|
On the whole Kush-scumslip ordeal...
The game began, and people were stating their opinions about lurking lynching. DP notes that talk of this policy is simply a way to engage day 1 conversation, and that extended discussion of it can be suspicious. Kush then says:
On September 28 2012 09:01 kushm4sta wrote:
Sorry but who appointed this asshole boss?
It's quite the arrogant remark, to be honest. DP may have been a little stern with his wording, but he certainly didn't come off as an "asshole boss" to me. In my opinion, Kush came on too strong regardless of his role--and i certainly don't like the play. People have mentioned his "scummy meta", but I don't read it as scum, just inconsiderate.
This remark catapulted into the DP-Kush arguments. When Kush refers to DP as an "active townie", DP accuses him of a huge slip.
On September 28 2012 11:27 DarthPunk wrote:
How do you know I am town? You are SCUM
The accusation was simple reciprocation. Kush was strong with DP, and now DP is going hard on him with evidence. Fair enough. While the aforementioned scumslip could have been a townie error, I find Kush's response underwhelming, and still, a bit arrogant.
On September 28 2012 20:12 kushm4sta wrote:
2. My supposed scumslip: huh? What else should I have called you? Player? Person? Maybe but to me those things sound awkward. Townie just seemed like the most non awkward word to use.
Innocent until proven guilty. That's how we do it in America bro.
To me, "The most active player; the most active person" don't seem awkward to me. The excuse is weak. And the "bro" at the end is telling of people with weak defenses that need to seem confident.
Those are just my thoughts on Kush so far: Reckless, overconfident, and a little suspicious.
|
@Z-Boson
Let me include another post from sonic which happened closely after the one which you attacked.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 07:08 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 06:58 kushm4sta wrote:
@sonic
getting everyone's thoughts on lurker policy is important. Don't argue about it but share your views on the matter please.. Encouraging newbie towns to post is more important than typing out the same things I've said about lurker policy in XXVI and XXVII yet again: If we don't have a good scum case (lurker or active) by late d1, we lynch the most suspicious lurker. We should obviously be looking to avoid that scenario by scum hunting. That's really all that needs to be said as far as I'm concerned.
This looks like his view of lurking right?
Then why did you post your attack on him 2 hours after this post?
Are you just scanning the thread looking for things that you can accuse people for instead of actually reading?
Now for your reasoning for the attack
+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 14:26 Z-BosoN wrote:@debearHave you ever heard about instigating discussion? You know, getting people to talk?
I don't like how you defended SDM. You stated your views on lurkers, so that means you must agree that this type of discussion has some validity:Show nested quote +-- snip --
Also, I would like everyone to start considering a lurker (in your head) once we hit the second 24 hours as a backup. If we get close to the lynch deadline, and there are no scummy candidates, feel free to post a good case on which lurker would be the best candidate. Yet, you don't address SDM's blatant "I don't give a crap about policy lynch discussion's" stance? Seems rather odd to me. ##FoS debears
How is your post instigating discussion with SDM? He said he would be afk with sleep and classes. He won't be here for a while, yet you attack him and that's your main reason, especially for a first post? That, combined with failing to read his post that came shortly after, means your either lying or not reading.
And the fact that you are twisting his statements is also concerning. He never said "I don't give a crap" about lurker policy. He said he hope it is over by the time he gets back. Lurker policy discussion is generally fruitless, that is why darthpunk FOS kush early on. Are you going to attack darthpunk also?
Now for your next post
+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 15:36 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 14:43 debears wrote:
@darth
When did I say stop going after him? I said wait for him to respond.
You can be convinced he's scum, but you're making a huge deal out of it early in the game. multiple red texts with the word scum. Got your point.
I'm not defending him as much as I'm trying to tell you that you are going overboard right now. You don't have to rush in annointing him scum.
@z-boson
If you haven't realized yet, I played with SDM last game. I know where he stands with lurker policy. If you haven't noticed, darth doesn't like them either. Why? Cuz they usually go nowhere fast.
Why are you so focused on lurker discussion when there are other things going on?
Nice FOS btw. I make a case on you and you fail to respond to half of it. I don't care who you've played with. You make it a point to say your view on lurkers. You defend him for absolutely no reason, when his views implicitly contradict yours. If you were townie, I wouldn't think this to be a priority for you. I am not focused on lurker discussion, I am focused on the inconsistency you've presented. The issue of "Lurker policy" is not what is at hand. The issue at hand is why you are bothering to defend him (and now kush) instead of letting them defend themselves. It feels extremely forced right now, as townies are supposedly scouring the thread for blood. That's why the FOS. Regarding your "case", it seems to me like the only think you've got going is my general usefulness. And I already said it in form of a question, but now I'll answer it more bluntly so you can't dismiss it: I am instigating discussion. Read all my posts and see if that's what I'm trying to accomplish.
