Storm Mafia
Forum Index > TL Mafia |
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
| ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 11:42 Jackal58 wrote: Dear redFF and WBG You both suck. Sincerely, Jackal58 I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 11:50 redFF wrote: Ace is a cunt and not in this game, stop riding his dick and play. and yet hes better than you in near every way. What does that say about you? | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 11:56 redFF wrote: him being a cunt has nothing to do with his skill at mafia. I was more referencing the fact your behaving worse than he normally does (he is better than you). As you are being a total douche canoe yet don't carry the level of skill or better than him I was referencing that you were deserving of a far lower and baser title. I am free to let others pick for you as I simply switch to different and more entertaining terms. Now, shall we play instead of focusing on how fun it is that you play in the shallow end of the sandbox all alone. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 11:59 VisceraEyes wrote: /salute What are your thoughts on redFF BC? I'm almost convinced that he's just bad and not scum, but I'd like your thoughts before I act on it. Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 12:06 redFF wrote: Actually bc I'm kind of pissed you're calling me the troll when any personal flaming/animosity started with wbg's first posts of the game, everything I've said has been a response to that. Before that I was being perfectly civil, maybe bad and stupid, but not a dick. Trolls aren't always flaming asshats. I find that the way you continued talking about policy lynching troll like. The continuing of posts between you and wbg (screams troll from both of you) is bad. I am moderately guilty as well, but as someone who has played with ace for years and as he is not in this game it is moderately disrespectful to trash him. You also said things I viewed as bad Pushing what I will view as bad agendas or bad forms of play is something I near always comment on. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 21 2012 12:09 VisceraEyes wrote: Come on guy....COME ON. You know what I'm asking. Do you think he's scum? Also, I thought we were well beyond policy-discussion - I've put forth a scum-candidate and several people have joined the wagon (with little to no reasoning)....and some (and by some I mean WBG) have even gone on to defend him - citing meta resources that point to badTownRedFF. I mean, did you miss all this in reading? Why are you trying to color this all as policy discussion? What's up yo? its what? 5 hours into the day? I would like to believe redff isn't this horrendous as scum to be caught this quickly. However that is wifom with someone of his experience. The only read I have on him as of now is Bad. Bad town or bad mafia. Hell, I think chaoser is also bad for defending posting town reads as a viable move at this stage in the game. It is only at all useful if people are posting clear scum reads along with clear town reads to make them fully accountable rather than "contributing" without doing much. As for coloring it up to policy discussion, the main point you first raised (I will re-read to see what your entire argument is in exact detail so i stress the first point i saw) was his push on tyrran via policy of being bad. Factor in the mass level of general annoyance with him via his recent behaviour outside of game it is not outside the realms of possibility people are "policy" pushing him based on him being a total wad. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
He then states that if he is roleblocked to lynch him, but says its not optimal to lynch claimed blues? Contradiction and sounds like hes just finding any reason to stay alive. This level of play is so insanely bad that it makes me sad. He knows all this and yet still does the play to create a total shit fest of a thread and does not in anyway create a pro town environment. As for syllo. Get off my nuts. 5 hours is never enough information to actually commit to a read especially given my horrible ability to differentiate between bad play and bad scum. Find other straw men to go burn. ##vote redff | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:21 Dirkzor wrote: Its not like the BC wagon is forming quickly. Scum voting for RedFF can just sit there and hope 7 votes are enough to hang RedFF. And to be precise we have 3 wagons. RedFF Bloodyc0bble -------------->Blazinghand <-------------- RedFF is a non-issue. He don't want to play anymore. If he returns we can take the discussion again. There are argument for and against keeping him alive even if he is scum. Bloodyc0bble is gone. He don't care. He is indifferent. He have been a target for some time now but he don't want to defend himself. Okayish lynch. Blazinghand is so far of his meta and have been sheeping thought troughout the game. He is the best lynch today and everyone should vote him. Ok, i have to take off for work soon but as it seems people are being retarded I have to come in and defend myself. Reasons like this post are reasons I am more or less a dick this game. You just said redff is a non issue because he doesn't want to play? If he is scum he is still going to help his team and guess what else? It means you just gave him a free pass to lurk the fuck out of the game without ever contributing and not die unless he actively posts. There are no activity requirements this game and you are letting someone go with a free pass seriously. You then paint a bullseye on me for being indifferent and not defending myself? The case against me is terrible. Wasting my time on a case that imo doesn't warrant being lynched on is something I should never have to respond to. The fact that said case is also being pushed by players who know better is even sadder. Whats even worse is you have those same people pushing my lynch saying I am more likely scum, yet one of the major reasons for their defense (as near all of them have also defended redff), is that there was near no resistance to his lynch. Guess what? I have seen very few people defend me through this lynch yet redff has had a ton defending him. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
| ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:29 VisceraEyes wrote: Look again pal - I've counted layabout, Blazinghand and WBG all defending you so far. And I have counted you, syllo, prpl, drH, and more defending redff either directly or indirectly. Your point? There are far less defending me then there are on redff. Aside from general indifference I have done exactly what I said I would. Call out bad play. Redff has outright rage quit the thread after creating a clusterfuck of a day. Yet you are fine with someone actively disrupting and sabotaging a thread, but don't like when someone gets pissed off at bad play. Palmar invited people so that serious play would be done this game. I have yet to be given a game I was promised. What did you expect me to do day 1? Have an elaborate setup based plan in a closed setup? Did you expect me to post a list of scum reads day 5 hours into the day (when you guys have primarily based your entire argument on me around). Anyone who knows my style knows that I do not do this regardless of alignment. My ability to differentiate bad town from bad mafia or mafia in general is sub par in comparison to foolishness, incog, ver, etc... You can ask them and they will confirm this. Tell me what you expected? I was promised decent play in a game that has for the most part been herp derpy. Do you really want me to pull another pyp3? That was not enjoyable for me or anyone in the game. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:43 VisceraEyes wrote: L had 10 times the herp-derpiness this game has had - and yet you were able (with the help of superior scumhunters, by your estimation) to come up with some reads. Your entire defense is based around the fact that "everyone has these unrealistic expectations of me", but the fact of the matter is that you've been entirely useless this game so far - oh, you called out bad play and voted for redFF?! COOL STORY BRO THAT'S WHAT WBG HAD BEEN DOING ALL EFFING GAME. No, you're scum and I think the fact that instead of posting reads or whatever when the heat is on, you went instantly into defensive mode when it's pretty clear that your wagon isn't even going to make it. Without naming names I already posted my thoughts. Perhaps you should read what I post for full content. As for L? It had 10 times the herp derpiness with how many players total were in the game but overall level in this game is far higher and more infuriating with it is there are less players being intelligent. As for defending myself? I only am because people are voting for me for the most retarded reasons. Find me being scummy and not annoyed. How about instead of tunneling one player you look at all the people swapping their vote like a complete derp. How about you look at the player who said "he claimed a role in a closed setup but his claim is pro town" when that player then rage quits right after. How about you look at all the people defending bad play with bad justification instead of tunneling one person who the case on is flimsy at best. Seriously. The level of wtf play in this game is near horrendous. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:48 DoctorHelvetica wrote: BH, since you claim you can't be meta'd can you explain how anything you've done is helpful to town? You seem to agree that you've been an unoriginal sheep the entire game, but you're posting more than anyone else. Stop announcing your votes and make a point or I'll likely change my vote. I have a case to push but I won't do it until the end of the night unless there is significant time left. The vote ends today right? Few hours? 12 minutes | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 23 2012 06:51 DoctorHelvetica wrote: That's fine then. Can I expect to see some contribution beyond criticism from you on Day 2, BC? I'm pretty sure prplhz is scum and I'll make my case on him tonight in case I die. RedFF seems likely as well, but we'll see when the flip happens. BC has responded fairly well to the pressure as far as explaining himself in my opinion, all that's lacking is for him to make some positive play or follow through with his criticisms by scumhunting on the second day. correct. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
For starters lets look at this post that I just read after catching up on the thread. I will move on to more stuff after it but I feel it should be addressed just due to the sheer level of "wtf" in it. On February 24 2012 08:17 Blazinghand wrote: Alright guys I think we should lynch BC today. Here's the case, which others have made, and which is only stronger over a day later with him not having contributed substantially in the meantime: So here's my case for BC BC opens up like this: + Show Spoiler + On February 21 2012 11:49 BloodyC0bbler wrote: I endorse this statement fully and from the bottom of my heart I thank you for letting me know I am not insane. Why are we debating Policy lynches this early into the day? Seriously? This isn't a game with a player like 2010 bill murray who spams while being a dick, this isn't a game with a mod hating spammer named showtime. Instead we have for the most part a fairly solid crew devoid of spammy trolls. If you want to lynch someone for being bad, wait till they start being bad / scumlike, dont lynch them for shits and giggles. Policy lynching people on retarded reasoning is worse than RNG votes for early discussion. Cut the nonsense out. Anyone who keeps talking about it from this post on be warned. as a side note, VE since you are making moderate sense for the first time ever I have to give you props for impressing me two games in a row. On February 21 2012 11:53 BloodyC0bbler wrote: and yet hes better than you in near every way. What does that say about you? On February 21 2012 11:59 BloodyC0bbler wrote: I was more referencing the fact your behaving worse than he normally does (he is better than you). As