the fact I didn't vote for forumite is...I didn't vote for forumite and wanted to be as transparent as possible about what I'd done. I didn't mean to 'fakevote' but it happened and I wanted to make it clear what my intentions were, so I explicitly unvoted Forumite in order to Vote Mattchew.
In regards to point (2)
I don't seem happy? What the fuck is this statement? How do you determine happiness based on my voteswitch to a confirmed liar? Why should I have to explain the reasoning when its in the thread for the past however many pages ever since BC knew Mattchew was lying. If anything, this would have been me HARD bussing Matt, not reluctantly as you've claimed stated.
I will concede that the "provider of information" posts are scummy. It also turns out I -(think)- I was wrong in my discussion with BC(2), I'm sure that's going to make me scum for pushing misinformation. My response to Shady(1) especially looks bad given the length of my filter. Not much I can do to change that now.
The waffley statement was me asserting that while I don't think Miltonkram was 'lying' (which you snipped out of the quote btw), I still think he was scummy because his case was complete shite relative to the pace of the thread when he made it.
Ergo I think Milton is scum. Is that less waffley?
Why does Matt flipping red imply that I'm red as well? Why can't I be continuing to hunt scum? I still think Forumite is scum. My case was not an effort to divert the thread, it was an attempt to focus it. I wasn't around to do so, and feel free to call me scum for not following through before, but wait and see, you'll run out of steam on that front in a moment.
|
I think Gravan fits the bill of newbie town much better than newbie scum. He is making mistakes, doing things that "you shouldn't do", yet they are all things a newbie town could do, which is what he is (newbie).
On September 07 2012 01:07 slOosh wrote:
I'm seeing new town learning as he goes along. You can see how his post reflect the thread information at the time (indication that he is reading)
This I consider somewhat of a newbie town trait - if you read the thread and you are bound to absorb information and regurgitate it, and from what I see in each of his posts, you can see how a town can say what he is saying considering the precursor posts. (e.g. Ottoxlol argues about possiblility of Matt as assassin and the thought permeates to some people, and he picks it up and says what he thinks). Or more simply put, he is reading the thread and his posts reflect current going ons (regardless of how effective his good/bad posts filter is).
I think for him it's best to see what his current thoughts are on people like Miltonkram, Hapa, Maverick to get a clearer understanding of his playstyle.
|
First, my original case on Forumite:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 04 2012 13:18 Hopeless1der wrote:Supposing we table the nosy-neighbor discussion(which appears to still be going strong), I would like to point out my take on Forumite: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. "We're lynching you anyway" Not cool. First, I disagree with the notion that revealing yourself as a nosy neighbor is scummy. Oh wait, Forumite didn't really say that. He didn't really say much of anything here if you ask me, but back to the point of "lynching you anyways", I don't like the blanket statements from Forumite. Here's another one: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:46 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:42 BlackMamba24 wrote:On September 04 2012 09:27 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:07 BlackMamba24 wrote:
I mean that blues should do what they feel is best with their own judgment and ignore any direction from the "town" Sorry, I should have been more specific. I wondered about this phrase: On September 04 2012 07:55 BlackMamba24 wrote:
Never lynch someone just because they wouldn't claim to the town leader or whatever, that's asinine, asiten, asieleven, asitwelve, etc. What is there to explain? There's a difference between lynching someone for not backing themselves up after they're caught lying or whatever and lynching someone because they don't trust the town circle. It sounded weird. It´s common for the voteleader to be lynched unless he claims (convincingly). As an aside, "It sounded weird" is not a phrase I like to see. Immediately makes me suspicious. Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:55 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:43 Mattchew wrote:On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. Because there is no town benefit to me hiding this information. and for all everyone knows I could be a blue role trying to avoid being incorrectly tracked as well if I get tracked to a dead person atleast there will be something to think about before mislynching me Lying to town as a blue is a bad idea. If you fakeclaim nosy neighbor to fool scum, then you risk getting lynched by town. You are still going to draw a few trackers during the first few nights, just to make sure that you are really visiting people at random with no effect, so because of this you might actually be hurting town by distracting blues. Why are trackers going to be inclined to 'verify' a nosy neighbor claim? Even if Mattchew is scum, he just needs to do something and his claim is still up in the air. Why is Forumite trying to manipulate our blues? There's also the point about lying as a blue. How about lying in general to the town? There isn't any value in this statement. Town is supposedly harmed because our Trackers have to make sure Mattchew is really visiting random people with no effect. And then they get a confirmed townie out of the exchange. Wait, how does that hurt us again?
Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:00 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Let me rephrase: What is your problem with Toades play in this game? You were reacting very strongly to a random vote coming right at the beginning of the game. Dat Over-reaction: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 07:42 slOosh wrote:
Cool ... you wanna talk about something else? Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? And then of course slo0sh himself points out: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:17 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 10:00 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Let me rephrase: What is your problem with Toades play in this game? You were reacting very strongly to a random vote coming right at the beginning of the game. I reacted strongly because there was no grounds for the vote / read. I still have a problem with the fact that he keeps emphasizing the uselessness of the post (it isn't, because as clearly seen that people can miss setup information), which I take as soft discrediting of my posts in general. I'm not claiming my opening post is super useful, but to call it useless is unwarranted. That said I can see this coming from a town perspective, so my problem with his play thus far is a matter of taste rather than alignment. On September 04 2012 10:04 Z-BosoN wrote:On September 04 2012 09:55 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 09:05 Forumite wrote:Finished with page 12. On September 04 2012 08:01 slOosh wrote:On September 04 2012 07:58 Toadesstern wrote:On September 04 2012 07:56 slOosh wrote:
Hapa, what is your idea of a town circle and how does it help us find / lynch / kill scum?
Toad - How is that useless stuff that has nothing to do with the game? The setup changed and maybe people haven't read the updates. I've asked you once and I'll do it again, what else do you want to talk about? I don't know what you want to talk about. I'm talking about your useless post being useless. Well BlackMamba's recent post just shows that people can miss information. My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not. Do you think I'm scum by my first post? What is your problem with Toades? Do you think he´s deliberately disruptive? What makes you think I think that? Um... this: " My post has already proven itself useful, and your opening post which tries to discredit mine has not" You are saying that he tries to discredit you ---> you think he tried to discredit you ---> if he tried to discredit you, you are saying he wanted to do this and is being deliberately disruptive. Why not just straight answer the question without adding another one? There is a difference in someone discrediting me and someone being deliberately disruptive. Forumite phrased the question in a way that seemingly put words in my mouth as I said the former but not the latter (or never intended to so I checked with my question). Specifically the last paragraph is what I want noted. Then again, slo0sh addressed the 'strong reaction' in the first part of that quote, but I don't think slo0sh reacted 'strongly' at all. Forumite is just stirring the pot here and not really being helpful to me. He looks like he's pushing discussion, but slo0sh was taking care of that all on his own. We didn't need Forumite to prompt him.
I see a lot of roundabout advice from Forumite on why claiming self-aware miller is terrible and how our blues are screwed for it. But nowhere does he tell us that Mattchew is scummy, just that he'll still be suspicious no matter what. His prodding at slo0sh dead-ended pretty quickly and he's ducked out of the thread after making this post: Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 10:01 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 10:00 Z-BosoN wrote:
Hello folks ^^
I would appreciate it if someone could clear some things up, since I've never played in this setup yet. Right now I've noticed this new mechanic: visiting someone.
A nosy neighbor will randomly visit someone. This will be caught up by the town watcher and/or tracker.
Now what I don't understand: if a medic saves someone, or if a roleblocker blocks some, or if a Suicide Bomber plants a bomb somewhere, or if a goon tks someone, will they also "visit" this person? Yes, all nightactions, including mafia nightkills, can be detected by watchers and trackers. I´ve never seen you before. Have you been on TL-mafia long? What do you think about the game so far? I don't think his posts have contributed anything to getting scum lynched, and I think it is because Forumite is scum. ##Vote: Forumite+ Show Spoiler +Pregame answer for Rewok, I got curious when going through Forumite's filter: On September 03 2012 01:49 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 03 2012 00:51 Rewok wrote:
There's a word for arguing for arguments sake but I can't remember it. Anybody want to help me out? No there isn't! + Show Spoiler + Eristic
My followup, continuing my journey through his filter:
His entire reasoning for voting matt is to sheep BC:
On September 04 2012 21:11 Forumite wrote:
Still catching up with the posts made while I was asleep.
