|
On November 05 2012 03:58 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 03:56 debears wrote:On November 05 2012 02:19 Clarity_nl wrote:I am going to put my comments into the quote itself, I will use green for added effect. On November 04 2012 23:54 debears wrote:Hey guys, I believe Clarity is scumhttp://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=16787463First, look at Djo's case about Clarity's - non committal attitude - blending in - lack of scumhunting I would like to add two things to that. 1) Scumhunting MethodClarity's scumhunting method for day 1 appears to be looking for people who don't answer questions. Why is this a scum favored strategy? It's an easy way to scumhunt. You don't have to read for changes in behavior/motivations. Also, if everyone answers the questions, then you can say "oh, idk who is scum cuz all my questions were answered" My scumhunting method is not "looking for people who don't answer questions". You are taking something I said I believe is scummy and turning into saying it's the only thing I think is scummy.Example of what I mean On November 04 2012 17:08 Clarity_nl wrote:
All the answers I got were sufficient. Hell, your answer had an entire case on sylver attached to it. Maybe I should be pushing people harder. I feel like there are plenty of people already doing that though.
My top scrumreads at the time were you and Alsn, Alsn wasn't around at all and you were already being pushed by others.
I was just reading, and as I said I will end up posting at least a solid case today, you can tell me if my information gathering has been weak at that point. 2) Contradiction to his scumhunting viewsOn November 04 2012 17:20 Clarity_nl wrote:
Top 3 choices in my eyes are Debears, Sylver and you.
As for people who haven't answered my questions: Alsn, Cheese, Sylver. In this post, clarity names 3 top scumreads. He has no reasoning. Not only that he acknowledges that 3 people haven't answered his questions. Now let's look at what he said about people who don't answer his questions. On November 04 2012 16:54 Clarity_nl wrote:On November 04 2012 16:48 Djodref wrote:
@ Clarity
A few people never answered your questions from the list. Why do you not push them as well ? Because I felt it would go along nicely with any cases I would make. If you "miss" a question asked to you that's super scummy because town reads and re-reads a lot. Scum just sorta play.. Because they don't need extra information[. and this On November 03 2012 18:43 Clarity_nl wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote:
@Cheese
>:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way:
I don't think it's directed at you specifically, but it's interesting that you think it is. The reason Cheese said to not drop the newbie card is because it's not town behavior. When you are town you want people to believe you, if you come out of the gate saying you're awful and no one should listen to you then that's anti-town. It also prevents scum from using "omg sorry I'm just new!", the less excuses scum have available the better for town. My reads at this point in time: Obzy: Leaning slightly town. He hasn't quite come out of his shell yet but he seems genuinly interested in discussion and progressing. @ ObzyDo you think you can get over this "I'm new" thing and give us the best reads you've got? Instead of posting something that's obvious to everyone perhaps post something that stands out to you. _ Rad: Null. He's being more careful than last game, lurking a bit more. He mentioned he would be more careful, but not in pregame, he did this after the role PMs were sent. He also seems really invested in helping Obzy out as he's the newest, the only one here who wasn't in XXIX. @ RadWhy the interest in Obzy? Are you going to use MLG as an excuse at any point this weekend? _ Alsn: Leaning slightly scum, very little info about him though. He opened super aggressive this game, which is the opposite of how he played in the majority of XXIX. Perhaps the only reason he snapped at debears so hard is because debears said On November 03 2012 10:04 debears wrote:
If I'm not here for lynch, its irl conflicts 99% of the time. Don't pull an Alsn @ AlsnWhy the change in behavior from last game? What do you think of debears at this point? _ Mr Cheesecake: Null. He went SUPER defensive when he was called out about making a ton of jokes, but that discussion got blown way out of proportion. The fact that he's acting more like the way he was in mafia QT XXIX than in the actual XXIX thread is indicative of town. @ CheeseYou did have some jokes in the XXIX thread. Can you tell us if these were jokes for the sake of jokes or if you used them to push a scum agenda? An argument can be made for both. _ Djodref: Leaning slightly scum, He was obsessed with policy. Everyone was ready to move on but he kept mentioning it over and over. He's also the person that blew up the whole *Cheese's scum joke* thing, which bogged us down for a couple of pages. @ Djodref If you had to lynch someone right now, would it be da0ud or someone else? _ Debears: Null. Regardless of if he's scum or town, he is getting the ball rolling which is good for us. Problem is... that was what he was doing in XXIX as well and he was scum in that. Older games suggest this is simply his meta so there is no read to be made about his opening. What I'm curious about is if he's going to pull a vanishing act in D2 / D3 again. @ DebearsWhat's your ready on Obzy? _ Sylverfire: Null. Only have 3 real posts to read him on. He opened really aggressive onto debears, even though he's keeping the ball rolling, an odd choice. He showed up way late but Rad pointed out that he is sticking to the same schedule he's had in previous games. @ SylverfireYou've only shared your read on debears, is there anything else that stands out to you? _ So with all that said, I only have two slight scumreads on Alsn and Djo, so I hope they defend themselves as soon as possible. Even if we end up lynching da0ud for lurking, currently with 0 posts, we can at least gather as much information as possible Hopefully this gets some discussion going, please comment on as much as possible in my post and point out any flaws. It's a contradiction, and a contradiction in a mafia oriented way. His scumhunting method is a way to avoid actually having to scumhunt, then he doesn't even use it when he gives his top scumreads I did not have cases ready. Yes I was on and checking mafia but I was also working. Djo specifically asked me who my current scumreads were, and who hadn't answered my questions yet. I answered both.
