EPTHey look it's me!
TL Mafia LXI
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
Hey look it's me! | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
| ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
Sharrant On April 22 2013 08:29 Sharrant wrote: No, I want to sort this out. If you answer this for me satisfactorily, I will give you a reprieve for a bit. What is your exact reasoning for voting for BM. Give me one paragraph, with your thought process. If it's policy, tell me it's policy and the exact policy. If you have other reasoning for it, please detail that reasoning to the best of your ability. I will be reading and cooking for a while. I know this is a Sunday, but I would really like more people to be active. There's 25 people in this game, and honestly it feels like a mini to me. Thank you to the people who are being active. "If you give me the right answer I'll leave you alone" This irked me, this notion always irks me. If you're "pressuring" by saying exactly what someone should do to get you off their back, then you are not pressuring. This is an easy way for scum to appear to scumhunt with an easy out. On April 22 2013 08:40 Sharrant wrote: I see. I'll wait until Bill Murray is back in the thread before I say anything more about this then, if I feel the need to say anything more. Let's give ourselves another topic then. Pick a player who you would like to discuss with me, and I will read their filter while I cook and eat. I would suggest Mr. Cheesecake, but I would prefer it if you picked the candidate for discussion. So Sharrant gets his answer, with the answer being the obvious (and as rayn points out, already said before). "I didn't like the miller claim" That's what Sharrant accept as a satisfactory answer? What other answer could there be? Asking questions that only have one answer, regardless of alignment, is useless. Yet it's easy to skim over these two posts and have it seems as if he contributed. Who posts in a way that seems like they contribute, but don't? Scum do. On April 22 2013 10:23 Sharrant wrote: @Vivax This is the most bothersome quote in Hopeless' filter. It reads to me as if he already knows Vivax is town, so he's not thinking about the play in every possible scenario. If Vivax is town: The play is indeed somewhat reckless, but it also has some degree of accuracy. Mafia generally will float towards their QT at the beginning to check out their new toy, and coordinate. This is not fool proof, but is at least grounded in logic, and offers a decent way to focus your search during the first day. If Vivax is mafia: The play is bad. He's given out several townreads (which always sticks in peoples mind as mafia oriented), and he potentially denies himself opportunities for easy mislynches or he has to go back on his town reads. Whether or not that makes him suspicious to everyone else is moot, because it will make him feel like he's being suspicious and less safe. If Vivax is third party: This is pretty much the same as if he's town as his main goal is just survival, and scum hunting will help in that survival. That Hopeless does not seem to ever figure out why Palmar can attach town value to Vivax's statement, and that he does not seem to have mentally played out each situation is suspicious. There's a more I could write, but as is I would A) like to see more from him so I can see if he follows the same patterns I'm seeing B) I would prefer other lynches over him at this point. When I see more from him I will reevaluate again as to whether he should be more of a priority lynch. I do consider him a good lynch, and likely mafia, but there are others I would lynch before him. Here Sharrant is saying: "Hopeless is doing this thing that makes him scummy, I shall watch him and see if he keeps doing it" Another easy out, telling the person you're "pressuring" exactly what they need to do (or not do in this case) to avoid being pressured more. On April 22 2013 10:51 Sharrant wrote: Bill Murray, please get in the thread. Right now almost every single read in this thread runs back to the incident that you sparked, so you best get back into the thread and tell us if you were serious about your claim or not so we can start working things out. More empty threats and easy outs. On April 22 2013 10:56 Sharrant wrote: ShiaoPi, at your earliest possible convenience I would like you to tell me how you feel about Raynepelikoneet, TheRavensName, Hopeless1nder, and one person of your choosing. I'll accept as low as one sentence on the first 3, but whoever you choose I'd like you to write something of decent size about. And more.... Not even indicating any read, just asking for reads from another player. More of this: On April 22 2013 11:28 Sharrant wrote: Oatsmaster, who are your top 2 lynch candidates today and why? On April 22 2013 11:30 Sharrant wrote: Also, same thing with Yamato, which two people would you lynch right now? Just scattershot. Ask everyone for their opinion and you'll get everyone's opinion. It's not pressure, there is no direction or follow-up with these questions, it's simply a shallow attempt to seem involved. One other thing I'd like to point out is his consistent "I'm here now, I'm leaving now" updates. The comments about him cooking, the