|
On July 18 2012 03:52 Hapahauli wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 03:51 JingleHell wrote:On July 18 2012 03:48 Hapahauli wrote: But Tube didn't make a scumslip! He was asked to change his tone for the town and did so! And if the two of us are agreeing on it, you'd think it would be obvious as all hell to anyone else, right? I'm shocked we're on the same side of this issue tbh o_O
That's because you still think I'm disagreeing with you on principle rather than because I actually see things differently than you do.
Now granted, I loathe your style, but if I see the same thing you do, I'm not going to argue against it. And if I agree with you for a different set of reasons, I'm just going to list my own reasons.
|
An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something.
|
Of course my reason for voting tube is based on something else, which I previously outlined.
|
On July 18 2012 04:00 YourHarry wrote: An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something.
Actually it came from someone who was in on pressuring the change of style, right after they said welcome to the thread. That person was obvious, and is the reason for my vote on him, which you're using as a "case" against me.
That's equally ridiculous.
|
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote: There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
I highlighted what I found scummy in red. His intro does seem like forced narration to seem pro-townie. I have no problem with rest of the post.
|
Well guys, we have a clutserf*#@ of a mess here currently. I’ll do my best to outline my thoughts concisely.
1. @jingle and @hapa – jesus christ guys chill out already. Your back and forth is unproductive, distracting, spammy, and most importantly, anti-town. That is reason enough to stop, immediately. Deal with your issues outside of the thread.
2. My strongest mafia read is iamperfection. He has completely ignored my questions and has posted little. He has jumped to conclusions and used poor logic. He’s either mafia or a townie playing extremely poorly.
Once again he just targets whoever is already receiving heat, in this case obvious (his logic isn’t as terrible this time around, but still). Very safe vote to make that doesn’t require him to do anything risky. He backs off of me when I vote him to avoid any confrontation. I acted very differently when people accused me – I took them seriously. I gave thorough responses and addressed concerns. He has ignored them. I suspect he is sliding by right now because of the large number of other targets currently being thrown around.
3. @jingle – can you briefly summarize the crux of your suspicions in two or three sentences? I ask because to me, obvious reads town.
I think he reads town because: 1- He also has a read on iamperfection, who I think is a good d1 lynch choice 2- He casts FOS on yourharry early on, who I am inclined to think is mafia (see #4). 3- I think the ‘under the bus’ was read into similarly to how I was read into earlier 4- I think he tunneled and overanalyzed whereas a simpler solution may be more likely in the case of his rash tube accusation. 5- He tries to coax fulla into posting, which fulla ignores. I tried to coax evul into posting, which evul ignores. 6- In conclusion, obvious and I seem to be playing a very similar game. IMO, the only thing that separates him from me is his vote and unvote against tube. As an afterthought, he’s read me as town so I am slightly more inclined to believe him. Maybe a clever psychological play on his part.
4. I’m inclined to change my vote to yourharry now. I would like to go with my read but I realize my single vote isn’t going to matter if no one else feels the same way. Here’s why:
1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points. 2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam. 3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town 4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case.
##Unvote ##Vote YourHarry
|
Except I counter-argued that reason, and you agreed with it. You're just keeping your vote on me so as to look committed.
On July 18 2012 03:48 YourHarry wrote: But even despite not providing any reason to vote Obvious.660, I did strongly push his bandwagon - mostly to see his reactions - which could seem scummy in many people's eyes. As you recently read, Hapha's accusation against me included this as my scuminess. Also why are you mentioning Hapa's accusation when we never even suggested that we agreed with it?
|
On July 18 2012 04:06 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 18 2012 04:00 YourHarry wrote: An argument that tube's change of writing style is a scumslip could not have come from a person who actually read this thread. It is just ridiculous. Unless I missed something. Actually it came from someone who was in on pressuring the change of style, right after they said welcome to the thread. That person was obvious, and is the reason for my vote on him, which you're using as a "case" against me. That's equally ridiculous.