Again you put an emphasis on people not answering my questions, when that is only part of it. The same way your "meta" read on me (which is 1 post, that I made about you, that was accurate.) is not the entirety of your case.
I had a strong read on you. I do not have a strong read in this game yet
You are completely denying the fact that you said people not answering your questions is very scummy twice. Yet, you know who hasn't answered your questions, and you don't find them in your top 3 suspicions
I may have to retract super scummy, but it is scummy. (whatever the difference is) In the post with all my questions I said this to entice everyone to answer.
The way to get scum isn't to point out one thing and say it's scummy and therefore the person is scum. Point out multiple things.
A lot of things have changed since I posted that, looking back I am very surprised by the people who did not answer. Are you saying that I should find the people who didn't answer my questions immediately scum?
Please reply to my case.
|
ebwop: I never denied I said that at all.
|
@debears
Since he's asleep right now, I'll answer for him. Djo is from france but living in south korea. He pointed that out last game:
On October 30 2012 08:29 Djodref wrote:- I'm Abel the Vanilla Townie. I have been given this name because I'm French !
|
I dunno. I really can't say Djo Debears scumteam. But every time djo tunnels someone, debears is right behind - scum teaming up onto a townie to look more genuine himself? Also, he's wasted peoples time a lot. With fluffy posts and oneliners, then with the entire "percentage fluff" argument with Rad - which he wasn't even willing to drop after Clarity gave him a percentage.
Also there's the large amounts of OMGUS coming from debears. Like, everyone who has ever accused him, I think?
On November 05 2012 02:45 Djodref wrote:
Anyway, you are not showing town mentality at all, as debears rightly emphasized it with his case. I'm more and more certain that you are scum.
You mean Clarity, right?
I'm definitely agreeing with clarity being fishy. Definitely some suspicious... mediocre content that he's bringing forward. But he is consistently bringing content up, he has a 4 page filter (with low fluff, but also not with huge, attention grabbing accusations) I'm not willing to evaluate timing for scumminess/innocence - there's too many factors going into timing.
Ultimately, though, I don't want to vote for him because there's just not enough material to read into motivations yet. Shit, his recent case about debears is responding pretty convincingly to being called out for low content.
Meanwhile debears quadruple posts. I understand that one was a mispost, but you don't need to dedicate another post to "ugh mispost" then make two more oneliner posts following that. That's exactly what I was complaining about earlier. As we get closer to lynchtime it's that much more unproductive, and also demoralizing to people who come back from any flavor of AFK and realize there's that many more posts to crawl through.
And exactly why Djo's thing says "France" is irrelevant. He's made it clear where he is, that's the only useful piece of information there. Djo's response to it, regardless of what exactly it is, will have nothing to do with scumhunting.
##Unvote
##Vote Debears
|
@sylver and @clarity
Can you each please define fluff in your own words? I need to understand exactly what you're talking about when you use that word in this context. I didn't really care about it before, I cared more about debear's request to alsn (which seemed like a huge waste of time), but now that you're both using it as part of a case on debears I need to determine if I agree or disagree with you.
|
A post, deliberately or not, that adds nothing of value.
|
ebwop A post that adds nothing of value, deliberately or not. (makes more sense)
|
Clarity, I've not answered your question because at the time I considered it largely pointless. My answering why you think that my behaviour has changed when I myself don't particularly think it has is WIFOM at best.
