| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On February 22 2012 08:47 wherebugsgo wrote: Jackal would you kill redFF right now if you had a gun? No sir. I'd kill you. If I were compelled to kill somebody day 1 it would be you sir. Day 2 and beyond would be much more pleasant. I'd probably kill red day 2 though fwiw. Rarely do I get a gun though. All I have at my disposal this game is my vote. And I don't know where it's going yet. | ||
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
Now to everyone else: I've enjoyed comedy hour with Jackal, but his filter is completely void of content. Not a single post showing he isn't just along for the ride. Toad appears to be going through post-Arkham depression or something. A lot of fluff and he isn't very willing to share his reads. On February 22 2012 11:14 prplhz wrote: Okay I don't think that redFF is scum because he's been pretty out there. The scummiest he has done in my opinion is his claim which was oddly timed. Right now he's a terribly easy lynch, because we'll have to lynch him at some point. I'd like to see wherebugsgo explain how everything redFF has done can be explained by scum motivation and can not be explained by town motivation. The worst thing about this whole redFF thing is that the lynch is so easy that everybody can just pile onto him and then the day is kinda ruined, we aren't going to find anybody else. I don't think that redFF is scum because he's just been putting himself too much in the line of fire. On February 22 2012 11:14 prplhz wrote: I'll vote redFF to avoid no lynch. I kinda assume that this is an extended majority lynch where we can end up in a no lynch sitaution, but the OP doesn't really say anything about that. But like, redFF probably isn't scum, come on. There's also plenty good in having him around since scum can't role block anybody else no matter redFF's alignment. The lynch today comes down to "We very likely have to lynch redFF at some point, should it be today or do we have something better?". Right now, I think it's too early to say. These two statements by prpl completely contradict each other. You argue how you don't think red is scum, but you're willing to vote him to avoid no lynch? How does that make sense? If you're going to argue that he really is blue, then of course a no lynch would be more beneficial. How about push a different lynch if red isn't your priority? This is really poor from him. I know I already picked on Dirkzor for his language, but I'm going to do it again. On February 21 2012 07:03 Dirkzor wrote: The positive part is that I already have something to critisize... Good job on starting discussion. "Hey guys. Look at me and my protown attitude!" On February 22 2012 02:39 Dirkzor wrote: I'll give my honest opinion so far... Only scum say this. On February 22 2012 05:03 Dirkzor wrote: Wat? I'm glad you have that big confidence in my ability as town but I can't magicly make me notice scum... I notice what I notice when I notice it. And when I do I post it. So far this game I got jack. Lack of aggression and confidence. | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:19 chaoser wrote: the voting/discussion trends are a bit wonky... No shit. | ||
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:23 Jackal58 wrote: All I have at my disposal this game is my vote. And I don't know where it's going yet. "hey guys. Look at me quote the standard generic town role pm." *wink wink* | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:24 kitaman27 wrote: "hey guys. Look at me quote the standard generic town role pm." *wink wink* I rolled a 788 tonight Kita. Kiss my derriere. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:23 kitaman27 wrote: Dang it, I'm a sucker for blue claims. Funny to see the votes pile up on red after the claim, rather than before. On one hand, a mafia player who is set to die should always be claiming blue, but on the other, his claim ties up a potential roleblocker. Tracker is a tricky claim because even confirming it doesn't necessarily mean he isn't a mafia stalker or something. I'll be keeping my vote on him for the moment. Now to everyone else: I've enjoyed comedy hour with Jackal, but his filter is completely void of content. Not a single post showing he isn't just along for the ride. Toad appears to be going through post-Arkham depression or something. A lot of fluff and he isn't very willing to share his reads. These two statements by prpl completely contradict each other. You argue how you don't think red is scum, but you're willing to vote him to avoid no lynch? How does that make sense? If you're going to argue that he really is blue, then of course a no lynch would be more beneficial. How about push a different lynch if red isn't your priority? This is really poor from him. I know I already picked on Dirkzor for his language, but I'm going to do it again. "Hey guys. Look at me and my protown attitude!" Only scum say this. Lack of aggression and confidence. I love you so much right now. However, if you turn out to be the godfather I will hate myself forever. | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
| ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
Can you explain why you switched from a redFF vote to a Tyrran vote on February 22 2012 02:43, blazinghands? your posted reason doesn't say much: On February 22 2012 02:43 Blazinghand wrote: I think I have him figured out ##Vote: Tyrran especially given your follow up post: | ||
|
chaoser
United States5541 Posts
| ||
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:30 Jackal58 wrote: I rolled a 788 tonight Kita. Kiss my derriere. It was awful nice of them to turn the bumpers on just for you. | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:31 VisceraEyes wrote: Daaaaang dude that's like a 262 avg. I'm feeling jiggy. | ||
|
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:15 wherebugsgo wrote: I haven't personally attacked anyone in this thread. I have called them bad, I have said that their play sucks, and that they are in general useless for town. All of these things are game-relevant and actually pretty important. If you're referring to the fact that I said your agreement with syllo cements my opinion that syllo is wrong, then yes, you deserved that (and no, it is not ad hominem.) It is my opinion that syllo is wrong, and your agreement is bad. That's just indicative of you being bad. Since Dr. H also agrees with syllo, and his posting has been quite shitty, I think he's scum. I think you're just mad because I pointed out that your opinion is worth next to nothing since it's clearly wrong. Why would I be your second strongest read rather than syllo, in this case? Can you logically demonstrate why any case against BC is terrible instead of simply stating that it is and FOSing the people who suspect him? | ||
|
VisceraEyes
United States21170 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:38 kitaman27 wrote: It was awful nice of them to turn the bumpers on just for you. Daaaaaaaaayum! | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:31 chaoser wrote: Guys, I'm looking at the voting and blazinghand has voted for 3 different people under minimal reasoning in the last ten hours. I don't mind a redFF lynch but at the same time, we need to keep up discussion other people. Can you explain why you switched from a redFF vote to a Tyrran vote on February 22 2012 02:43, blazinghands? your posted reason doesn't say much: especially given your follow up post: Tyrran came by and posted some worthless stuff so I voted for him. then redFF asked if I thought he was town and I said "you're still scum" because he is still scum. | ||
|
Jackal58
United States4264 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:38 kitaman27 wrote: It was awful nice of them to turn the bumpers on just for you. You are definitely fucking with my buzz man. | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
@wherebugsgo My point is that, you knew before you joined this game that I'm stupid and you probably knew a lot of other people are stupid and that it's very unlikely that we've suddenly improved rapidly. You knew this unless you are stupid. Were you stupid? This is the situation you have put yourself in. Now you're throwing ad hominems around (yes, saying that player Y is more likely to be wrong because of the mere fact that player X agrees with him is an ad hominem on player X) and that's just making people think you're an asshole, clouding their judgement in emotions, which you should expect it to do. You know this unless you are stupid. Are you stupid? I like Jackal58 more right now just because he said he'd shoot you to make this game more enjoyable, that doesn't really make sense but that's how it is. This is the situation you've put yourself in, you're actively not making the best of it and you can't explain that away. My roleblocker point was the same that kitaman27 just made, redFF's existence ties up a roleblocker if they have one. If redFF is scum and they roleblock somebody else they force redFF to make his findings public which would give us more info to base a lynch on, which is good. If redFF is town then we get some hopefully juicy information, which is good. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:40 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Why would I be your second strongest read rather than syllo, in this case? Because you sheeped and syllogism didn't. prpl would be a scumread too if he was normally any good. But, it's nothing out of the ordinary to expect prplhz to make a bad argument, so despite the fact that he agrees with an opinion I disagree with it isn't alignment indicative for him. Can you logically demonstrate why any case against BC is terrible instead of simply stating that it is and FOSing the people who suspect him? I probably could, but I don't have to, since the burden of proof is on you. If you want to convince someone to vote BC you need to come up with a convincing argument first. For now, since your vote reason is poor, no one has a reason to follow you. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof | ||
|
kitaman27