Yet again. You failed to read. His views are similar to mine, as stated in his quoted post.
Townies are not supposed to be "scouring the thread for blood". That statement is way too harsh. You are supposed to be looking at motivations behind posts, making informed cases, and deciding who looks scummy. By the way you started out with attacking thrawn, it seems that you are looking through people's posts trying to find only mafia motivations behind their posting. It's a two sided coin. If you look at townie motivations, and there isn't one, then you have something.
Finally, instigating discussion does not mean making worthless posts with only questions and no analysis, posts calling out people for lurking way too early in the game, attacking people who said they would be afk early in d1, and FOS someone when you aren't reading the thread thoroughly. Overall, you are causing confusion by pointing you finger for bad reasons. That isn't helping us.
+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 23:30 Z-BosoN wrote:
@Alsn
Reading your trade-off with DP and your cases against me, I find two things:
a) You have a tendency to heavily misinterpret posts and intentions, AND use them as arguments.
b) You say you like Logic, but you don't seem to read carefully enough. Logic with information is useless.
I mean this, especially in the part where you said I was calling kush out along DP, which is clearly a lie.
For the love of God, if you are town, don't keep this up. I understand we are still in day one and we don't have much to go on, but still. The last thing I need is another austincc that will warp everything I say in a "scum would do this" way.
This post is funny, because you are doing the exact same thing
|
On September 29 2012 00:00 Stutters695 wrote:
I'm awake. Catching up now.
First impression is I really don't like Kush's early play.
Reading everything more in depth now.
I'm sorry you don't like my early play. Care to expand on that? I don't like your early play either, except I will tell you why:
you are a lurker.
It's been several hours since you said you read everything in depth, why not share your thoughts then?
On September 28 2012 07:41 Stutters695 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 07:08 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 06:58 kushm4sta wrote:
@sonic
getting everyone's thoughts on lurker policy is important. Don't argue about it but share your views on the matter please.. Encouraging newbie towns to post is more important than typing out the same things I've said about lurker policy in XXVI and XXVII yet again: If we don't have a good scum case (lurker or active) by late d1, we lynch the most suspicious lurker. We should obviously be looking to avoid that scenario by scum hunting. That's really all that needs to be said as far as I'm concerned. Agreed but, regrettably, there isn't really anything else to talk about this early. To second his point about townies being active, don't get intimidated if you aren't really sure how to make a case and stop posting. Long cases aren't the only way to catch scum so if you feel overwhelmed sick around and ask questions. Demand answers for things you find wrong. Even if it doesn't directly catch a scum it provides insight into both you and the person you question. Silence allows the scum to hide very easily without having to do anything.
This is your first post. Let me summarize:
1 theres nothing to talk about d1
2 townies should be active
So you didn't actually give your lurker policy.
1 is just anti town. A lot of stuff has happened that you can talk about.
2 is just obvious beyond obvious.
|
On September 29 2012 01:36 kushm4sta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 00:00 Stutters695 wrote:
I'm awake. Catching up now.
First impression is I really don't like Kush's early play.
Reading everything more in depth now. I'm sorry you don't like my early play. Care to expand on that? I don't like your early play either, except I will tell you why: you are a lurker. It's been several hours since you said you read everything in depth, why not share your thoughts then?
@stutters
I'm inclined to agree here. Seems like you kind of jumped on the anti-Kush bandwagon without much thought. Admittedly, I didn't like his early play either, but I'm interested in hearing what you have to say concerning it.
|
@Djoref
On September 28 2012 15:22 Djodref wrote:
@DarthPunk
For your information, i consider the comments of debears on my posts legitimate. Let me say that I even don't like them. Currently reading the guides and older game analysis.
Please pm marv for help. The coaches are great
|
|
|
On September 29 2012 01:55 debears wrote:@Djoref Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 15:22 Djodref wrote:
@DarthPunk
For your information, i consider the comments of debears on my posts legitimate. Let me say that I even don't like them. Currently reading the guides and older game analysis. Please pm marv for help. The coaches are great
So you're confirming him town?
|
@Alsn
I already answered that. You are bieng dense.
@debears
I missed that second post, though it further strengthens my case against you. You do not find it odd that he dismisses lurker policy talk and then, explicitly tells us his views on lurkers, thus indulging in this talk? And yet you find that post as a defense for him?
Finally, instigating discussion does not mean making worthless posts with only questions and no analysis, posts calling out people for lurking way too early in the game, attacking people who said they would be afk early in d1, and FOS someone when you aren't reading the thread thoroughly. Overall, you are causing confusion by pointing you finger for bad reasons. That isn't helping us.