I think the thread so far has demonstrated quite clearly the flaw with your idea that not answering a particular question is inherently scummy. Even if we assume that only the scum have refused to answer your question(unlikely, from where I'm sitting) it would mean that at least one townie is among that group.
I'd actually say his unwillingness to push through with his tactic and use the lack of answers as proof for a case at the very most is a null tell. The idea that him going back on a tactic when it's seemingly very ineffective is a scum tell is beyond me, which is part of the reason why I'm still very suspicious of debears. Inconsistency isn't necessarily a scum trait, as we've seen again and again in the newbie games.
|
On November 05 2012 04:15 Alsn wrote:
I think the thread so far has demonstrated quite clearly the flaw with your idea that not answering a particular question is inherently scummy. Even if we assume that only the scum have refused to answer your question(unlikely, from where I'm sitting) it would mean that at least one townie is among that group.
Yes, I've recognized my flaw and changed it to a possible scum tell. Again, the exaggeration was because I wanted people to answer, threat of being under suspect helps with that.
|
I caught up - ugh.
Alsn, Rad, Dao, Djo, Debears- I think are town.
...I get unsettling feelings about CC but, once again, nobody seems to share them. So I'll drop them. It's not like I'm actually making a case or anything anyways, just a bad feeling;... I'm probably just being stupid.
Out of Clar, Sylv, at least one of these two is scum IMO based on the arguments in the thread which I don't want to quote, my own suspicions, etc. I wouldn't be surprised if both were scum.
There's a lot of suspicion on debears - who the hell is his scumbuddy if he's scum? I don't think it's Djo, it could be Mr. CC but nobody is bringing that up so that's an illegitimate point imho, I just don't see it. I don't like Clarity's case on him, Sylv's case looks to play off of the fact that both Djo and Deb look scummy - but I don't think they're scum. It would make sense for them to try to both target the same person, especially going off of Alsn's case, it's already a third of the votes.
One thing that has been brought up a couple times is debears' attack on me. I don't see how that makes him scum. Honestly, to go on a side-tangent a little bit, I feel like I'm not playing well and this game has been taxing trying to keep up. I do not think this because of debears' post though, I think it because I'm analyzing myself and trying to think about the way people are playing relative to the way I am playing. The fact that debears made a post against me is one of the primary things that make me think he IS town.
If he was mafia, he would point out how I'm sort of bad. That I haven't posted a proper scumhunting case, only my reads. I would be an easy target for a mislynch IMO, why would he not do so? The only reason I can think of is because he's dismissed me as scum based on my responses. Blah blah blah. I'm losing my train of thought and want to go do something else so I'll just say that I don't think he's scum and I don't want to vote him.
If I'm going to narrow it down between Clar and Sylv: Clar looked a lot like Rad at first so I was fairly certain he is town - but I didn't like his absense, his lack of follow-through on the enforced questions to answer, and the cases from Djo and Deb are far more convincing than my concerns with Sylv early game.
