EPTWorld Heavyweight Championship mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
Edit: But uhh... totally not hype. No hype at all. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
I'm town. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 09:15 Blazinghand wrote: So, Risen, I'd like to hear your reasoning for not voting Oats. Are you protecting your scumbuddy? eh? No I'm not, but I'm not going to randomly lynch someone, either. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 10:20 Holyflare wrote: ##vote Oatsmaster Seems reasonable for now. In the meantime I do not know anyone's playstyles so I do not have an adequate basis for a policy lynch as of yet but that will most probably change after I've dug around into peoples playstyles. For now, does anyone know other people's 'metas'? Do some people play differently when they are scum compared to their town play? I know it may not be glaringly obvious differences but I'd like to know who the weaker people are in this game (guess you can add me to that). Why would you say that? There's so many other reasons you could get behind an rng lynch "rng'd" by someone else (quotes because sure that long explanation sounds random, but couldn't he just find something and guide it to Oats?). Reasonable is not the first thing that springs to mind. And no, "Ho ho! I was merely FAKING my vote old chap!" isn't a good excuse for finding it reasonable. I find it reasonable to vote for you, though. I don't trust people who proclaim themselves as weak, especially in a game titled "World Heavyweight Championship mafia". You saw the name, you knew what you were going for. You didn't feel weak when you signed up, so why do you feel weak now? ##vote: Holyflare | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 12:13 Blazinghand wrote: Actually, I also find it highly interesting that you are drawing suspicion onto my methods and motives for the random vote, but not actually calling a random vote bad in and of itself. Are you claiming that the only problem with RNG is that I may have manipulated the outcome (not possible) or that the RNG I used wasn't random (it was)? And that if I could convince you that it was truly random and I didn't manipulate the outcome, you'd be fine with it? Maybe, maybe not, but you also state you're not willing to "randomly lynch someone" earlier on. So which is it? Is my vote random, or isn't it random? Are you casting doubt on it because you really doubt it? Do you have a problem with a true RNG in general (as you imply in your second post) or do you think I failed to appropriately RNG (as you imply later)? You can't both say "I won't vote Oats because I don't randomly vote" AND "the oats vote isn't random"... I don't have a problem with a random vote in and of itself, I have a problem with someone accepting a random vote made by someone else as reasonable and what RNG respresents. If I could be convinced that someone could truly make an RNG applicable that scum could not tamper with I still probably wouldn't be ok with it, because it's day 1. We should be focus on generating discussion. A random vote can be useful as discussion starter, look at what has happened already with HF, but to just vote for someone based upon RNG defeats the purpose of playing mafia. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 12:48 Holyflare wrote: Risen, in a game of 9 players in which I know nothing about any of the players there is no better system to accept straight off than RNG. Obviously there are ways to get my attention drawn to other people, however, in a 'world heavyweight championship' as you so lovingly pointed out, is it really going to be that obvious when people screw up? I think not. Like I said in my original post, however, I am open to peoples opinions on other players. You could read people's posts and judge them by that? Seems to be a pretty common way to vote. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 13:23 Blazinghand wrote: I personally do not find either of these reasons compelling. A decision to hop or not hop on the RNG lynch wagon is dependent on personal ideas about how useful RNG is, and whether or not it paints someone as scummy depends on their reasoning and history, not the simple fact that they did or did not hop on. Calling holyflare scum, likewise, is not in and of itself a good strat. I too don't like holyflare's play, but you think I am scum, and it is almost certainly because of my interactions with holyflare. Instead of calling him a newb card player and voting him, as risen did, without serious explanation and an attempt to help him, I actually interacted with him seriously. playing the newb card is also something newbies do. the optimal response is mine, not risen's. Mine determines holyflare's alignment. Risen did not attempt to suss out what was up with holyflare. he laid some smackdown, but hasn't seriously followed it up. Where is he in convincing me to vote holyflare as I interact with holyflare? After all, he thinks holyflare is scum, no? I find risen scummy for that reason. Calling someone out