Sorry, my scummy friend, but observe how my post drew you and Alsn out in discussion. I still eagerly await his answer, but it certainly was not worthless. You are bitching about a question I asked SDM. I didn't file a case on him, I didn't FoS him, I questioned him. I did NOT call him out for lurking. YOU fail to read, and now you are waaaaaaay too defensive about a question that didn't even concern you. Alsn presented the same defensiveness, but not on the same level as you and on a way that is much more townie-looking than yours.
Also, the "irony" you've presented is without merit. I agree that the reasoning for my questioning of SDM is a bit far-fetched, but I absolutely did not use it as an argument as to why he is scummy. Don't get the facts distorted. The only FoS I have so far is on you.
|
On September 29 2012 01:36 kushm4sta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 00:00 Stutters695 wrote:
I'm awake. Catching up now.
First impression is I really don't like Kush's early play.
Reading everything more in depth now. I'm sorry you don't like my early play. Care to expand on that? I don't like your early play either, except I will tell you why: you are a lurker. It's been several hours since you said you read everything in depth, why not share your thoughts then? Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 07:41 Stutters695 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 07:08 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 06:58 kushm4sta wrote:
@sonic
getting everyone's thoughts on lurker policy is important. Don't argue about it but share your views on the matter please.. Encouraging newbie towns to post is more important than typing out the same things I've said about lurker policy in XXVI and XXVII yet again: If we don't have a good scum case (lurker or active) by late d1, we lynch the most suspicious lurker. We should obviously be looking to avoid that scenario by scum hunting. That's really all that needs to be said as far as I'm concerned. Agreed but, regrettably, there isn't really anything else to talk about this early. To second his point about townies being active, don't get intimidated if you aren't really sure how to make a case and stop posting. Long cases aren't the only way to catch scum so if you feel overwhelmed sick around and ask questions. Demand answers for things you find wrong. Even if it doesn't directly catch a scum it provides insight into both you and the person you question. Silence allows the scum to hide very easily without having to do anything. This is your first post. Let me summarize: 1 theres nothing to talk about d1 2 townies should be active So you didn't actually give your lurker policy. 1 is just anti town. A lot of stuff has happened that you can talk about. 2 is just obvious beyond obvious.
Alright, here are my thoughts. Starting with this post (^).
You have issues with reading or you're misrepresenting intentionally.
I said "there isn't anything to talk about this early. As in the time of posting that what can we discuss except lurker and simple policy that has nothing to do with a case.
Number two is obvious because you have played multiple games. Not everyone has. My first game I played like I described in my post and was dead weight. I was carried and simply posting more would have helped out with that. Even if it is completely obvious to everyone in the game it still was worth saying. It gave you something to accuse me with, which opens up discussion.
Now onto your other case of misrepresenting (Full quote in spoiler for context, relevant part is immediately after).
+ Show Spoiler +On September 29 2012 00:35 kushm4sta wrote:Darthpunk 1 You ask people what they think of me, Then when they don't tell you the exact answer you want to hear, you accuse them of defending me. What you meant was agree with me about kush or I will FOS you.
2 Did anyone notice how I went from DEFINITELY SCUM to a "distraction" instantly and without reason? Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:23 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 21:18 Djodref wrote:@corrosionI'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time  . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides. @everyone This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST. Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on... Wow. Really? That was not an explanation at all. It was a slip, and now everyone believes his weak as shit explanation. Anyway this is obviously going nowhere. And it is becoming a distraction at this point. ##Unvote##FoS: Kush @darthpunk
Why did you unvote me if you are certain I am scum?He explains his strategy: So why have you already FOSed 3 different people? 3 Darth's scumstrat is not so much to flame but to provoke. Show nested quote +If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy?
This is from the post in which he FOSes Alsn. Not even his most inflamatory statement but pay close attention to his tone in his posts. Specifically, "Savvy?" Condescending, intimidating, irritating. He wants you to get pissed. 4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was.
4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was.
Can you show me where this happened? I checked the postgame from XXVI and it wasn't there. I checked the pregame for XXVII and it wasn't there. The closest I found was this post from Hapa that says they made the mistake of shooting kreb N2 because of the gut read Jacob had on you as town and that they couldn't kill Jacob, you and myself at once N3 to reduce the number of confirmed/near-confirmed.
If this is the quote, it wasn't that your amazing play put you in such a confirmed town role that they should have shot you, its that Jacob (de-facto town leader) thought you were town. He isn't off the mark in saying that your play makes it so you don't get night-killed. If Jacob had been iffy about you I'd bet money Hapa wouldn't have said anything about scum shooting you.
Instead of addressing why less than a day into the game you aren't worried about a nightkill you accuse him of flaming while misrepresenting previous games to avoid answering.
|
On September 29 2012 01:31 Omniscient4983 wrote:On the whole Kush-scumslip ordeal... The game began, and people were stating their opinions about lurking lynching. DP notes that talk of this policy is simply a way to engage day 1 conversation, and that extended discussion of it can be suspicious. Kush then says: Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 09:01 kushm4sta wrote:
Sorry but who appointed this asshole boss?