##Vote Clarity_nl
|
On November 05 2012 02:57 Alsn wrote:My case for why I think debears is scum. His reaction's so far to pressure. 1)When I made my introductory post, I merely wanted to point out that he was being a little bit unfair in using skewed statistics to make us all forgive him if he should happen to be away. However, he instantly throws a FoS at me in order to discredit me instead of calmly explaining how I was wrong. Looking at his behaviour in XXVIII when he was town, the main reason I never got completely convinced he was scum was because he kept his cool and calmly explained why Z-BosoN was using faulty logic instead of going crazy about it. 2)Later, when sylver votes him for what he later explains is a strong FoS, he basically goes completely OMGUS on sylver instead of again, calmly explaining why sylver is wrong, accusing him of "bullshit reasoning"(see this post at the end. Unless debears has completely changed his town meta I don't see how I can view this behaviour as town debears. 3)Then there's his attitude towards Obzy, saying he's posting useless and worthless content. It's the exact same strategy he used in XXIX to discredit Inig, a timid beginner townie. Sure, you told him to get coaching, but how does that one line make up for saying his content is useless and worthless? In fact, it's more of the same from debears, seeing as Obzy was pointing fingers at debears it's yet more flaming in order to discredit someone who is suspicious of him. 4)His voting pattern so farHe voted for da0ud "just so lurkers know that he's serious". This is definitely something which I can't blame him for, since da0ud did indeed start posting shortly thereafter. But then he goes on to OMGUS vote sylver, maintaining for a very long time that sylver had "bullshit reasons" for voting him. Yet all is forgiven as soon as sylver backs off? No, actually not, he has kept criticising sylver. Interestingly however, he picks Clarity as his next target, a player who I can't yet see is behaving all that scummy. A paragon of town, definitely not, but probable scum? I don't think so. Interestingly, he's also sheeping off of Djodref instead of pursuing the scum reads he has shared so far. Largely, I find that the way he votes this game is very similar to the way he voted in XXIX so largely, I'd say this is a meta read more than anything else. However, I'd like to preface this by saying I definitely have concerns with regards to the cases against Clarity. I find that his behaviour overall is pretty null, or maybe even slightly town. But depending on how he actually addresses the cases brought forward thus far, I can definitely see myself changing my mind about him. Because while both of you are correct in criticising him for his actions, I'd just prefer to hear his side of the story first as you're being pretty hyperbolic about how important your points are. So, since I'm not yet convinced enough of Clarity's guilt, as well as the fact that I feel unless we have more than one wagon, it'll be harder to find out much of substance after the vote, I'm voting for my top scum read: ##Vote: debears
1) I didn't like how you used lie in red font, especially that early. It seemed to me the post was to discredit me, something I didn't think town Alsn would do.
2) When somethings bullshit reasoning, it's bullshit reasoning. I was not calm with Z-Bo, me and him had a pretty lengthy flamewar. Also, look at my actions before my lynch that game. I was very aggressive, and took my suspicions from Z-Bo, to SS, to SDM
3) Obsy agrees with me that the post was not an insulting or demeaning post. If he got the message, you guys clearly are overreacting
+ Show Spoiler +On November 03 2012 16:06 Obzy wrote:Hm. Okay. I've been looking at FoS the same way as a vote. Assuming people intend to vote the way they are suspicious, I didn't really think there was a difference; letting the mod keep track makes an amount of sense, though. @Cheese >:l The no newb cards comment seems specifically aimed at me. Not really a fan. I'm not wholly sure why he dropped his argument against debears so quickly - pointing out previous meta, etc, and then it just absolutely falls off the face of the planet. Why? (I disagree with this statement, by the way: Show nested quote +Again, another exact mistake I made last game. Feeling the need to tell people that you have been reading the thread. For the second part, he's assuring that we realize that he knows this game is important to him. As town, he wouldn't feel the need to tell us that the game is important. That sounds like the sort of thing I would do. Bringing up the not using newbness as an excuse without calling me out specifically (as the only player who was not participating in the previous game) and then pointing out a scumtell based on inexperience looks like a trap. It may be valid, but combined with the earlier statement, there doesn't really seem to be an answer besides inexperienced town and scum, and you've already indicated that inexperienced town is unacceptable. Why wouldn't you just vote? FoS Mr. Cheese.@Djo Notes: ignores deb/Als argument, policy discussion, mechanics discussion, argument with Cheesecake. If I didn't dislike CC's argument, I'd be a little more doubtful, but... I do dislike it. I think part of the problem for Djo is I have a hard time reading some of his sentences, so it's a little harder to follow his exact train of thought lol. Given that I'm suspicious of CC, I don't have a real problem with Djo at this time. @debears [I seriously clicked your filter and cringed before realizing it's 4 pages, not 40.] (Also, @sylver..)