for the only thing worth calling someone out on at the time makes me scummy? You also disregard the fact that I can be doing other things while doing things in mafia. Why is that? | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 13:31 Blazinghand wrote: Look, Oats, you have to admit, it IS pretty weird that Risen hasn't been trying to convince me, right? Like, even drawing some weird unflipped associative tell shit you can't just go and say "I'm not going to try to convince BH, who's literally in the thread right now and rather influential as a town player, that HF is scum". You also have to admit, do you not, that given that holyflare IS LITERALLY A NEWBIE, it's possible he doesn't get what playing the newb card means? It's possible that yes, the reaction should be suspicion, but also an attempt to draw him into conversation? That not doing that is sub-optimal, and therefore scummy? Or I'm playing dota | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
Clarity and Dirk... + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://blogwillhunting.com/gif/goodgifhunting2.gif) Filter diving now. Also ##unvote | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 02 2013 15:10 Clarity_nl wrote: Blazinghand is a cool guy (meaning no lynchy lynchy todaysies despite no real read on him (sowwy)) Holyflare town, sloosh town (despite opening post making me tilt my head) Risen is bleh, have to wait for him to have a scumread and have him explain it to see what colour his blood is. Oats..... his OMGUS on BH looks pretty bad. But then again oats tends to look pretty bad early as town. Did he, as scum, crack under the pressure of a single vote by BH? I dunno, sounds doubtful. I liked his pressure on holyflare, because an opening post proclaiming newb should always be pressured. But sloosh came out looking town and oats hasn't retracted his vote yet, so let's see what he thinks when he's back. I'm not convinced, anyway. Oats could you explain this? First post in the thread. Do you know something I don't? At the point of this post what has sloosh done in thread to give you this feeling? I can understand having a town read on HF (straight calling him town is a big stretch at this point but this is mafia where we don't use logic and weeeeeeeeeeeee). I, however, am bleh. Why am I bleh? Bleh because you have some meta read on me that requires my reads? You already had a read in thread. It wasn't a strong read, just a read that was worthy of a vote. Why isn't that enough for your meta? I can tell you now I think it's almost impossible to have a scum read stronger than 60/40 day 1. It's not logical to have a scum read day 1 when there is so little to go off of. Clarity would know this, clarity should know this, and he's my top scum read for now because... What is this shit about oats? You liked his pressure where he didn't like the newb claim from HF? I did the same exact thing as him before him. For him it's bad and town, for me it's hold on lets wait. This looks like a subtle push on me you're hoping will gain traction. You haven't committed to anything and can fit things to whatever you want at a later point in time. On October 02 2013 15:14 Clarity_nl wrote: I know you like your game theory, and technically we have a 2/7 chance (since doc will claim), but the information we get off of people agreeing to a random lynch isn't that telling I don't think. Rather just spark discussion as usual and see what happens. Despite,(according to database numbers) a random lynch being slightly more effective, if it hits town it probably gets less information than if there are a couple of lynch candidates and they are discussed and votes are moved around. He's rewording the 2/7 thing and acting like he's contributing, he's saying that a random lynch is slightly more effective and at the same time saying he'd rather not use something he views as more effective. Why the contradiction within your own post? On October 02 2013 15:23 Clarity_nl wrote: That's fine and I think we have some information that came out of it rather than lurker lynch policy talk which is a dead horse. But do you plan on hanging on to your rng lynch today unless someone becomes obvious scum? Or do you feel that oats is no longer a random lynch now and you think he's most likely to flip scum at this time, and if that changes you'll change your vote? A lot of words to say "Are you sticking to your RNG vote or will you vote the person you think is most scummy?" Is that even a real question? On October 02 2013 15:46 Clarity_nl wrote: I'm not trying to imply that I put him as a townread as some kind of trap, I didn't, just wasn't thinking properly. But did you not find it odd that I gave him a townread earlier? Where did this even come up? Why do you feel the need to defend yourself against something no one has brought up.. Why are you looking at your filter and trying to find things that are potentially scummy then preemptively defending yourself? Why am I the only one who sees this? On October 02 2013 19:05 Clarity_nl wrote: Yeah I'll go with that, actually ##Vote Dirkzor