you are being a total douche canoe yet don't carry the level of skill or better than him I was referencing that you were deserving of a far lower and baser title. I am free to let others pick for you as I simply switch to different and more entertaining terms. Now, shall we play instead of focusing on how fun it is that you play in the shallow end of the sandbox all alone. This is BC being mad, unhelpful, and criticising the discussion without legitimately helping or doing anything. This isn't very BC-like and isn't really helping the town at all. Then he's actually kinda noncomittal on redFF: + Show Spoiler + On February 21 2012 12:03 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Honestly I think he may be suffering from something like a bat to the back of the head. That or a level of arrogance unseen since showtime. As it stands now short of recommending a terrible idea and being a retarded troll (which is a smiteworthy offense if he keeps it up) I see him more as someone to mock / ignore than take seriously. I know I am moderately guilty of this via my last few posts, however anyone continuing the trend of useless discussion / just trading insults with redff are most likely not playing with town interests in heart. There are a few players already guilty of this obviously. I am currently more intrigued at the people who have let policy discussion run so damn rampant for even this short a duration of a game who (in my mind) should know better. This is actually a worthless post. "He's being bad, mocking poeple, but so am I, there are a few players like this, oh hey look a policy discussion" On February 21 2012 12:09 BloodyC0bbler wrote: Trolls aren't always flaming asshats. I find that the way you continued talking about policy lynching troll like. The continuing of posts between you and wbg (screams troll from both of you) is bad. I am moderately guilty as well, but as someone who has played with ace for years and as he is not in this game it is moderately disrespectful to trash him. You also said things I viewed as bad Pushing what I will view as bad agendas or bad forms of play is something I near always comment on. The kettle and the pot calling each other black This is actually semi reasonable but it's an important thing to note to contrast with his next post: Now let's take a look at where we are so far 1) BC hasn't analyzed dick all game 2) redFF claims tracker 3) this causes BC to say "well before the claim he seemed iffy, but claiming tracker means he could be a scum-aligned tracker? maybe there are multiple trackers!" This is possibly the worst reason to get on the redFF wagon I could think of. He then continues to defend himself not with reason but with rage and incoherences, since there's no real reason for his defense. He claims that there's nothing you can really do day 1 in a closed setup, and generally makes excuses. As he avoids the noose, and here's what he promises: And yet here we are, over a day later. Was BC so sure he wouldn't die overnight? Will we see anything at all useful from him today? I don't think there's anything valuable coming out of BC because he's trying to be unvaluable. His attacks were shoddy, his vote on redFF was antireasoned (he provided a reason that was literally bad), and his defense was empty and hollow. And here we are, greeted by crushing silence from him. What's the deal, BC? ##Vote: BloodyC0bbler Now, let me begin with. He starts that analysis with the words "here is the case which others have made." This means he is attempting to once again push a lynch on me. This is more or less moot for the reasons I am commenting however. He is actively pushing a lynch in which the case is not his own. In this regards it is an obvious showing early on to dodge responsibility for said lynch. He then to continue a "case" he begins to rather analyze posts he insteads decides to summarize a game day as if its a valid reasons at analysis. He attempts to misconstrue a post as well where I state I will be active today (as this is day 2) by trying to paint suspicion that I was not around during the night. Given that the read on me is not his own, nor that he is attempting to offer solid reasons to me screams fishy as hell. Pushing a lynch that had garnered alot of attention the day before where not always a bad thing is incredibly fishy coming from a player who could not make up their mind, nor had a good reason to hopping onto it to begin with. However lets move onto some of my reads instead of people I have on my watch list. Risk.nuke This guy is someone who has done nothing to help the town while coming out with stellar posts like On February 23 2012 06:46 risk.nuke wrote: Yeah I don't want to lynch redFF, just got home. So I threw my vote on BC because I like syllo. On February 23 2012 06:54 risk.nuke wrote: God dammit don't lynch a person who claimed tracker day 1. If you have ANY brains. I will link his filter as well for people to continue reading for them selves. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=76576 Now, why do I mention risk nuke? Simple. The two posts I quoted imo show a high level of anti town sentiment via play. Why you ask? Town has no reason to not spend some time figuring out the main points of a case. Voting once perhaps but given that he was posting at various points throughout the day he would have known the arguments against myself and redff to be able to give an actual opinion on which he felt should be lynched. Actively admitting to sheeping a player without actually justifying a vote is very scumlike in my eyes. Following it up with the "don't lynch someone who claimed tracker day 1" is also very very suspect to me as well. I say this because by allowing someone to claim a role day 1 that is not confirmable via action day 1 only opens them up to potential role tampering. You could get roleblocked, your target always seems to die, your checks mysteriously are wrong, etc.. In these cases said player would ultimately die to town regardless of alignment. It also opens a level of credibility the player does not deserve. People instantly