However I may have mentioned FoS vs vote confusion at the top of this post that I wrote like 30 minutes ago, I really don't like the vote on debears at all. If I'm wrong, fucking bummer, but debears is driving conversation. His filter's not easy to read, but the content is useful to Me, at least. I wish I wasn't getting attacked har har, but the activeness in making me respond to stop lurking is a townie move IMHO. If he was mafia, he would've let me continue happily lurking and reading to my heart's content and then blasted me in a day, rather than trying to get me to start contributing early on. For god's sake, it had been less than 6 hours from the start of the game, you hadn't even appeared yet, there were people with only a few words and he writes up a post designed to get me to contribute? That definitely feels townie to me. I don't see how you could come to the opposite conclusion. Some (Maybe even a lot!) of the filter is pretty pointless and could've gone unsaid. The parts that DID go said are, I think, the best in the thread. If he didn't have quality bits in the filter along with the spam I'd think differently but the quality parts look solid. I definitely think he's town at the moment. You haven't interacted with anybody besides Rad and myself, and your first post comes in and blasts debears? @da0ud What the hell dude, get in here and post >_> You can't do worse than me ffs I'm going to take a break now and probably sleep. If anybody has any questions, concerns, claims, or suspicions about me please say something because being called out is good for stopping lurking -_- And when the thread is going fast with a focused discussion it's really hard to jump in.
4) Considering my anti-lurker policy game, the vote was a pressure vote to get him to post. He reacted to it and posted more. It did it's job, hence my removal of it.
On Sylver, I am OMGUS because I found how he popped in the thread, votes me because of fluff (ignoring my content all the same) and then bails out within 45 minutes. Also, I didn't like how he criticized us (not enough substance) even though he wasn't even there
Also, you read my case on Clarity, no? Does the reasoning make sense? I believe so. Just because I make a case and vote on someone you think is slightly town, does not mean I am scummy. If my reasoning is bad and I do so, then yes I would look scummy. You yourself said some of my points on Clarity have mert
Also, on sheeping. You guys have the wrong terms for sheeping. Sheeping means you agree with someone without bringing anything new to the table. All of my cases have original content and input
Summary:
Alsn, this case is based mainly on my meta, and incorrect meta at that. In my town game, I exhibited aggressiveness with Z-Boson early on, and SS, Z-bo, and SDM late game.
Also, you seem to be denying the fact that in the postgame for XXIX, I said I was trying to adopt an aggressive meta from both alignments. My aggressiveness is a null tell (meaning attacking, moving my vote around). My reasoning is what you must look for.
Finally, today is d1. Scum reads aren't the strongest and they can change. My votes have moved around for two reasons
1) pressure - it helps get questions answered quicker
2) uncertainty - I don't know who is scum, and my reads have changed over the day.
|
I'm having trouble getting on the Debears wagon, a lot seems to be based on fluff content and OMGUS reactions. Although, I must say he is playing his scumgame right on point. But I suppose that's a null tell because he always opens as the town leader.
@Clarity
I just dug up your question. No, there was no scum motivation with my "jokes" last game. Zero percent whatsoever.
Also, what was the purpose (motivation behind) this post:
On November 04 2012 05:47 Clarity_nl wrote:
I noticed that too.
The distinction between "I wanted to show that I was trying to spark discussion" and "I was trying to spark discussion" is definitely a relevant one.
In context: I call out Djo for a scummy sounding clause, and I ask Rad (because he looked like the only one around) what he thought. Right away, you jump in and are like "Yeah, noticed this, relevant to your case" and then disappear. This was a random post (no posts ~30 mins beforehand, none until many hours after). Also, two people (Rad+Alsn I think) said it wasn't that important.
|
I was around, I guess you could say I was lurking
When I make posts I generally have the thread in a different tab and check before I post and you pointed out what I wanted to.
It kind of ticked me off because I felt clever, so I changed my post and put it up anyway.
The reason I didn't post for a while then was because I wasn't home.
Thanks for answering my question.
|
ebwop Red colouring is ironic
|
debears, I know you had a pretty lengthy flame war with Zbo, but as I recall it I always thought you were the reasonable one in that particular feud. IIRC I even pointed it out during the game. I just find your reactions so far uncharacteristic.
Whether Obzy has thick skin enough to shrug it off is besides the point. You were being demeaning to a new player which is exactly what you did last game. Admittedly, you seem to be painting "everyone" with bullshit this game, which is a slight change.
I actually am a bit concerned, seeing that there's a lot of people who has avoided taking any stances completely until wagons were already well under way. I'm starting to suspect that both you and Clarity might end up being town, but at this point I don't have a better option.
I'll see if I can make a better case against someone else, but I don't see how it would benefit town if we fumble around frenetically leading up to the lynch(see my play D3 last game). Especially since it's still D1, the most important thing is to simply make sure that we hold people responsible for their actions going forward.