It's quite the arrogant remark, to be honest. DP may have been a little stern with his wording, but he certainly didn't come off as an "asshole boss" to me. In my opinion, Kush came on too strong regardless of his role--and i certainly don't like the play. People have mentioned his "scummy meta", but I don't read it as scum, just inconsiderate. This remark catapulted into the DP-Kush arguments. When Kush refers to DP as an "active townie", DP accuses him of a huge slip. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 11:27 DarthPunk wrote:
How do you know I am town? You are SCUM The accusation was simple reciprocation. Kush was strong with DP, and now DP is going hard on him with evidence. Fair enough. While the aforementioned scumslip could have been a townie error, I find Kush's response underwhelming, and still, a bit arrogant. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 20:12 kushm4sta wrote:
2. My supposed scumslip: huh? What else should I have called you? Player? Person? Maybe but to me those things sound awkward. Townie just seemed like the most non awkward word to use.
Innocent until proven guilty. That's how we do it in America bro.
To me, "The most active player; the most active person" don't seem awkward to me. The excuse is weak. And the "bro" at the end is telling of people with weak defenses that need to seem confident.
Those are just my thoughts on Kush so far: Reckless, overconfident, and a little suspicious.
Omniscient, the only thing your post accomplish tells us is the bolded part, which, your opinion on the side, is kind of evident at this point. The rest of it is just a narrative containing the latest events. Does your "a little suspicious" claim him lynch-worthy, in your opinion?
|
@ Z-BosoN
The narrative was intentional; both to reiterate events and to weave my thoughts into it.
My stance is pretty clear on Kush. He's definitely a possible lynch candidate in my eyes, but I wouldn't go as far as to vote him just yet.
|
@Remedy
You made two posts without much content early on D1, and there's been nothing since then. You implied that you were going to contribute more than last game you played. So why don't you tell us about your reads so far?
|
On September 29 2012 02:27 Stutters695 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 01:36 kushm4sta wrote:On September 29 2012 00:00 Stutters695 wrote:
I'm awake. Catching up now.
First impression is I really don't like Kush's early play.
Reading everything more in depth now. I'm sorry you don't like my early play. Care to expand on that? I don't like your early play either, except I will tell you why: you are a lurker. It's been several hours since you said you read everything in depth, why not share your thoughts then? On September 28 2012 07:41 Stutters695 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 07:08 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 06:58 kushm4sta wrote:
@sonic
getting everyone's thoughts on lurker policy is important. Don't argue about it but share your views on the matter please.. Encouraging newbie towns to post is more important than typing out the same things I've said about lurker policy in XXVI and XXVII yet again: If we don't have a good scum case (lurker or active) by late d1, we lynch the most suspicious lurker. We should obviously be looking to avoid that scenario by scum hunting. That's really all that needs to be said as far as I'm concerned. Agreed but, regrettably, there isn't really anything else to talk about this early. To second his point about townies being active, don't get intimidated if you aren't really sure how to make a case and stop posting. Long cases aren't the only way to catch scum so if you feel overwhelmed sick around and ask questions. Demand answers for things you find wrong. Even if it doesn't directly catch a scum it provides insight into both you and the person you question. Silence allows the scum to hide very easily without having to do anything. This is your first post. Let me summarize: 1 theres nothing to talk about d1 2 townies should be active So you didn't actually give your lurker policy. 1 is just anti town. A lot of stuff has happened that you can talk about. 2 is just obvious beyond obvious. Alright, here are my thoughts. Starting with this post (^). You have issues with reading or you're misrepresenting intentionally. I said "there isn't anything to talk about this early. As in the time of posting that what can we discuss except lurker and simple policy that has nothing to do with a case. Number two is obvious because you have played multiple games. Not everyone has. My first game I played like I described in my post and was dead weight. I was carried and simply posting more would have helped out with that. Even if it is completely obvious to everyone in the game it still was worth saying. It gave you something to accuse me with, which opens up discussion. Now onto your other case of misrepresenting (Full quote in spoiler for context, relevant part is immediately after). + Show Spoiler +On September 29 2012 00:35 kushm4sta wrote:Darthpunk 1 You ask people what they think of me, Then when they don't tell you the exact answer you want to hear, you accuse them of defending me. What you meant was agree with me about kush or I will FOS you.