Just going with the flow, eh? Because it looks to me like in your post right before this you were doubtful. On October 02 2013 18:58 Clarity_nl wrote: Did you really feel the need to drop a vote before reading marv, were you afraid someone might vote him before you? I don't really understand. So you read what he wrote, didn't feel anything from it, marv came in with a vote, you were suspicious of it, and then when he gave an extremely simple explanation of his vote you were all about it? Ok. Why didn't you stick to your previous feeling? On October 02 2013 18:59 marvellosity wrote: I explained why I voted. Your question is silly. "yes, I was terrified someone might vote him before me, that's absolutely why I voted him like that" Actually marv, yeah that's a very good reason to vote like that. I know you're being sarcastic in the quote, but wouldn't scum marv want to lead a lynch instead of adopting one later? Why does Clarity not see this, but instead immediately drops his pressure on marv? There's no way he has any sort of town read on marv at this point. Does clarity know something I don't? On October 02 2013 19:22 Clarity_nl wrote: I could quote marvs posts if you'd like but they're right there. #Sheeple You spend 4 paragraphs on a null read yet your scumread is hardly explained. Saying HF has done nothing means you haven't read the thread carefully enough. Reading him as most likely to be scum is bleh. Why is that? You certainly haven't given anything on HF since the very first post at this point where you simply call him town. Another case of knowing too much. On October 02 2013 21:49 Clarity_nl wrote: How'd you feel about a sloosh lynch if dirk didn't exist in this game? Why? On October 02 2013 21:51 Clarity_nl wrote: You're no fun marv. Is there anyone other than dirk that you have an opinion on so far? Oh, sure. Yeah totally. Nitpick. It wasn't a contradiction from where I'm standing. Where's the contradiction? On October 02 2013 23:04 Clarity_nl wrote: I'm saying your question is based on the false premise that I think you're scum. Huh? Maybe it's all the SUPER SUBTLE soft pushing you've been doing on him. + Show Spoiler + On October 02 2013 15:23 Clarity_nl wrote: That's fine and I think we have some information that came out of it rather than lurker lynch policy talk which is a dead horse. But do you plan on hanging on to your rng lynch today unless someone becomes obvious scum? Or do you feel that oats is no longer a random lynch now and you think he's most likely to flip scum at this time, and if that changes you'll change your vote? On October 02 2013 18:42 Clarity_nl wrote: Just the usual really. I didn't mean anything in particular but it >felt< that the starting hours were more productive than usual due to BH's rng lynch suggestion. I can't really quantify it. What do you think of oats? On October 02 2013 19:13 Clarity_nl wrote: Would still like your thoughts on oats, marv. On October 02 2013 22:44 Clarity_nl wrote: Man... Could you explain your townread on oats better? You seemed to go "despite this list of things I just mentioned I still think he's town because reasons", namely that he cares... Could you point out some examples? What do YOU think of oats? You haven't said anything about him since you came into the thread saying his OMGUS was bad, but he's usually bad. The very next thing you actually say in relation to him is contradiction? You totally weren't laying a trap earlier, but now it looks like you are. On October 03 2013 00:32 Clarity_nl wrote: You tend to make sense. Though honestly if you were wrong I'd sheep you as scum so, meh. This is why meta is stupid. On October 03 2013 02:37 Clarity_nl wrote: Please drop off your reads at the read centre near you, or call if you have thoughts that you need help with. When you contact us to arrange discussion of your reads you will be informed of the pick-up schedule for your area. Click here to locate the nearest read centre to you. BEEP Filler. On October 03 2013 02:46 Clarity_nl wrote: Read the thread and find out, do not post until you're caught up. Thanks. Totally ok for you to ask a million questions, no one else can, though. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 03 2013 23:48 Dirkzor wrote: Actually the more I think about it the scummier your post gets. You get called out for inactivity and not producing. Of course you claim this is not alignment indicative but then you start producing like a maniac. First of after spending some 24 hours in the RNG BH thing your conclusion is rather weak. You then proceed to jump on a minor (imo) thing about HF. Of those 3 bullets I only really think number 1 is worth noting. The bolded part is something you should never call someone out on unless you're using it as part of a case and you're voting that person. Discouraging people from posting is not something town players should do. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 04 2013 01:43 Blazinghand wrote: also where the hell has risen been anyways Afk. I'll be leaving the thread for another hour and a half right now. | ||
| ||