Anyway, I'm still not inclined to trust that you've town's best interest in mind. But I'll keep an eye out for how the thread develops.
|
@Clarity
I agree with the fluff point on your case of Debears - fluff creating more fluff because fluff is fluffy fluff. (Fluff = confidence from last game). The first point, however, you say that he was trying to halt discussion. I'd disagree, Debears and I both wanted Djo to stop because the argument was, well, ridiculous in nature. It was pretty much going in circles and if we hadn't stopped it, we'd still be drowned in it.
|
On November 05 2012 04:50 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
@Clarity
I agree with the fluff point on your case of Debears - fluff creating more fluff because fluff is fluffy fluff. (Fluff = confidence from last game). The first point, however, you say that he was trying to halt discussion. I'd disagree, Debears and I both wanted Djo to stop because the argument was, well, ridiculous in nature. It was pretty much going in circles and if we hadn't stopped it, we'd still be drowned in it.
I guess my problem with it is mainly that he didn't replace it with anything.
I'm sure once someone had something useful to say it would've stopped Djo.
|
@Clarity
On November 05 2012 03:40 Clarity_nl wrote:1) + Show Spoiler +My case on debears: All game long he's been accusing people of FoS'ing him while he's away. The reason it's interesting is that he doesn't mention when he leaves, it's just "unlucky" I guess. But it's a good way to redirect attention to whomever is accusing him. By itself this doesn't mean much, but by the end of this post you should know why I'm extremely suspicious of debears. On November 03 2012 13:25 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 13:23 Djodref wrote:On November 03 2012 13:09 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:On November 03 2012 13:00 Djodref wrote:@ CheeseI'm pretty sure that the following quote was totally serving your mafia agenda in the last game. But I guess I should better trust you because I don't really see why you should be dishonest right now about it. On October 29 2012 13:24 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
Holy meta argument Batbears. Are you saying that Dandel under pressure is basically = Kush in terms of meta? Let's take a look at the second one On October 28 2012 09:20 Rad wrote:
Djo NOW YOU SHOW UP? On October 28 2012 09:21 Mr. Cheesecake wrote:
A wild Djo appears? I don't know if you have seen Rad post or not before posting yours but I really felt that you were both accusing me of active lurking. Why the lolwut by the way ? What did you not understand in my comment ? @Djo The second part of the first quote isn't a joke. It's an analogy. Therefore it has nothing to do with anything. The second quote: Pokemon reference, it means I think of you as a pokemon. Pokemon are innocent and cute; I'm not casting aspersions on you in the least. Yes, @obsQT I just mentioned pokemon. We could go with this WIFOM crap all day. These "jokes" means absolutely nothing. Are we seriously still talking about a failboat joke? Stop this incessant attempt to tunnel me--it bears no weight at all because it is probably one of the most subjective things one could possibly focus on. Especially since it's coming from another game entirely. I declare this useless argument over *gavel slam*. @ CheeseI'll stop tunneling you when I'm satisfied with your answers. Why do you want us to stop discussing ? This discussion has derived from its original point to go something quite useless, I agree. My point is that you could have used these jokes to make me look bad. I know this was a pokemon reference but I think "a wild Djo appears" was implying active lurking, especially in the context of the thread, rather than implying that I was innocent as a pokemon. My point is that jokes can be used by mafia to cast suspicion on a player without looking like you are doing it. It's a great tool used this way. Djo, if you are town, stop arguing over stupid points. You're wrong. Get over it If you're mafia, keep arguing Debears does two things here. 1. He halts discussion. He doesn't change subject, he just stops the current one. 2. He calls djo wrong. There is no explanation. Just: "You're wrong. Get over it" He's also telling Djo to stop being an idiot, NOW. Why would he want him to stop if he had nothing better to discuss? My current scumreads have changed wildly with recent developments. To me, a debears/djodref scumteam seems most likely, but since djo has set it up so that I cannot post a useful case about him now I'm posting this instead. 2) + Show Spoiler +On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote:On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote:
Holy shit, this flavor. What.
If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. Here it starts, the whole "fluff debate". Fluff talk about fluff. It is the epitome of useless. Here are all his posts regarding this issue: + Show Spoiler +On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote:On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote:
Holy shit, this flavor. What.
If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:13 debears wrote:On November 03 2012 14:44 sylverfyre wrote:
Holy shit, this flavor. What.