2 Did anyone notice how I went from DEFINITELY SCUM to a "distraction" instantly and without reason? Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:23 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 21:18 Djodref wrote:@corrosionI'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides. @everyone This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST. Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on... Wow. Really? That was not an explanation at all. It was a slip, and now everyone believes his weak as shit explanation. Anyway this is obviously going nowhere. And it is becoming a distraction at this point. ##Unvote##FoS: Kush @darthpunk
Why did you unvote me if you are certain I am scum?He explains his strategy: So why have you already FOSed 3 different people? 3 Darth's scumstrat is not so much to flame but to provoke. Show nested quote +If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy?
This is from the post in which he FOSes Alsn. Not even his most inflamatory statement but pay close attention to his tone in his posts. Specifically, "Savvy?" Condescending, intimidating, irritating. He wants you to get pissed. 4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was. Show nested quote +4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was. Can you show me where this happened? I checked the postgame from XXVI and it wasn't there. I checked the pregame for XXVII and it wasn't there. The closest I found was this post from Hapa that says they made the mistake of shooting kreb N2 because of the gut read Jacob had on you as town and that they couldn't kill Jacob, you and myself at once N3 to reduce the number of confirmed/near-confirmed. If this is the quote, it wasn't that your amazing play put you in such a confirmed town role that they should have shot you, its that Jacob (de-facto town leader) thought you were town. He isn't off the mark in saying that your play makes it so you don't get night-killed. If Jacob had been iffy about you I'd bet money Hapa wouldn't have said anything about scum shooting you. Instead of addressing why less than a day into the game you aren't worried about a nightkill you accuse him of flaming while misrepresenting previous games to avoid answering.
This is so long it should be spoilered, but its impossible to do on my phone so I'm sorry for the clutter.
So you write a lot here concerning that post game discussion I referred to.
You may be right that hapa said it. To me there is no difference between them.
He said mafia should have killed me because I was considered confirmed town.
You sure do focus a lot on that though. That was definitly the least important part of my post. It's not a misrepresentation and I didn't make a big deal about it, unlike you.
Why not address the body of the case?
|
On September 28 2012 09:10 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 06:56 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
Cool, we're on. Pretty bad timing though, I'm off to bed and then I've got a day at uni before I can really start posting. I hope to God when I get back we've moved past the lurker policy discussion. My message to newbies: the best way for you to clear yourself is to post a lot. Don't post just for the sake of posting though, that'll make you look like scum because posting for the sake of posting is what scum do. This is a rather useless post. Newbie towns want to scumhunt. Newbie scum want to look like they are scumhunting. That =/= posting a lot but not for the sake of posting, or whatever you meant. And please tell me, what do you mean? You say you hope to have moved past the lurker discussion, and yet you are telling people to post a lot? In my eyes you are telling people not to lurk because that will make them seem scummy. It seems to me that you are indirectly stating your views on lurkers despite openly saying you don't want to talk about them.
First paragraph, I agree newbie town wants to scum hunt. Problem is many don’t know how to scum hunt and end up low volume posters because they’re anxious to say something stupid. Pretty much what Stutters summed up, I’m saying that it’s better they engage in discussions, ask questions and try build cases they like. They will probably end up making a few stupid cases, but it’s our responsibility to see that their motivations weren’t scummy. If they remain low volume posters, it’s much more difficult to see what their motivations are.
Second paragraph, I’m saying this is a game of information and we need players to post. Scum don’t want to post, if they could decide then no one would post anything and they win almost 100% of the time. Town posts in order to be able to solve the game and in the process we force scum to post as well. I’m not saying lurkers are necessarily scummy, just look at XXVII. Lurkers aren’t necessarily scummy, but they’re 100% anti-town. That’s why, if all else fail, we lynch the most scummy lurker.
I’m a bit surprised I had to explain that post to someone who seem to have some experience. I could see attacking my post as an early game town strategy to get things started, but even after there were more interesting things going on it was still your main talking point. I do somewhat sympathize with your point that people should be forced to defend themselves, but I don’t see why a townie would push a weak case against someone who’s not even around to defend himself.
I’m still in the process of reading up on the thread. Will be able to post more of my thoughts later tonight.
|
@Omniscient
On September 29 2012 02:17 Omniscient4983 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2012 01:55 debears wrote:@Djoref On September 28 2012 15:22 Djodref wrote:
@DarthPunk
For your information, i consider the comments of debears on my posts legitimate. Let me say that I even don't like them. Currently reading the guides and older game analysis. Please pm marv for help. The coaches are great So you're confirming him town?
No. I am trying to help a newbie get into the swing of things. Last game, there was a large portion of lurkers, and it destroyed the game atmosphere. If he gets help and posts more quality, we have a much better read on him.