United States9244 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:56 prplhz wrote: @kitaman27 I thought it was majority lynch back then so I said that I'd vote redFF to avoid no lynch. I think it's plurality lynch now and we'll see what I do. I'm pretty sure I said in a game not 4 months ago that I prefer no-lynches to lynches. Right now, I'm contradicting myself and that makes me scum? If I back down them I'm also contradicting myself (cf. the argument you made against redFF in the beginning of this game) and this also making me scum? Yikes, did I touch on a sensitive issue? On February 22 2012 12:56 prplhz wrote: I support lynches because redFF could conceivably be scum, I just don't think so. I just like a flip and this is my subjective opinion, it doesn't really make sense to discuss it right now. lol | ||
|
prplhz
Denmark8045 Posts
Maybe that sounded wrong, I support lynches over no lynched as long as it not anybody who isn't just about confirmed town. By support lynches, I don't mean "I will support any lynch from the first vote until the guy hangs, just because he's not confirmed town", but this should be rather obvious from my behavior so far so I don't really get what you're trying to do. | ||
|
wherebugsgo
Japan10647 Posts
On February 22 2012 12:56 prplhz wrote: @wherebugsgo My point is that, you knew before you joined this game that I'm stupid and you probably knew a lot of other people are stupid and that it's very unlikely that we've suddenly improved rapidly. You knew this unless you are stupid. Were you stupid? This is the situation you have put yourself in. Now you're throwing ad hominems around (yes, saying that player Y is more likely to be wrong because of the mere fact that player X agrees with him is an ad hominem on player X) and that's just making people think you're an asshole, clouding their judgement in emotions, which you should expect it to do. You know this unless you are stupid. Are you stupid? I like Jackal58 more right now just because he said he'd shoot you to make this game more enjoyable, that doesn't really make sense but that's how it is. This is the situation you've put yourself in, you're actively not making the best of it and you can't explain that away. I'm sorry but this made me laugh repeatedly because of how absolutely convoluted it is. In fact, this entire discussion is completely worthless because you're just butthurt and you can't handle being called bad. If you want people to lynch BC, then you need to come up with a convincing argument for him being scum. Until then, there's little else for me to do but ridicule you because you can't handle my style of play. My style of play is directed at forcing people into reacting certain ways. So far your reactions haven't made you look that great. My roleblocker point was the same that kitaman27 just made, redFF's existence ties up a roleblocker if they have one. If redFF is scum and they roleblock somebody else they force redFF to make his findings public which would give us more info to base a lynch on, which is good. If redFF is town then we get some hopefully juicy information, which is good. Very little of this is true, mostly because it's largely WIFOM. We don't know what the optimal choice for scum would be if redFF is town. No one knows what his role is except redFF himself. He could be lying and he could be telling the truth; how do we know? Can you find anything that would help us determine this? Also, if I were scum and redFF was town I'd personally probably not even bother roleblocking redFF because the simple knowledge that he claimed tracker would let me manipulate his standing in town. There are some players, on the other hand, who I know would roleblock him 100% if they were scum in that situation. If he's scum he either fake claims roleblock or he claims a fake result. Since he claimed tracker, neither of these scenarios helps us determine his alignment. It's even worse because in this setup roleblock notifications are not sent out (or at least that's what it says in the OP). Thus, only blues with an action that returns the same night (as in, DT-type roles) would 100% know that they were roleblocked. Vigis who shot have to consider the possibility that their targets were protected, doctors whose targets die would have to consider that their target got double stacked, etc. Imagine a setup where the scumteam has a rolecop and a roleblocker. They roleblock and cop the same person at once and then if they turn out to be anything other than a DT-type role anyone on the scumteam can fakeclaim a roleblock. How do you deal with that? So, essentially, if redFF is scum, we leave him alive today and that's one bad thing. Tomorrow we'll have to deal with either a roleblock claim or a result claim, neither of which will help us find out his alignment because both are possible from both alignments. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 RotterdaM StarCraft: Brood War 1024PiGStarcraft560 UpATreeSC  218NeuroSwarm  91JuggernautJason81 SteadfastSC 77ForJumy  22Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
PiGosaur Monday
OlimoLeague
StarCraft2.fi
StarCraft2.fi
The PondCast
StarCraft2.fi
|
|
|
EPT