My reason for suspecting you is based on your finding Obvious.660 latest analysis of everyone in the game scummy, not based on your suspecting obvious.660's post that accused tube of scumslip. This and two others players quickly joining Obvious.660's bandwagon based on the obvious.660's analysis of the players. Which I found hard to understand.
Obvious.660 may be OK lynch now that I think about it. But, while it is hard to grasp how a townie player could mess up so bad as to interpret change of writing style as scum slip, it is ALSO hard to accept that scum would make this obviously non-sense conclusion...
|
Calgar: I already have summarized my suspicion of Obvious. The primary reasoning is that he was pressuring tube to fix his posting, and when tube tried to do what he was asked, Obvious makes these posts, in a short period of time.
On July 17 2012 07:32 Obvious.660 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 07:30 tube wrote:On July 17 2012 07:12 calgar wrote:On July 17 2012 07:05 tube wrote:yeah i dont see the need to put the effort into quoting each argument and pointing exactly where somebody is trying to make an accusation out of thin air when if people just looked at them they would realize there is statistically an 8/11 chance that whoever they're accusing is town because their argument was empty to begin with, in that people just pick out innocuous tidbits of a post and try to make it seem like something a mafia would say (sometimes even extrapolating to create an even less believable post, you being the repeat offender of this one) On July 17 2012 06:48 calgar wrote:On July 17 2012 06:45 tube wrote:On July 17 2012 06:41 Hapahauli wrote: EBWOP: Oh shucks, calgar beat me to it. didnt i beat both of you to it well looks like mufaa is also convinced that my active lurking is a scumtell despite the fact that i already said i dont suspect anyone and again i dont see a reason to bandwagon me for not being careful with accusations Our advice seems to be falling on deaf ears, here. Why don't you read my summary of iamperfection again, I think it was very suspicious and poorly written post on his part (and his only one, to boot). ? i was wrong in my response to evulrabbitz or what is this about? No, you were right. I was just suggesting that since you had no suspicions you could see what you thought about mine. As a way to try and become a more active participant. Also, your posts are slightly difficult to understand because of awkward formatting. Could you try using sentences and punctuation? Yeah I agree his argument had bad logic but again I think he's just making accusations out of nothing, like this segment for example: You are by far looking the more sucpicious right now. The accusation on tube is telling to me. After the heat on you it seems you like you know want to set up a policy of lynching lurker or people that do one liners. Instead of drving the attention on one person it appears to me you are trying to get us looking at a whole group in order to confuse the town
I don't necessarily read such an argument as a scumtell because it could also just as easily be his candid attempt at scumhunting. Fact of the matter is, there's virtually no way to tell for something like this. Also, if you think putting words into people's mouths is suspicious, take a look at JingleHell's early posts against me that sparked the entire bandwagon. He does it multiple times by saying that I basically said so and so and therefore was clearly playing against town. Woah! It's like a completely different person sat down at your computer and started typing. WELCOME TO THE GAME, TUBE!
On July 17 2012 07:39 Obvious.660 wrote: ##Vote tube Reason: out of character posting. Coached response.
Further, he was pushing this:
On July 17 2012 02:21 Obvious.660 wrote:Greetings. Had a good sleep and I feel a bit refreshed and quite a bit like swimming in coffee. Breakfast-type things are happening but the hunt must continue. FOS YourHarryI guess it was an easy way to make myself a convenient target by posting something low content early in the first day before I would be able to contribute anything for another 12 hours or so. Regardless, choosing the last name you see for your vote when others have already provided much more to go on seems scummy to me when I wouldn't even be around to defend myself. YourHarry's self analysis might be indicative that mafia is going with some kind of sacrificial lamb ploy to get our trust. If that's the case, I'll have to follow it up with smaller, more wrinkly and arthritic FOS on iamperfectionas their entire strategy may have been hinted right in front of us. YourHarry gets to be the sacrificial lamb and anyone on his case early is riding the gravy train for day 1 as they will be safe from lynch tonight. Show nested quote +On July 17 2012 00:42 iamperfection wrote: Also, i think there is a possibility yourharry post was an attempt to get attention away from calgar Of course there's a third scumbucket somewhere around here that hasn't been factored in my theory, for which I will be searching on top of building my current case against these two.
talking about the sacrificial lamb strategy. I mean, really? Nothing's impossible, but I don't buy it, and never will.
