EPTWhite Flag Mafia
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
| ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
Also, I'm suspicious of the people pushing for it. Most notably hzflank because he only said he was for it after people brought it up. Like, even though it's only a 30% chance, if I'm scum and someone talks about random lynching my first thought is probably something like "Oh god, what if one of us gets chosen? There'd be nothing we could do." So he makes his post saying he'd be for a RNG lynch to show everyone that he's not afraid of it. Even going as far as saying On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote: How in the world could his odds actually be worse than random? Even if he had no scumhunting skill whatsoever, it would be @ worst equal to random.I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On October 31 2013 22:20 Grackaroni wrote: Basically. I think people agreeing to lynch randomly are just showing everyone "Look @ me, I don't care who we lynch!". I equate it to when someone says that they'll just automatically lynch whoever another player picks no questions asked. It's scummy.I don't understand. You believe that scum are afraid of being picked by random lynches, yet you say that people are scummy for pushing something scum are afraid of? | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On October 31 2013 22:30 Oatsmaster wrote: JJD, im confused, are you saying that Random lynching is Pro town or Pro scum? I think it's pro-scum. But I still think it'd be something I'd be afraid of if I was scum if that makes sense. Because there still is that 30% chance that my team would get screwed on day 1 and there'd be nothing I could do about it. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
Might as well untill I see a better choice. Seemed like there's a decent amount of support for a hzflank lynch | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On October 31 2013 23:01 Oatsmaster wrote: Yeah. Other people pointed out stuff that didn't look for him good either. And like, the way I see it, when there's something that people need to take a stance on, very rarely will all the scummies end up on the same side of the issue. So I think there's a real good chance that one of the pro-RNGers is scum. And I think hzflank is the scummiest of them.So what exactly are you calling Hzflank scummy for? Promoting random lynch? | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On October 31 2013 23:09 Grackaroni wrote: OK. You also cant lynch people without other people supporting it. You do realize you can't just lynch people because others support it right? On October 31 2013 23:09 Grackaroni wrote: I'm sorry. Do you have a better reason for the people you've voted for?The only reasoning you have given is that hzflank was the 3rd person to say yes to random lynch, thus he was pretending to agree with it to show that he is not afraid. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 00:53 Grackaroni wrote: still didn't answer his question. Why would an RNG lynch be better than a lurker lynch?This whole game is lurkers lol | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 01:12 hzflank wrote: Possibly not. If I thought someone was scummy but I didn't think there was any chance that person could get lynched then I probably wouldn't waste my vote there.Why is that relevant to your vote? Would you not have voted for me if there seemed to be no support for it? | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 01:13 Grackaroni wrote: Is this a fact?That is the reason why statistically day 1 RNG lynches come out more successful than analysis. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 01:24 Laughing Jack wrote: What do you mean I don't bring up anything new? I'm the first person to bring up that supporting RNG lynch is scummy. Whether or not you agree w/ it, it's something new. And who really cares if I brought up something new? I commented on the main topic of conversation. Jarjar doesn't bring up anything new but just says he's against randomlynching, However most of the post is just fluff about what rng-lynching is to make it seem like his saying more then "Yeah I agree". And it's very certainly fluff because he doesn't reach a conclusion with it. And what exactly do you mean by "he doesn't reach a conclusion with it"? What conclusion could I have reached? | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
OK, I just saw that. I was thinking that you meant games where people actually employed a random lynch. Ok based on that information you can assume that random lynch on day 1 will in fact lynch scum more often on day 1. However, I'd be willing to bet that it would result in a town win less of the time. For reasons already pointed out regarding the amount of information gathered. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 02:09 Grackaroni wrote: Well @ the very least, wouldn't it make more sense to randomly choose someone out of the lurkers?I don't really wish to argue over the benefits of RNG but you are wrong. Scum can push town lurkers and we would be none the wiser. RNG is completely objective. /still against random lynching | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On October 31 2013 12:53 hzflank wrote: How could anyone read this post and not think you were for random lynching?I would think my chances of actually identifying scum on day one are less than 31%, therefore RNG would yield better results for me. Ofcourse, We would need to decide on who rolls the dice. How should we do that? I suggest we vote on it. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 02:37 hzflank wrote: This is exactly my point. You pretend like you're ok w/ random lynching when you are clearly concerned about it. First you say that you're worried about who gets to choose the random person. Then when it's pointed out to you that there is indeed a way for a random selection to be chosen, you change your stance to: If we lynch randomly then we wont get any discussion.Because the whole point of that was that I did not like the idea of random lynching because I was worried that scum might control the random. If that was your stance then what was the point of suggesting that we vote for someone to pick the random person? | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 03:25 Laughing Jack wrote: Oats said RNG was bad. I said the people that were supporting it were scummy. Not exactly the same thing.No, oats said why we shouldn't rng. You just talked some general reasoning for why scum/town would or wouldn't want to rng. You said townies shouldn't want to do it and that scum wouldn't want to do it. A lot of people were confused to what you actually ment. And that was because you didn't type it with any conclusion in mind. You could had reached a conclusion by for example saying. I believe scum wouldn't do this because the risk it pose to themselves are high, so rng supporters are town. or I believe townies wouldn't do this because it's bad play so rng supporters are scum. Regardless if what you choose is true or not picking one side means you believe in it or are pretending to believe in it. Picking neither means you're full of fluff. But fine, so what do you mean by rng is scummy, which was what you were first to bring up?, Is it that it is bad townplay and scummy because of it. Then how was it you and not Oats who brought that up? And I explained what I meant about why townies and scum both wouldn't really want it. It's not just a black and White conclusion like you're making it out to be. What do you think about RNG lynching? For someone claiming that my posts are full of fluff, I sure don't know what your opinion is on pretty much anything. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
On November 01 2013 04:08 hzflank wrote: OK, you're saying that you were being sarcastic in that post as well as the following one. Didn't understand that's what you were saying. If that's the case then it didn't come across that way to me at all but I can definately see it that way now. I suggested that we vote for someone so that we do not have to vote for someone. That is not a serious suggestion, that is me saying that I want to vote and not rng. Since that was the bulk of my case: ##unvote hzflank | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
- I thought I already explained this but: I never said my reason for voting hzflank was because other people suspected him. I voted for him because I felt he was scummy for my own reason and the fact that other people also suspected him made it so I felt comfortable putting my vote there because I thought there was a decent chance that he would get lynched. If everyone in the thread thought he was like super town then I probably don't vote for him because I don't want to waste time voting for someone that has no chance of being lynched. - I didn't reconsider my opinion because it got shit on. I changed my opinion because I believe I misinterpreted what hzflank was saying. I wasn't the only person that missed his sarcasm but now that he pointed it out I think it's very likely that he was indeed against a random lynch from the getgo. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
The rest of his posts are him asking other people their opinions. | ||
|
JarJarDrinks
United States1302 Posts
And would either of you care to comment on laughing jack ? | ||
| ||