@Z-Boson
+ Show Spoiler +On September 29 2012 02:25 Z-BosoN wrote:@AlsnI already answered that. You are bieng dense. @debearsI missed that second post, though it further strengthens my case against you. You do not find it odd that he dismisses lurker policy talk and then, explicitly tells us his views on lurkers, thus indulging in this talk? And yet you find that post as a defense for him? Show nested quote +Finally, instigating discussion does not mean making worthless posts with only questions and no analysis, posts calling out people for lurking way too early in the game, attacking people who said they would be afk early in d1, and FOS someone when you aren't reading the thread thoroughly. Overall, you are causing confusion by pointing you finger for bad reasons. That isn't helping us. Sorry, my scummy friend, but observe how my post drew you and Alsn out in discussion. I still eagerly await his answer, but it certainly was not worthless. You are bitching about a question I asked SDM. I didn't file a case on him, I didn't FoS him, I questioned him. I did NOT call him out for lurking. YOU fail to read, and now you are waaaaaaay too defensive about a question that didn't even concern you. Alsn presented the same defensiveness, but not on the same level as you and on a way that is much more townie-looking than yours. Also, the "irony" you've presented is without merit. I agree that the reasoning for my questioning of SDM is a bit far-fetched, but I absolutely did not use it as an argument as to why he is scummy. Don't get the facts distorted. The only FoS I have so far is on you.
Let me clarify the quote you put in my post. I realize now that I should've said who you did those against.
"Finally, instigating discussion does not mean making worthless posts with only questions and no analysis (your first 3 posts),
posts calling out people for lurking way too early in the game (the post about stutters),
attacking people who said they would be afk early in d1 (SDM)
, and FOS someone when you aren't reading the thread thoroughly. (me)
Overall, you are causing confusion by pointing you finger for bad reasons. That isn't helping us."
And I wouldn't call me criticizing you defensive. I'd call it offensive. If anything is defensive, it's your OMGUS-like FOS on me right after I make a case about you.
|
debears, my case against you is not OMGUS. That's a dumb thing to say, granted I've explained to you why I find you scummy.
I didn't call stutters out for lurking. I talked to him because I've played with him before, and conveyed my will that he should post more than he did in XXIV, because he makes decent posts, or at least made them in XXIV, as a townie. It's more of an "acknowledgement" towards someone I've already played with.
I didn't call him out for being afk. I attacked SDM because of HOW he said he would be afk, as if he was blatantly avoiding posting because of his hate on lurker policy talking. AS IF. Which is why I've questioned him.
I'm also being very clear here. I'm not pushing a case against SDM. I'm pushing a case against you, again, because I didn't find your reaction towards SDM natural at all.
Answering SDM shortly.
|
Would just like to say that I'm going to bed a little early today. Will be up in the morning(~12-14 hours before lynch) and making some posts and then on and off until lynch but without major "leaves of absence". Here's hoping that no one is still lurking when I wake up.
|
Couple of things in your post:
On September 29 2012 03:02 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 09:10 Z-BosoN wrote:On September 28 2012 06:56 Sonic Death Monkey wrote:
Cool, we're on. Pretty bad timing though, I'm off to bed and then I've got a day at uni before I can really start posting. I hope to God when I get back we've moved past the lurker policy discussion. My message to newbies: the best way for you to clear yourself is to post a lot. Don't post just for the sake of posting though, that'll make you look like scum because posting for the sake of posting is what scum do. This is a rather useless post. Newbie towns want to scumhunt. Newbie scum want to look like they are scumhunting. That =/= posting a lot but not for the sake of posting, or whatever you meant. And please tell me, what do you mean? You say you hope to have moved past the lurker discussion, and yet you are telling people to post a lot? In my eyes you are telling people not to lurk because that will make them seem scummy. It seems to me that you are indirectly stating your views on lurkers despite openly saying you don't want to talk about them. First paragraph, I agree newbie town wants to scum hunt. Problem is many don’t know how to scum hunt and end up low volume posters because they’re anxious to say something stupid. Pretty much what Stutters summed up, I’m saying that it’s better they engage in discussions, ask questions and try build cases they like. They will probably end up making a few stupid cases, but it’s our responsibility to see that their motivations weren’t scummy. If they remain low volume posters, it’s much more difficult to see what their motivations are. Second paragraph, I’m saying this is a game of information and we need players to post. Scum don’t want to post, if they could decide then no one would post anything and they win almost 100% of the time. Town posts in order to be able to solve the game and in the process we force scum to post as well. I’m not saying lurkers are necessarily scummy, just look at XXVII. Lurkers aren’t necessarily scummy, but they’re 100% anti-town. That’s why, if all else fail, we lynch the most scummy lurker. I’m a bit surprised I had to explain that post to someone who seem to have some experience. I could see attacking my post as an early game town strategy to get things started, 1)but even after there were more interesting things going on it was still your main talking point. I do somewhat sympathize with your point that people should be forced to defend themselves, 2)but I don’t see why a townie would push a weak case against someone who’s not even around to defend himself.I’m still in the process of reading up on the thread. Will be able to post more of my thoughts later tonight.