Further, there's this bolded bit:
On July 17 2012 10:13 Obvious.660 wrote: @JingleHell I would rather have a strategy and have a discussion than lurk, make no claims, or hold no convictions. We have agreed that non-participation is bad. If you want me to adjust my strategy then propose another that holds more merit. Sitting around waiting for something to happen is boring. Again, I was tunneling tube, I got somewhat over-impassioned about maybe finding a scum and I let myself be taken over by it. Lesson learned.
I already conceded the I was wrong about the tell. That doesn't excuse everything else that has been discussed.
Then posts all his "convictions"
On July 17 2012 20:06 Obvious.660 wrote: There aren't enough fingers to go around at this point. I will share a few thoughts before I sleep, as I may not make it back in time for any further analysis. Seriously, the town play needs to improve overall or we're going to mislynch tonight. It's awful that I am reading more scum than town.
> tube still has my vote. Don't just look at the filter, it's better to read the actual thread when looking at him. Very few quotes to address the accusations against him in his responses will make analysis of tube troublesome without going through unfiltered.
> YourHarry: Highly, highly suspicious of this one. Not because he voted for me, but because of HOW IT WAS DONE.
> JingleHell is suspicious to me for his constant attacks on what words are chosen: "Wait and see" -- "Under the bus" conversations, where intent was pretty clear and he chose to always take it in the most negative context possible. He's railed on Calgar and me fairly hard.
> Hopeless1der makes a safe vote against the lurking Fulla. Wanted to know about no-lynch for whatever reason. Leaning scum here.
> Fulla seems to be lurking hard. Brings up a point of inquiry for some irrelevant statistic and probably goes to sleep.
> iamperfection read my post but clearly didn't follow the conversation in entirety. Points a few fingers, nothing overly suspicious. I would call the posting history semi-engaging but barely active. Leaning scum here.
> Calgar: My gut tells me town.
> Mufaa: Two posts. One starts analysis with the promise of more. The extra analysis is nowhere to be found. However, his line of reasoning regarding JingleHell seems to be spot on so far today.
> drwiggl3s: No scummy feelings here, yet.
> Evulrabbitz: Lurky, but lives in Sweden. 7 hours ahead of EST, if my just-before-sleep math is any good. I'm probably off by an hour. Look for something from Evul in the very near future, well before vote time.
> Hapahauli: Should be weighing in today. I have no strong feelings either way about his contributed play.
If you get nothing else out of this, town members need to take a good look at their individual contributions and ask themselves if they've done everything they can today to work towards a good day one lynch.
Where this is mostly non-committal, cluttering, and a useless list.
He also used this post:
On July 17 2012 10:29 Obvious.660 wrote: @JingleHell hi. I'm the guy who noted you used a colloquialism and defended you for it earlier. Anyone can throw anyone to the wolves. Take them out in back of the barn and shoot them. Leave them for dead. Thanks for letting me know my figures of speech are tells when they match anything ever said or used in a mafia game. I'll try to avoid them if it makes you feel better.
Please, take everything I say and compare it to everything ever written about scum. When you're done, you can lynch me and watch me flip town.
Such nonsense.
to try and guilt me into removing my vote.
Plus there's this gem:
On July 17 2012 08:40 Obvious.660 wrote: certainly give you the chance to participate before I throw you under the bus. .
When throwing someone under the bus is a term for what scum does.
A lot of people seem to dislike this, but I think they're forgetting that evidence is either hearsay, circumstantial, or based in WIFOM, every single time. This is enough for me to consider him scummy, and regardless of whether others agree with that, I do think it's bizarre anyone would try to turn it into a case against me.
|
On July 18 2012 04:07 calgar wrote:
I’m inclined to change my vote to yourharry now. I would like to go with my read but I realize my single vote isn’t going to matter if no one else feels the same way. Here’s why:
1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points. 2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam. 3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town 4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case.
