EPTWhite Flag Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
| ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
| ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On October 31 2013 09:31 hzflank wrote: Stutters posting when he does not have to is a town Stutters. That is exactly what mafia Stutters would want you to think. Why label Stutters as town and leave the thread? We are trying to find scum, not tell scum who is town. Your post serves no greater purpose other than to gain Stutters' support. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On October 31 2013 12:05 Asinine wrote: That is exactly what mafia Stutters would want you to think. Why label Stutters as town and leave the thread? We are trying to find scum, not tell scum who is town. Your post serves no greater purpose other than to gain Stutters' support. Looks like he didn't even gain Stutters support... Regardless, hzflank does not look good right now. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
Another thought elicits it's familiars Crowding their weight into the chamber Of my weary, doleful mind What right does he possess To exhaust my idle time By way of his enslaving image. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On October 31 2013 12:24 Bereft wrote: no, i want to ask a question -- why does pandain only get to ask one. asinine, what's your reason for smurfing? i can think of only 2 reasons. which one is yours: [a] you have a reputation known throughout the land of being an excellent scum hunter, and you don't want to die night 1. [b] you believe your meta is so obvious people would be able to read your play day 1. [c] other (please expand) Meta is the only reason why anyone smurfs. I hope that answer is sufficient. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote: As a conversation starter. Up until that point only little blue men were being discussed and I am unable to partake in that discussion to to my unfamiliarity with big green or red men. Obviously I did not think that Stutters' post gave a clue to his alignment, but I may not of conveyed the tone correctly. Your post: On October 31 2013 09:31 hzflank wrote: Stutters posting when he does not have to is a town Stutters. It is quite apparent that you were trying to bait Stutters into posting. This is not what I take issue with. My issue is that your first post is stated as a fact and an imperative. In other words, you are essentially saying that Stutters should post -- when he doesn't have to -- and you will automatically consider him town. Now this may not be what you wanted to say, but it is exactly what it sounds like you are saying to any third-party. "Come out to play, Stutters! If you post a lot, I won't think you're scum." I don't see much town motivation in this strategy. Yes, you may get Stutters to post a little more. This, in theory, should give you town cred. However, you are quite clearly choosing one of the most obvious lynchbait targets to talk about on Day 1. Additionally, after Stutters reply, you just disappear with no follow-up. When you return, you make a lengthy post that focuses on defending yourself. There is a wishy-washy accusation towards me, but it is weak and unsubstantiated. You are also strong-arming Stutters to play a particular way that could make his meta harder to read in the long run. All in all, I am still unimpressed with you. Convince me otherwise. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On October 31 2013 13:40 Oatsmaster wrote: Random lynching is bad and lets not do it. If we hit scum, great, but then what do we do on day 2? If we hit town, fuck, but then what do we do on day 2? Yeah sure we have a 30% chance of hitting scum, but we also have a 70% chance of hitting town, Would you lynch someone who you think is 70% town? I dont think so. This man speaks the truth. Give this man an Oscar. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On November 01 2013 04:26 Stutters695 wrote: So where did Asinine disappear to? Here in Qatar, we sleep. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
##vote: hzflank | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On November 01 2013 05:22 Stutters695 wrote: I would say he answered your questions decently. What else were you looking for in that regard? An answer or a response to this post: On October 31 2013 13:31 Asinine wrote: Bereft, I want to know how exactly you arrived at the 25% number. Scumhunting will increase odds of hitting scum to a percentage far greater than that. Please explain. Your post: It is quite apparent that you were trying to bait Stutters into posting. This is not what I take issue with. My issue is that your first post is stated as a fact and an imperative. In other words, you are essentially saying that Stutters should post -- when he doesn't have to -- and you will automatically consider him town. Now this may not be what you wanted to say, but it is exactly what it sounds like you are saying to any third-party. "Come out to play, Stutters! If you post a lot, I won't think you're scum." I don't see much town motivation in this strategy. Yes, you may get Stutters to post a little more. This, in theory, should give you town cred. However, you are quite clearly choosing one of the most obvious lynchbait targets to talk about on Day 1. Additionally, after Stutters reply, you just disappear with no follow-up. When you return, you make a lengthy post that focuses on defending yourself. There is a wishy-washy accusation towards me, but it is weak and unsubstantiated. You are also strong-arming Stutters to play a particular way that could make his meta harder to read in the long run. All in all, I am still unimpressed with you. Convince me otherwise. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
| ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
I'll filter a few other players. Be back soon. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
Reason #1 This is the first post that brings up fuba in any regard: On November 01 2013 09:51 hzflank wrote: This seems to have flown under the radar: You say that you are not sure whether the most concerning thing actually exists. You feel pretty confident with a vote on someone that you only lean slightly scum on. I would say that you decided on where to park your vote before you decided on the reasons for it. ##vote: mkfuba07 In sum, hzflank is saying 1) Fuba has a slight scum read on hzflank but... 2) is very confident in voting him Therefore, this disconnect makes fuba scum. However, this accusation is cherry-picking information from fuba's post! Fuba's post: On November 01 2013 03:09 mkfuba07 wrote: Actually, I think I'm going to vote for him. He's talked quite a bit, but always ends with a noncommittal statement. He kind of narrates the thread, but doesn't give a conclusion. As far as his involvement in the rng debate, the apparent inconsistency in his position is the most concerning thing to me, though I'm not even sure there is one. I think rng-ing would be bad play, so advocating for it or opposing it are pretty null. I agree with jjd that he appears to be supporting it in one post, then the next one appears to be agreeing with the first. However, I guess it could be interpreted the way hzflank says he meant it, so overall that just makes me lean slight scum on him. Altogether, I feel pretty confident with a vote on hzflank. ##Vote: hzflank See: bold hzflank conveniently left out the part where fuba substantiates his read on hzflank. The bolded quote should be reason enough for a townie to vote a scum read. Ultimately, the vote is justified by that bolded statement. When you see the quote in its full context, the part about RNG is clearly mentioned as an aside, not as a primary argument. Reason #2: The other people voting for fuba do not make any compelling arguments. Pandain is the only one who brought up actual evidence, but only did so after he had voted for fuba. In essence, Pandain did exactly what hzflank is accusing fuba of doing. He voted a slight scum read and then expressed his overt confidence in that read later on. If hzflank was consistent in his reasoning, he would be voting Pandain right now(or at the very least pressuring him). Grack seems to be buddying Pandain and vice-versa. So far, I have not seen a single useful post out of him. Odin sounds like he hasn't completely caught up to the thread. Again, a vote with no real reasoning. Reason #3: The votes have piled up far too quickly for my liking. Not much to go into here. I don't like any of the people voting fuba and I don't like the reasons they gave for voting fuba. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
| ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On November 02 2013 07:56 Pandain wrote: Okay, then do you think the votes are still piling up too quickly? I mean to be frank there are only three votes on him. I count four. Honestly, votes pile up too quickly more often because town begins to play impulsively than because scum is piling on the target. I think we have a classic case of misguided town being led astray by scum (hzflank) here. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On November 02 2013 07:57 Pandain wrote: I agree Hz's reasonings are poor, but it seems to be more of a result of mis-understanding then pure malice. Even ignoring him, what do you think of my points? All I saw was "mkfuba is apathetic" and a few quotes of his posts. First of all, apathy isn't a sure-fire scumtell. Apathy is usually an indication of disinterest. While scum are more likely to appear disinterested than town are, you'll need a broader set of evidence to convince me that mkfuba is scum. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
| ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
I will do so post-lynch. Right now, our primary lynch targets are fuba and hzflank. If we're deciding between these two, then my goal right now should be to convince town that hzflank is the better lynch. | ||
|
Asinine
Qatar66 Posts
On November 02 2013 08:10 hzflank wrote: Why are there only two lynch targets, to you? With 50 minutes before deadline, introducing a new lynch target only gives scum the opportunity to sway the lynch in their favor. Thus, sticking to the two primary lynch targets is the safer play. | ||
| ||