1) Wrong. Like you said, finish up reading the thread.
2) I'm not pushing a case, for the last fucking time.
Here are some guiding thoughts that I judge noteworthy, as you are reading off the thread:
1) Two people have defended you from my overly-aggressive post: Alsn, and debears. I find Alsn's reaction much more natural-looking than debears, please look at his filter and see if you agree.
2) wagon against kush. Kush's play definitely has some scummy-looking elements that people are currently wagoning over. Personally the main thing that gets to me is what I've answered DP's post with. See if you agree with these.
|
Note the red is just for highlighting, I'm not 100% sold on Kush as scum.
The rest of my thoughts on Kush's play:
I feel the beginning of their argument is pretty self-explanatory. Once Kush says "thank you now i won't be nk" is where I really got suspicious of him.
Just look at how he has responded to Darth's case. "Oh those were jokes."
On September 28 2012 11:22 kushm4sta wrote:should not have looked at thread again now I have to respond... @debears yeah it's like exactly the same as last game. That's because I think up my first post almost word for word before I even get my roll pm. I did not get to follow through with it last game though since I rolled scum. Also sorry for the semiflame war. It was not that bad. Also he started it. Aside from that, I think the plan to start tunneling during the second half of the day is really bad. It helped us a lot last game as scum because we had an excuse not to vote for the people we were fosing. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 11:09 Djodref wrote:@Kush thank you now I won't be nk Was it also a joke ? How can you be so sure you are not going to be NKed ? Because the most active townie is tunneling me? Obviously I'm not going to be nk. And yes it was a joke but the best jokes have truth to them. It is a joke in that it's purpose was to be funny since obviously it doesn't help the scumhunt or my defense.
If you weren't scumhunting or defending a case to prove you're town, why are you posting it?
DarthPunk also throws up these two posts describing why he thinks Kush is scummy
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=370487¤tpage=8#151
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=370487¤tpage=8#157
After the post in the first link, kush says
On September 28 2012 10:37 kushm4sta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 10:08 DarthPunk wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 28 2012 09:58 kushm4sta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 09:53 DarthPunk wrote:
Also I am not against policy talk but that first post where you talk policy was also scummy as hell. Why was that scummy? You say something that you know, since you've been watching me like a creeper, would piss me off, then you vote for me for responding to it. So why was my policy talk scummy? You didn't even mention that in your vote post. Here you go buddy  On September 28 2012 06:11 kushm4sta wrote:
I have been told many times I have a "scummy meta." Not really fair since last game I did roll scum so I didn't really get a chance to show improvement in my town play. I'm working on it guys. Apologetic and excusing scummy play before the game has really begun. Intrinsic guilt and belief that you will come across as scum. Not a townie trait at all.On September 28 2012 06:11 kushm4sta wrote:
This is my 4th newbie game so I'm experienced as possible to play in this game. Also I think rolling scum last game will help my reads greatly. I know how those fuckers think. Needlessly aggressive and otherwise irrelevant. Hinting you are town which is something scum worry about doing but townies are less inclined to do.On September 28 2012 06:11 kushm4sta wrote:
Everyone say how you feel about lurker policy.
I take kind of a middle of the ground stance. I mean if you have like 3 lurkers obviously you shouldn't waste 3 nights killing them off 1 by 1. If I think someone is scummy than I vote for that person. If I don't have any good scumreads then I will be in favor of lynching a lurker.
Usually what seems to happen is town can't decide so they bandwagon on some lurker at the last second. I'm not against this since it keeps pressure on possible scum.
I don't like people to say oh we are definitely lynching a lurker d1, because then scum feels safe as long as they are somewhat active.
My willingness to lynch a lurker decreases as the game progresses. For example I think lynching a lurker d3 is really bad.
Policy talk that says very little yet makes it seem like you want to contribute. Null tell at best but doesn't look great in the context of your post.On September 28 2012 06:11 kushm4sta wrote:
Message to scum:
I can smell you.
Thank you. now why you didn't do that at first I don't know. Instead you engaged in this flame war with me for really no reason.About my first post, yeah it was meant as mostly irrelevant. Just an introduction so people could get to know me. I prob should not bring this up but let me just say I have an unkilled undefeated streak atm. 3 games played and I have yet to die and yet to lose. Therefore, for perhaps selfish reasons, I have a strong will to self survival. I want people to know that I have a scummy meta so they don't lynch me for it. Apparently you were ready to lynch me in all 3 games even though I was town in 2 of them. I want to avoid that. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 10:09 DarthPunk wrote:There is a reason that you have never been night killed, even when you claimed JK day one. Secondly, you are not getting night killed because you are not town. So that wasn't an insult or a flame? You are saying I've never been nk because scum doesn't see me as a threat because I am bad. That's the real talk translation.