see a role that is normally a pro town role and instantly assume that player is town. If the claim is fake, or the role is in mafia hands this leads to a player being "confirmed" when they in fact are not. Obviously a player could be the role they claimed, but given that you will never be able to confirm their role / alignment without outing another role or killing said player it is never ideal to let them stay alive. Both of the posts I mentioned are extremely suspect in my eyes for reasons I posted, he also has alot of what I would deem fluff posts which are not really helpful in any way. As of now I will say most likely scum and will cement my read as he continues to post. Lets now move onto RoL. My read on RoL is one that is almost solely around meta. His filter is located http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=313426&user=41447 My personal experience with a scum RoL is that of a lazy inactive RoL. I think anyone could go back and read a game like plexa's summer mafia (he was mafia) and flamewheels mafia 42(i believe this was the weird mason mechanic game) and compare the difference of a mafia RoL to a town RoL. You could also look at responsibility mafia where he was town as well. RoL as town is normally very active however he is not this game. IF he continues this trend I will heavily push his lynch. I am willing to see how he performs today to determine if he is infact scum. I have a heavy leaning at this moment in time that he is scum based on his general level of inactivity and on the basis that out of all his posts with no commitment to any opinion(except a roleclaim) to any stance while posting useless video or making posts like "hello all" His only real opinion was on why he believed redff had to go which was purely one based on the roleclaim and not based on anything else. Based on inactivity fitting his normal meta + his posts not being as indepth or trying to help the town move in a progression similar to such I believe he is scum. He could come in here and convince me otherwise, but as of now that is my opinion. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 24 2012 09:31 Blazinghand wrote: ##unvote bloodyc0bbler as happy as I am with this result? Whats the reason for this? | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 24 2012 09:36 VisceraEyes wrote: Well, that didn't take much. I appreciate the effort BC. If your quality of posting stays at least close to the quality of your last post, I can entertain the possibility of lynching others first. What are your thoughts on WBG BC? at the moment an aggressive asshat who needs to shape up or ship out. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 24 2012 09:45 VisceraEyes wrote: By your estimation, how much "aggressive asshattery" is it going to take before he's no longer able to "shape up" enough and has to be "shipped out"? That's a really really wishywashy stance on someone who's active when you're largest gripe with RoL is his inactivity sir. RoL's biggest tell in near all games as red that I can recall is his activity level. He lurks and will bust out excuses as to why he was inactive but always appears when he has to (called out or to avoid being heavily suspected, etc..) whereas town he even when busy with life shite always has quality posts if inactive. As for how much it will take for wbg is similar to what I would expect what it will take for myself or RoL. IE contribute. I am overall fine with aggressive posting but aside from a few of his posts he has come off as someone attempting to avoid leaving a huge mark on the thread in solid opinions. He obviously has had some solid posts, but he has a ton of fluff ones as well. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
On February 24 2012 19:10 risk.nuke wrote: You're all still dumb for killing redFF, you don't kill a person who claims tracker. If he were town scum would either have to kill him and we wouldn't need to waste a lynch or let him live in the hopes that we will kill him out of suspicion but also leaves the risk of him finding scum. If he were scum we would had lynched him soon out of suspicion anyway. This is incredibly terrible. In a setup like this, lets say for arguments sake you are correct and redff was a tracker. If he checked someone who did not leave there home he would not know. If he was roleblocked he would not know. You say not killing him was dumb, yet leaving someone around who's role is now jeopardized and essentially useless only to say kill them later. Based on outing his own role / his play if there is some form of role disabler then town instead of "wasting" a lynch early would instead have to put up with continued scumlike play and leave someone alive purely on a claim. A claim does not mean someone is town, their actions due. Do you think aside from his tracker claim that redff was being pro town? This same person who claimed also rage quit the thread and spent an entire game day posting horrible content. As this has been your only post since the beginning of the day, you are now even further on my radar as scum. There is no logically sound reason I can see to your point of view. | ||
BloodyC0bbler
Canada7875 Posts
You're analysis of risk nuke comes off very much like something I already posted. It is odd you would move your vote to someone I brought up as a scum option given that until I posted I was your top scum read. Very interesting. You also base your entire case on him due to his sheep vote with a shite reason. Yet all you did day 1 was rehash other peoples arguments, then flip flop a ton near end of day on who to actually lynch. Ultimately you stayed on me but you swapped at least 2 if not 3 times in the last hour. Each one of your "cases" has been a rehash of someone else's that you carry like its your own case yet you back down or dodge most confrontations and avoid trying to take the seat of responsibility. If you want to push someones lynch for being scum then choose someone you firmly believe is scum and push, you don't flail around and let others do the work for you only to sheep after. | ||
| ||