For now:
##Vote: Mattchew
He´s a scummy liar and I´m 100% behind BC for calling him out.
He didn't even read the entire thread through...He initially just tossed his vote in there because BC was so sure of himself, but that wasn't really the case. How do I know this? Because in his next post, he's defending his 'out of place' vote in the spoilered post below:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 05 2012 11:17 Forumite wrote:Reading through the thread, my vote on Matt looks kind of odd. I made it after I got a PM-confirmation from Palmar but before I saw Palmars post in the thread. Why do people fakevote, then say "lol, I never really voted!" It´s irritating. Making a vote in this thread might not count but I think it´s bad form. Similarly it´s bad to stealthvote in the other thread without confirming it here. If you want to pressurevote, do it for real. @BMShow nested quote +On September 05 2012 05:57 Bill Murray wrote:On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. check this scummy post from forumite 1) misreads the setup 2) attacks him with a smirk for the claim, which looks scummy as shit 3) takes the visiting thing a step further, saying "if they die" which clears a ton of scum roles... forumite is scum with a role FoS: Forumite I don´t get it. Matt was looking very strange for claiming when there was no benefit in claiming. I was talking to him to try and get a better read. Yes, if Matt was blue then I might have exposed him, but I wasn´t worried about that, I was thinking Matt was either NN or scum. With Matt looking more and more scummy, do you still accuse me of fishing for his role? Your FoS seem to rely on Matt being a townie, which he´s probably not. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 09:48 Rewok wrote:
Been keeping up my reading. Here's how the situation seems to me:
We're voting Mattchew today. Pretty much no getting out of that. If he turns up scum, Ottox and a few others could be on the chopping block. If he's town, we've got a whole new set of reads.
But it seems to me that our whole strategy hinges on how Mattchew turns up after he's killed. Is there any way we can get another read / another kill set up for D1? One which doesn't hinge on Mattchew's alignment?
I'm asking because you guys are way more familiar with the way TL mafia runs. One lynch at a time. Once Matt is dead, we shut up during the night, and then try to figure out what his flip means tomorrow. We can´t lynch more than one target at a time, so we lynch the scummiest one and worry about finding the rest of the scumteam later.
More specifically, pulling from the spoilered post above:
On September 05 2012 11:17 Forumite wrote:
Reading through the thread, my vote on Matt looks kind of odd. I made it after I got a PM-confirmation from Palmar but before I saw Palmars post in the thread. It didn't look strange. Feel free the check the timestamps, his vote came after Palmar confirmed the lie. Forumite says he got mod confirmation anyways, but to what avail? This is a defensive statement when there is nothing to defend against. This is scummy behavior. Why did he have to sheep BC if he had mod confirmation? More scummy behavior.
Next, he's reading things between lines that I have a hard time seeing. Read BM's post and show me how you came out of that thinking "Well BM is accusing me of bluefishing":
On September 05 2012 05:57 Bill Murray wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 09:36 Forumite wrote:On September 04 2012 09:12 Mattchew wrote:
I am a nosy neighbor. Anyone else with this role should insta-claim as well.
The reason people policy lynch people like BM and Grush is because they get by into later in the game because they are unreadable. This is because they barely actually play the game and if you end up in lylo with one of them left, you've basically already lost. I completely understand anyone wanting to policy lynch them, but we should also not allow them to be off the hook for some sort of scum read during the day.
That being said, I remember thinking to myself that I don't hate BM's play in the last few games I have been in with him. I do not want to policy lynch today.
Why would you claim this? You eliminated yourself as a possible blue from scums list of townies, and it´s not like you doing this eliminates you as a scum suspect. If someone see you visiting a player who dies the we´re lynching you anyway. check this scummy post from forumite 1) misreads the setup 2) attacks him with a smirk for the claim, which looks scummy as shit 3) takes the visiting thing a step further, saying "if they die" which clears a ton of scum roles... forumite is scum with a role FoS: Forumite
Forumite's response to BM:
On September 05 2012 11:17 Forumite wrote:
I don´t get it. Matt was looking very strange for claiming when there was no benefit in claiming. I was talking to him to try and get a better read. Yes, if Matt was blue then I might have exposed him, but I wasn´t worried about that, I was thinking Matt was either NN or scum.