If we're gonna lynch a lurker, I'd rather it be early game than late, at least. But I think that we have more... dedication among the townies this game. There wasn't a long wait for the last few signups - everyone here seems pretty pumped to play some mafia seriously. I don't think lurker policy lynch will come up at all. You said townies. That's very different than saying the town or players. Very, very different. It means that you either 1) Think the people being active are townies 2) Know that the people being active are townies There is no other reason for using townies to describe those of us who are showing activeness and dedication Also, you voted me, meaning you voted for someone who you think is townie based on the above. That is scummy as shit debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 01:49 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:39 Alsn wrote:
[quote]debears, even if we hypothetically assume the two most active players are scum, it would still mean that town on the whole is being active and not lurking. I think your argument is bad and your insistence that his statement is a scum slip is far fetched imho. Eh. I think it's very odd to say that townies have good dedication, and I'm one of the guys showing dedication, yet he votes me. Also, what do you think of this part of his post alsn? I kinda expected a bit more... substance in the thread by now. For a guy who hadn't posted anything, why is he calling all the actives out for substance? What good does that do? That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case. Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 02:01 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 01:58 Alsn wrote:
[quote]That part of his post, sure, I agree that it's somewhat a silly statement. It doesn't change the fact that you had been acting very strangely and quite counter-productive to town interests. From where I'm sitting his vote was merited. Especially in light of the fact that he said he meant it as a strong FoS as opposed to a rock solid reason for why you absolutely must be scum. You OMGUSing him most certainly doesn't damage his case.
Also, it's unfortunate that I'm indirectly helping him defend himself, but at this point I simply find you/Djod more scummy than him and I figured the chance of him being scum was lower than the risk of you guys getting off the hook if I had stayed silent and just watched. It seems that from the latest developments that other people had the same thought. So, in essence, you think that a vote to tell someone to post less is productive? Being active =/ acting strangely or counter productive I was sparking conversation dude OMGUS is warranted when I find him scummy Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less? Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:13 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:07 Alsn wrote:
[quote]Again, that isn't even what he said. He said he wanted you to post less fluff and more content. How is that a vote to make you post less?
Also, if you're explaining away fluff as sparking conversation I don't know what to say, how is posting a bunch of fluff productive? Either people find you scummy for it(bad if you're town, it lessens your credibility) or people will actually reply with fluff themselves(even worse). How much fluff do you actually see in my filter? Quote it and put it in a spoiler. Then take my quotes that look like they are accomplishing something. and put them in another spoiler. I want to see how much you think his fluff argument holds true. That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Wait... but what did debears say in that previous quote.... stop arguing over stupid points? On November 04 2012 02:46 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 02:44 Clarity_nl wrote:On November 04 2012 02:42 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:39 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:31 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:30 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:27 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:26 Rad wrote:On November 04 2012 02:20 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 02:16 Rad wrote:
[quote]
That's quite a lot of work you're asking from him and doesn't really help town much, does it? It's all going to be subjective at that point, he might say "this is fluff" and you can just argue that it's not. If we want to determine how much fluff you've given so far, we can check your filter and determine for ourselves. Give me a percentage of fluff in my filter then. If your going to accuse me of something, at least make is specific. This "you're posting so much fluff" is doing nothing. That's your best reasoning on me so far. What good does this percentage do except make some arbitrary point to argue about endlessly? "50% fluff, scum!!!" "only 25% fluff, clearly not a scum tell!" I'm trying to figure out what you expect to come from such a number. If you're scum and you want alsn to waste time coming up with this percentage, clearly you don't think it'll be damning. Nothing to come out of this number except WIFOM on both sides of the argument. Stop bitching and just give me a damn percentage. Holy shit. I'm not gonna freak out. I already admitted I had fluff Answer the question about what good can come from coming up with a percentage. So I know where my fluff rating stands. So I can determine whether you are being genuine or not based on what I feel Your "fluff rating"? O.o Anyway, my issues were with your reasoning for wanting alsn to spend time doing something that doesn't help town at all. If you could think of reasons why it would help town, great, I was hoping to hear them from you, but you're stuck on just pushing the wasting of time to happen. Get on Alsn if you really want this huge waste of time to happen, not me (I wasn't the one pushing the fluff idea on you), but if you don't give a good answer as to why your "fluff rating" matters to town, I'll consider this you just pushing people to waste time. Again, as I stated before, if you're scum, you clearly don't think your fluff percentage will be a bad thing against you, so it's worthless to even look up at this point. Because I'm town and I'm trying to figure out who's scum. Attacking someone without specific reasoning means you can back out on your argument easier later. Saying "you're posting a lot of fluff" is a very ambigious statement. Why don't you want to just give me a percentage? It's a very simple request. Off the top of your head Well I'm glad you cleared that up. Anyway, you want your number so badly? 