EPTiGrok's Good Clean Old-fashioned Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 03 2012 00:13 chaoser wrote: /in On June 03 2012 05:04 chaoser wrote: /in!! This game is so awesome chaoser just had to /in twice  | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
Kthnx I'll see ya'll broskis tomorrow. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 00:26 GreYMisT wrote: I would rather not lynch a player based on how good they might be as scum with no evidence. And yes chaoser, there are other ways. In a world where we would RNG the lynch, we would need to pick someone to do it, or have everyone RNG and then pick the person who showed up the most. Even though you provided a screen shot we don't know how many times that RNG was run, or your parameters This post is smart. Unlike RNG, which is dumb and useful for scum seeing as all they need to do is "RNG" someone who already has a couple votes. It leaves no accountability for who gets lynched because everyone will say the same thing "I just RNG'd it." | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
Also I'm struggling to comprehend how my opposition to RNG makes me scum. From what I've gathered, certain people think that because opposing RNG is a townie thing to do (albeit an "easy" townie thing to do), I must be scum attempting to gain town cred? By that logic, proposing RNG would be a scummy thing to do so why don't we lynch everyone who wanted to do that? For those who want to know what "UnRadfield like" is, I give you examples A, B, and C: On June 10 2012 08:23 Radfield wrote: Hizzah! No setup to talk about! No roles to direct! Nothing but cold hard calculation...! No medic and no ability to confirm townies means that every player needs to actually play, and establish themselves. No spamming, no coasting, etc. Given that, lets lynch into the players who are most difficult to find and the players with the best scum play. In this case that's ace and.... uhmmm.... well, just Ace I suppose  Seems like a good policy to me! On June 10 2012 08:25 Radfield wrote: In other news we could RNG a lynch. Ace, Palmar! GOGOGO! These were his first 3 posts and I've never seen him acting so cavalier. Radfield is a careful player but these did not strike me as careful posts. Even if he's just joking, it struck me as a very odd way to start the game because at the very least it just muddies up the thread right off the bat. MZ was randomly slinging mud on me to start, when I'm player least worth focusing on Day 1. There is no medic this game, which means I'll either die or catch scum... or else I'm probably scum. Can we hold you to this Radfield? Would you be willing to die on say, day three, if you're still alive? | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 09:53 chaoser wrote: What a ridiculous thing to ask. Why would you even ask this? What does this question accomplish? You're basically asking if it's ok to settle on a lynch of Radfield on D3 if he's not dead, which mafia can then exploit if he is townie. That's the point, what a ridiculous thing for Radfield to claim, scum can already do exactly what you described with what Radfield said. He's using the probability of him dying quickly as town to deflect suspicions off of him which is incredibly strange. I'm asking because I want him to explain why he said it in the first place when there's literally zero reason for a townie to make that claim. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 10:12 chaoser wrote: VE, MK, what do you think of greymist's response to gonzaw's "Vanilla Towny"? Both claims are a little strange tbh. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 11:00 GreYMisT wrote: For the record, my reaction had a "haha" after it, Gonzaws had a <_<. Mine is equally joking, if not more so. In any case, I am very worried about Ace after rereading. Particularly his post asking for caoser to respond to something someone else said without providing us anything, as well as saying he is down for an RNG lynch and then disappearing without again, giving us anything. Ace has bounced around a bit today without polarizing or giving town anything ##Vote: Ace To those people who are suspicious of Greymist, you guys just gained another member. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 11:17 VisceraEyes wrote: MZ what do you think of Radfield? wow read the thread. I outlined my suspicions in a previous post. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 11:18 VisceraEyes wrote: By which I mean will you lynch him with me? I actually had to think about this for a bit. My answer is going to be no, it's both early in the day and I've reread the thread a bit and am liking the greymist case especially given his recent posts. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 13:37 GreYMisT wrote: And woah woah woah. You are hesitant to vote VE because of misslynching him under completely different circumstances in a different game? broski I've done it twice in the span of two games, pardon me if I'm hesitant to complete the hat trick. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 22:21 Palmar wrote: To clarify, the logic is terrible, but that doesn't make him scum. While using bad logic may be an indicator of someone being scum, it's not conclusive, because townies tend to be well... dumb. The point is that he's using bad logic to avoid reaching a conclusion. If he was using bad logic to actually do something with it, like conclude someone he wanted to lynch, or decide that someone is town, I'd not be so eager to kill him. It's the fact that he's basically saying nothing for no reason that makes him scum. Now, about VisceraEyes, there isn't a case against him yet, and meapak is much more likely to flip scum anyway. VE has a nice habit of looking ridiculously much like town when he is one, so we'll know soon enough. The reason VE has been getting mislynched is because mafia has been pushing the idea he's scum, not because he has been scummy, or that was at least the case in Liar Game. I was scum myself and just chose to ignore the fact he was looking pretty towny. lol I thought you'd actually be playing this game palmar, sadly it seems like you aren't :/ http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=341558¤tpage=10#196 <--- case against VE I was responding to. Read the thread please. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 12 2012 02:03 Palmar wrote: a) screw you for suggesting I'm not playing b) I'm perfectly aware what you were responding to, that doesn't make what I said untrue. lol what you said is untrue. Direct quote: Now, about VisceraEyes, there isn't a case against him yet . So does hesmyrr not count? I await with baited breath for you to explain to me how it doesn't count... probably should add in a reference to how stupid I am as well eh? | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 12 2012 02:16 VisceraEyes wrote: Hesmyrr's case is "VE doesn't have a stance on RNG" Do you think that constitutes a valid case MZ? Really? Whatever the merits of the case are, hesmyrr chose to vote on them. As I indicated in my earlier posts (which apparently got everyone's panties in a wad), I don't think you're a very good lynch, thus you have the answer to your question. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 11 2012 19:34 Palmar wrote: you're all bad, inactive and boring. It's funny how well your own words describe you palmar. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 12 2012 03:45 Palmar wrote: When I say "there isn't a case on X" it means that I don't think there is a valid case to be put forth against that person. For example BrownBear and Ace, while both completely fucking useless so far in the game, neither has a valid case against him. That won't change even if some internet warrior writes a "case" on them. So this means you're the ultimate arbiter of what is a good case and what isn't? lol | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
| ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
On June 12 2012 03:54 VisceraEyes wrote: MZ that's a strawman argument - clearly Palmar means in his opinion...quit trying to fuck with him. X( [/VE to the rescue] No it's not a strawman. Palmar is being arrogant (as usual) and I'm calling him on his bullshit. And if that's what he measn then he can tell me that himself, he certainly shouldn't need you to be his yes man. | ||
|
Meapak_Ziphh
United States6789 Posts
| ||
| ||