Next is him stifling active discussion and being wishy-washy:
On September 05 2012 11:17 Forumite wrote:
One lynch at a time. Once Matt is dead, we shut up during the night, and then try to figure out what his flip means tomorrow. We can´t lynch more than one target at a time, so we lynch the scummiest one and worry about finding the rest of the scumteam later.
He's kind of hedging his bets on what Matt's flip is going to be. This is a step back from when Matt was a scummy liar in his previous post. So what if we can't lynch more than one target at a time? I disagree with the concept of shutting up at night, but I don't necessarily see that as scum motivated. What is scummy is that we can "worry about finding the rest of the scumteam later." This isn't shutting up at night, this is shutting up in general. Rewok phrased his question poorly as an "alternative D1 target", but the basic concept of CONTINUE TO SCUMHUNT is completely valid to me.
In the next post:+ Show Spoiler +On September 05 2012 21:19 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 12:43 Z-BosoN wrote:
Allright, Mattchew is set to be lynched.
What can we conclude if he flips scum or town?
In the unlikely event that he will flip town, will we have enough evidence to go for a BC lynch?
My take is, if he flips town, BC's suspicions will go way up, but I don't agree with insta-lynch. We all agreed that fakeclaiming is not something a blue role would do, and is most likely coming from scum.
If he flips scum, then we will take a long hard look at the people who insist that he shouldn't be lynched.
Ox, as of now, is my top candidate for a lynch. He's been so obnoxious and so annoying regarding the whole Mattchew business that he looks the most suspicious up to now. He also has been of zero usefulness this entire game.
@Shiaopi
Your meta is a little off from Dwarf Mafia, where you were town and had much more contribuitive posts in day 1. When will your internet be fixed? Basically that, if Matt flips town, then BC could be anything, but if Matt flips scum then BC is most likely town, and everyone who defended Matt until Palmars confirmation looks kind of bad. People who defend Matt after Palmars confirmation look bad for creating a disruption over something that is allready decided, that Matt lied and needs to die, but I think most scum jumped on the bandwagon long ago. If Matt is an Assassin then we get rid of both the 3rd Party in return for 2 townies dead. Not a good trade, but I think it´s unlikely that Matt is an assassin. There´s no point in not defending yourself to the end as a 3rd Party, while scum often shut up to avoid giving away any of their buddies. Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 14:38 Bill Murray wrote:
No, Forumite. I don't see how you get that whatsoever. I see you as being scum with Mattchew for not jumping on voting him there. Isn´t that a different accusation? Before you accuse me of trying to get Matt to claim (meaning that you thought I was scum and Matt town), and now you say I´m scum together with Matt. To answer why I didn´t vote Matt early, at the time I was weighing on what Matt was and engaged him in conversation to get a better read, but until Palmar confirmed how Nosy Neighbors works, there wasn´t enough on Matt for me to throw down a vote. Matt was suspicious for claiming NN, but there were no proof that he was really lying at the time. Why should I vote someone who claims a town role unless I have a good reason to think he´s lying?
He basically says that if Matt flips red (which he has) then everyone looks kind of bad sometimes because of disruption and bussing something something waffle. Don't count on finding scum using Matt's flip is the message I got from that.
This, in addition to his "find scum later" response to rewok reads very scummy to me.
He also pushes his luck with BM regarding the bluefishing, which I don't think actually happened and Forumite is twisting the situation to make BM look bad.
For the most part, he's shut up other than to call Mav scum and neglect to address the ottoxlol issue. This is null since he said he'd wanted to shut up at night, but with everything else, I'm reading heavily into Forumite being scum.
|
Hopeless1der what are your thoughts on DYH?
|
@Hapa
Well, we're reading differently then. You insist that him going up against 20 votes makes him townier, I insist I don't think it makes a difference. I'm no expert on the term WIFOM, but you are drawing conclusions based on what mafia would or wouldn't do. But you are done discussing him, so whatever.