Note: The only "flame" so far has been Kush calling him an asshole and how Kush interpreted the JK comment (fact: if you claim JK d1 you should be dead. The only way that doesn't happen is if people write it off because your play is so hard to read between town/scum).
He addresses his own very first post and that is it. He says he wants to avoid DP lynching him because in 2 of his past 3 times he's been town. That bears no relevance to this. He hasn't addressed Darth's case at all. He's tried to discredit it through a strawman.
After Darth's next part of the case (Post 157) Kush again ignores it (writes this one off as just claiming DP thinks he plays bad, so the case is invalid) and just responds to part of it.
On September 28 2012 11:03 kushm4sta wrote:I did bait your FoS intentionally actually. Before the nk post. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 08:34 DarthPunk wrote:
Any more talk of policy will get you FoS'd. Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 09:03 kushm4sta wrote:
@Darth what are your thoughts on lurker policy? What is your opinion of policy lynches? What is your policy about policies? That's when I baited your fos.Your recent case against my defense basically says you think I play bad. Just because I don't fit your mold of how you want a townie to act does not mean I can't find scum.
So we're to believe when you claim that particular joke post was to bait his FoS? So tell me, what did you learn by baiting his FoS? How does having distracted with you benefit the town? Why should we believe your other joke posts are jokes if this one had a purpose?
His defenses have been non-existent other than "jokes" and "player sounds weird compared to townie." Are you fucking kidding me? Having your sentence sound weird (it doesn't by the way) is a bad thing compared to calling someone town before you make a case on them? No, I don't buy it.
Finally, his only scum-hunting is this:
+ Show Spoiler +On September 29 2012 00:35 kushm4sta wrote:Darthpunk 1 You ask people what they think of me, Then when they don't tell you the exact answer you want to hear, you accuse them of defending me. What you meant was agree with me about kush or I will FOS you.
2 Did anyone notice how I went from DEFINITELY SCUM to a "distraction" instantly and without reason? Show nested quote +On September 28 2012 21:23 DarthPunk wrote:On September 28 2012 21:18 Djodref wrote:@corrosionI'm actually working in Korea so I don't enjoy so much free time . But a big national holiday is coming this week end so I should be able to participate to the thread and finish to read all the guides. @everyone This also means party time ! I'm currently headed to get drunk all night so you shouldn't be hearing from me until tomorrow 12.00 pm KST. Also I'm accepting Kush explanation for calling Darth a townie but it would be better for him to refrain calling someone a townie or a scum without explanations later on... Wow. Really? That was not an explanation at all. It was a slip, and now everyone believes his weak as shit explanation. Anyway this is obviously going nowhere. And it is becoming a distraction at this point. ##Unvote##FoS: Kush @darthpunk
Why did you unvote me if you are certain I am scum?He explains his strategy: So why have you already FOSed 3 different people? 3 Darth's scumstrat is not so much to flame but to provoke. Show nested quote +If there was nothing to go on I would have changed tac. Turns out he is scum. So I try and get him lynched. Savvy?
This is from the post in which he FOSes Alsn. Not even his most inflamatory statement but pay close attention to his tone in his posts. Specifically, "Savvy?" Condescending, intimidating, irritating. He wants you to get pissed. 4 @Darthpunk at the end of newbie 26, marv said scum's biggest mistake was not nightkilling me. So your supposition that scum would never nightkill me is in itself ridiculous. It was an indirect flame, suggesting I play bad, and that's all that post was.
Where to begin with this "case."
1) Before this post, he accused debears of defending you. There is no them. And quite I don't blame him considering debears said "let the man defend himself instead of trying to rally everyone active behind your cause so early. If he is scummy, the votes will come." despite your multiple posts and not having defended yourself once.
2) This is the only point I'm actually curious about but I can understand why he would. When everyone accepts your "answers" he can't pressure you because no one will back him up and you'll just accuse him of flaming and joke around some more. I would like to hear DarthPunk's response to this point though.
3)Ok so what are his inflammatory statements? How does this correlate to him being scum? You accuse him of targetting you because of your playstyle, but here you do the same thing. The difference is he has facts to back up his. Your case reeks of OMGUS.
4) See my previous post. You're using the flaming to skirt the real issues. You should have been dead after you claimed JK. The only reason you have lived so long is because of bad play all around. Hapa says the mafia established the townieness of Kush. Again, you're making it seem like DP is completely off the mark when that isn't true and using to to say he is flaming you and his points are invalid (again strawman). Why aren't you afraid of a NK? Because of one post that isn't even a majority consensus?
There is plenty of time where you could answer and actually contribute to where you might be a NK target, but instead <12 hours in you
|
ebwop: you were convinced that you won't die tonight because of some pressure.
Until I get some answers:
##Vote Kushm4sta
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