promises to look over players later or that he's waiting for more information, or this gem: On April 22 2013 13:33 Sharrant wrote: And with that, I'm going to bed... Good night, everyone. They all scream insecurity, which is in stark contrast with his "pressure" posts which have an air of misguided authority about them. All his posts scream "look at me I'm active and contributing" without actually contributing, All his other posts scream insecurity. Sharrant is scum. ##Vote Sharrant | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 11:34 Bill Murray wrote: one hour later has read the entire game and made a case on sharrant? his case is really tunnely, and reaching, as well FoS Clarity Yeah okay I might have started reading and then figured I would read the last two pages and see palmar talking about possibly being the hammervote so figured I'd show my face. interested why you think my case is reaching, though. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 11:36 Oatsmaster wrote: meh I changed my mind again, I dont wanna lynch him. GAME SO HARD. Im town, yamato is town. Who is scum? ##Unvote Clarity's case looks kinda weird, like random filtering dudes and bringing up someone 'new' that has not been discussed other than 'REALLY GOOD SCUM OR TOWNNNN'. Clarity, thoughts on me and yamato? I never said really good scum or town, in fact I think he's bad scum. Like I said I have no idea about you. I liked yamato's post on ace. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 11:44 Oatsmaster wrote: No I said, Why Sharrent? There has been absolutely no other discussion on him? Why not discuss the things that are currently issues in the thread? Tis not how I roll. On April 23 2013 11:44 getmoript wrote: So Clarity, are you seriously flat out admitting to not reading the thread and making a case off of a random filter? I read the thread I just posted I was catching up a little after I started reading >.> Maybe comment on my case instead of twisting my words? | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 12:06 Mr. Cheesecake wrote: Why is there a case on Sharrant by some guy that randomly got into the thread.... Why not? Maybe instead of asking a question that has no answer you could comment on the case I made? | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 13:18 WaveofShadow wrote: I'll comment on it. I already forget who said it but it screams to me of reaching. I have a very strong townread on Sharrant right now and nothing you bring up in your case on him strikes me as scummy at all---how is providing 'easy outs' as you call them an anti-town thing to do? What is inherently scummy about the way he has presented himself? I will agree that his methodology isn't necessarily great but it certainly doesn't look scummy. For example in the first example you gave he provides Rayn with an out because they had already been arguing for fucking ages and shitting up the thread; it's entirely possible that he wants the argument to end as well and just wants to get a clear read, which certainly seems likely as he encourages Rayn to continue the discussion on another subject. I don't see anything wrong with his asking questions of others; everybody in here does that and you're really reaching with his talking about how he has to go eat makes him look insecure. You say that he just asks shallow questions to look involved? He's been plenty involved and has had plenty opportunity as scum to just blend it or let something go and make it seem as though he has contributed. Your case is bad and I urge you to look over something else if YOU want to make it seem like you're contributing. Providing easy outs isn't anti-town so much as it is pro-scum. It's very easy to say "do this or I'll lynch you!!!!" because your target will do what you ask. This is fine if you are asking for something that may result in anything but when you ask a question with only one possible answer regardless of your targets alignment then it is just a waste of space. If you are town and you are scumhunting you do NOT want to give whoever you're pressuring the "how-to-get-rid-of-me guide" Asking questions is fine, it generates discussion even when you do it as scum, but when there is no clear motivation NOR follow-up behind the questions then I begin to wonder why the question was asked at all, and I can only see it as feigning to contribute which is obviously a scum trait. Although I don't agree with defending a townread day 1 at all unless they are at risk of being lynched (which he is clearly not) you do make a valid point concerning the first post I addressed. I still believe I am on to something but I can see with the current thread sentiment and the fact that I am in no strong position (showing up way late >.<) that this lynch isn't happening. A weak case is still a case and it could have sparked some discussion that's not centered around oats and yamato which are as far as I'm concerned both policy lynches at best. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 15:53 Bill Murray wrote: so i'm actually not going to vote clarity... im going to vote sharrant I mean, you actually voted yamato in the voting thread, but okay. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
| ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 16:38 Oatsmaster wrote: Well Vivax did try and derail yamato's lynch with his case So resistance to yamato's lynch. Also technically your case on sharrent has also been resistance. Which means that resistance being a factor in someone being scum is bullshit. I wanna lynch you kinda clarity, you know why? Yes good point, clearly I should look at myself when I say "there's been no resistance" Anyway, I'll indulge you, why? | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 17:04 Oatsmaster wrote: Good, my plan is going welllllll But main points that have been already said. Case on totally random dude. Case is bad because, town give dudes easy outs all the time Town scattershot questions all the time too. Like non of this is really all that scummy, it seems to be playstyle more than alignment IMO. So, easy case to make, and it basically allows you to 'look' useful cause whos gonna call out clarity for a bad case? No one. (Of course you could do this as town too, and thats what I am currently trying to find out) Ignored main argument of yamato/oats until asked. Clarity, do you think your meta for scum or town play has changed significantly since the last game you played? Cause the last 10 pages were all yamato/oats and I had nothing to add, so I focused elsewhere. Doubt my meta has changed much since last I played, seeing as it was last I played. And clearly you're wrong about people not calling me out if I make a (subjectively) bad case. Why would you say that? | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 17:25 Oatsmaster wrote: By call out, i meant, OH SHIT CLARITY SCUMMMMYYYYY. Which no one did. That case was really low impact, it came and went. What do you think about my response to your case? *shrugs*, you just called my case weird cause it wasn't a trending topic. You didn't even mention anything regarding my alignment till after Wave's hard defense of him, why is that? Although I stand by most of my observations in my case, it shouldn't have been made a case yet, shoulda just put it in the notes till I had a little more. Guess I felt like contributing something fresh since I felt guilty for missing the start of the game. It was either post that or post nothing seeing as it was quite late. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
Don't have many full fledged opinions yet, but the people I was gonna look into next (that being tonight, have work soon) were gonna be giygas, bc and shiaopi (mainly because I don't remember much of them from reading through the thread) | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
Fuck off guys I went to bed at 5 and woke up at 8, I got asked who else I'd like to lynch and my answer is, I dunno but I'm gonna look at these people next. Doesn't mean they're the only ones I'll look at if I find nothing it's just who I'm gonna look at next. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 23 2013 23:49 Vivax wrote: I find this quote interesting. Clarity apparently was afraid of not posting anything before the hammer fell, and here he is admitting that his case on Sharrant was something done in haste, and to "show his face", not cause he found the reasons good enough to post them so quickly. Hi Vivax. When you say interesting, what do you mean? Because pointing out something as interesting and seeing if anyone else jumps on it is interesting. Erm, yes I wanted to get a couple of posts in before day 1 ended, and I didn't just want it to be "I'm here guys", I do possess some self preservation. I figured if I showed my face maybe people would hold off on hammering and give me a chance to catch up. Turns out palmar wasn't even close to hammering but w/e, I wasn't sure. And I did find reasons, maybe the case isn't well worded or convincing but it is in essence why I believe he's scum. | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
| ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 24 2013 00:16 yamato77 wrote: Did you read my case? Or the thread? What the fuck? I read your case, there are some reasons that bc might be scum, but not strong ones. I was asking the question because that was what you started your case off with, it makes no sense so I asked about it. Will you answer? Also is oats hammered or not? I thought he was at 12 with shiao now | ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
| ||
|
Clarity_nl
Netherlands6826 Posts
On April 24 2013 04:01 yamato77 wrote: So why didn't we lynch BC? And why did Vivax apparently post an intentionally misleading votecount? And why did people not listen to me and not hammer Oats? And why did Clarity apparently not care that town was lynching someone he didn't want to lynch? And why did no one decide to listen to the only person who gave a fuck about who we were lynching yesterday? uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I didn't not want to lynch him either. It didn't feel right but as hopeless pointed out in the face of dying he was just still being trolly.... you don't do that as town.. Yamato why were you so certain that oats was town, I think you were the only one. It wasn't that you were explaining how he was a bad lynch, you were saying HE IS TOWN OMG IDIOTS. What made you so sure? | ||
| ||