Misinformation to me is most likely a mistake. Once he realized it, he pulled back. Would be the same reaction if he was a townie who realized he made a bad case. I don't read this as scummy as you do, especially, like you said, since it was in D1.
Milton is doing the bare minimum to act like he's contributing. His bad case (regardless of it being against me or not) doesn't help him. Also, his case was filled with misinformation as opposed to bad logic. The latter is townie, while the former is not. It's consistent with scum trying to contribute without actually contributing.
Oh, so now he's acting he is contributing and not genuinely trying to just because you have your eyes on him? Why can't he be just trying to contribute, but doing a poor job at it? Why is this preferable over someone who is contributing jack shit? Sure it can be scum acting like he's contributing, but to me this is so ridiculous to go on based on a sea of how many other players are making weak and useless contributions. Imo, the pillar that separates him from the rest, in your view, is that he "fabricated" evidence, correct me if I'm wrong. I say this could very easily have come from a lack of reading, much like goodkarma's post. But you won't even consider that possibility.
Also, he attacked one of the most active townies. If I agreed with your Oxtott argument, I would even add: why would a mafia go ahead and do that, sticking his neck out instead of sheeping or picking some random lurker or going for an easier case?
I think you are overextending yourself on him. Discussion with you regarding him is useless at the moment as you will just attack him no matter what I or anyone says. Don't get me wrong, you may be absolutely balls out right regarding your read, but I just can't see how you would ever choose him over ox based on a "scum wouldn't do this" argument.
We need some other opinions here, our vigi(s) could use more of them.
|
As for Forumite I agree with you that there is something off about him. The thing that stuck out the most to me was that preemptive defense when no one was calling him out on it. Additionally, his only comment of Ottoxlol, which was by far the most thread dominating topic at the time:
On September 06 2012 08:32 Forumite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2012 08:21 BlackMamba24 wrote:
why does everyone suddenly think ottoxlol is town I think the reasoning goes "Too obnoxious to be scum". Why do you think he´s scum?
Prior to this he postedOn September 06 2012 08:26 Forumite wrote:
My reads:
Maverick32x (Scum)
Everyone else (Null)
And yet this is his only effort to remedy his null Ottoxlol read. A filter filled with questions that do not develop into reads indicates apathy.
|
On September 07 2012 02:44 slOosh wrote:
Hopeless1der what are your thoughts on DYH?
His case against me isn't stupid or misinformed, but it draws conclusions from very little information and is based more on what mafia "should be doing" as opposed to what my actual intentions were. No one really knew my intentions due to my lurking, so I'd like to see if he's going to continue to tunnel me or accept my response and move on.
He went looking for a potential 'busser' after the fact and neglected to notify the thread until after Matt was confirmed scum. Apparently, I was already in his sights, and Toad pointed out why the order in which DYH made his case was scummy. His defense makes sense to me in terms of how he decided who he wanted to build a case on. The problem is he could have just as easily tossed BKE into that case instead of me and ended up with the same thing.
I could also OMGUS him for:
1. I think Matt is almost certainly scum.
4. I find that Hopeless also fits the mold for a lurky scum.
6. I come to the conclusion that Hopeless bussed Mattchew, but only after indirectly stop the lynch.
It didn't take much to convince him to vote Mattchew and he was about as active as I was.
If Forumite flips scum, I'll connection theory the shit out of DYH chain-sawing me in Forumites's defense, but otherwise I'm scum-null on DYH right now.
|
@ Z-Boson
I believe the misinformation distinguishes him from the other lurkers in a scummy way.
It's interesting that you bring up the whole "attacking active townie" thing, because the post he attacked me for was on page 2 (out of 6) on my filter. Seems pretty silly to determine who and who isn't an active townie only 2 hours into the game? For all he knows, I could go lurker-king after his accusation. Why should attacking a vocal townie or not determine whether or not he's mafia? Mafia-objectives are to cast illogical-suspicion to push for lynches; this is the core of their win-condition.
Anywho, we can agree to disagree. Arguing will get us nowhere if neither of our scumreads are posting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