##Unvote ##Vote YourHarry
1. I responded against hapha's case. Please read it and let me know what you think. 2. I pissed you off by posting one liners! LOL. Anyways, is it anti-town? Hmm, I guess putting in more thoughts and reasoning behind the posts would serve the town better. But after I read the posts, I did not have a strong opinion. So I posted one liners to incite some reactions. Either way, is it a sign of scum? I don't particularly see a reason why scum would want to bring attention to himself by posting spam one-liners to piss people off. 3. Because I voted for someone you strongly think is town, does it make me more likely I am scum? Yes, but only a little bit. Players have different perspectives and and a post some townies may deem scummy could seem protown to others. 4. Yes my posting styles changed after I am accused by Hapha. But if you look back, I was accused and voted by Jingle earlier on, which I responded in one liners. But why does it matter? Am I suddenly becoming anxious as scum that I am going to get lynched? I was never close to being lynched. I think the max votes I had on me was 1, at a time... although people did express some suspicions.
|
Jingle, regarding the "under the bus" comment, you would have to be totally careless to make that kind of scum slip.
And I know doing this will make me scummy, but I will anyway because my opinions changed
Vote Obvious.660
|
Freudian slips do happen. It's not exactly my sole piece of evidence.
|
EDBOW: Above post would may look scummy because I changed my opinions many times and even defended Obvious.660 quite a bit. And now I suddenly change my vote. Also, it comes after calgar's vote on me, so some people may argue that I am jumping on the bandwagon that looks most promising.
But I think while two scummy points that Jingle pointed out below are almost ridiculously careless, but I have experienced at least a couple of games where too obviously scummy to scums turned out to be indeed scums. 1. Obvious.660 suspecting tube's change of writing style to be scum slip 2. Obvious.660 making "under the bus" comment
|
And calgar, how could you! After I defended your "wait and see" comment
|
I will throw my vote on Obvious.660 based on his eagerness to vote for Tube for something that didn't even occur.
##Vote Obvious.660
|
On July 18 2012 04:07 calgar wrote:
1- I like hapa’s case and think it is well-thought out. I agree with most of his points. 2- those one liners that yourharry posted really pissed me off. Anti-town play and spam. 3- he voted for jingle and I read jingle as strongly town 4- his posting style changes after he is accused. Look at his posts 1-14 in the thread. They seem to be useless, spam, and 1-liners. Until he is accused, and all the sudden he’s dropping paragraphs. Maybe he’s blue and trying to lay low but he played it very poorly if that’s the case.
OK. How should i have played if I wanted to lay low, LOL. I am BTW not claiming blue here LOL. WIFOM LOL.
Are you role hunting here?!!
|
On July 18 2012 04:36 Evulrabbitz wrote: I will throw my vote on Obvious.660 based on his eagerness to vote for Tube for something that didn't even occur.
##Vote Obvious.660
That vote isn't even suspicious! Bad vote =/= scummy behavior, and he's been pretty townie otherwise. Hell if you're not going to listen to me, atleast read Calgar's opinion on Obvious.660
|
Well I'm still waiting for him to defend himself, it's been a good while since his post that instigated the votes against him.
|
Sigh, are people really bandwagon-ing onto Obvious/Harry this hard?
I've yet to see any super strong evidence posted against either of them other than WIFOM and some contradicting statements they've made. I guess this is D1 after all but I really think tube would be a better vote.
I'm curious how an obvious lynch turns out though since some people seem to be pushing him hard and tunneling in on him quite a bit. Usually that's something mafia does when one of their own is in danger is it not? Push votes to other targets, throw accusations, start spamming up the thread and the like.
I'm keeping my vote where it is and I'd like others to join me. tube's been posting quite carefully since he narrowly escaped the lynch around his neck. But I'll throw my FOS onto Obvious and Harry right now. Seems like there's too much panicing going on in this thread. Gives me a good feeling mafia is scrambling right now. And that gives me a good feeling one of these 3 are definitely mafia.
|
When are you going to start actually telling me how my posts are scummy? Why do you think other people who initially wanted to lynch me no longer do?
|
|
|
|