35% fluff. Can we move on now? I feel like we reversed 12 hours and we're talking about Cheese's joke. Ok. Finally. I have 65% content in a large filter according to you, which arguably is more contribution to the thread than most. This is why the fluff argument is invalid. See my point Rad? That is all. Now, scumhunting coming I end up trying to shut him up, and it works. He manages to convey that he posts more content than fluff, with SEVEN fluff posts. I figured maybe he was trying to bury something, but if it's there I can't find it. Regardless, flooding the thread with useless posts is anti-town. Although this stood out, by itself it doesn't mean much. He spammed because he wanted to prove a point.... I guess On November 04 2012 04:02 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2012 03:51 Alsn wrote:On November 04 2012 03:46 debears wrote:On November 04 2012 03:38 sylverfyre wrote:
At the time, your posts were a lot of oneliners. If you have a 30 page post of oneliners (instead of longer posts, with more than one sentence of information per post) then it's much harder to read your filter. Which is bad for town. All I'm asking there is to up your words per post and cool down on the tripleposting.
It's worth noting, you're actually doing what I'm asking of you right now, even as you're calling me out for being frustrated at you for it. Thanks, I guess? While you consider a long filter bad for town, have you considered that an active town, especially super active town, is extremely bad for scum. They lose control of the thread, and have a threat who is invested and reads things over. And artificially increasing your filter is what? At best it's a genuine attempt at making the observers laugh about something, at worst you're scum trying to hide behind Hapa's advice that he has posted after/during almost every single newbie lately, that lynching the most active player is almost always a mislynch. Neither of those help us find scum. Where do you get that I'm artificially increasing my filter? I'm not posting for the sake of filter. I'm posting for the sake of discussion and finding scum Oh, okay. On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
Btw to all obs
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter Because talking a lot is pro town right? But day 1 debears is always the same, every game I've looked into anyway. He starts out aggressive, regardless of alignment. But last game where he was scum, he actively lurked the more the game went on, he fed off of his "townie vibe" because he posted a lot. But never has he proclaimed he will be posting a lot, this game he has. Why is that? I believe that he's forcing himself to be active all game. By posting this he is forced to keep his promise or he will stick out. He gets over his fear of posting later in the game as scum this way. It's easy to be active D1 scum, you can keep your story straight. The longer the game goes the more problems you'll have and debears has experienced this and knows it as a weakness. 3) + Show Spoiler +But what REALLY caught my eye were these: On November 03 2012 14:27 debears wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 14:21 Obzy wrote:K - This is in response to debears post asking about me. I may screw up the formatting but hopefully not - On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
Obsy has been around the thread. What I have found is that he seems to be actively lurking. Notice above post. Asking a pretty much useless question. It's newbie town/scum tell, so it's a null tell
Yeah, I've been trying to read and refresh the thread regularly, I think I've been away from it for maybe an hour total since game start. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
He has a few one-liners like the above. Mostly, his posts do not take a strong stance and his opinions seem to be easily swayed. Again newbie town/scum tell.
I've typed out a few posts that were a bit longer, but after re-reading, it didn't look like they did anything to advance town interests and the only thing they did was look spammy and unhelpful, so I've mostly been deleting them. I am, as mentioned, not really certain whether or not I'm judging things properly and taking a concrete stance on something that turns out to be stupid feels sort of dumb. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
I don't like this post. At all. Trying to come up with excuses to not be posting. Sure the thread is moving pretty decently (score one for town), but it's nothing huge and pretty easy to follow so far imo.
No comment, it does move really fast. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
Here he acts confused. He asks questions without answering them himself or even really attempting to answer them himself.
I didn't really want to call you out directly. You responded really strongly to Alsn's red font, and it seemed counterproductive - but stifling discussion is a problem; given that you've been the primary generator of discussion. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
Who have a tough time contributing early? Usually scum because
1) They are afraid to post and put themselves out there since they are guilty and know so
2) They know the players they are accusing are town and they can't actually find real evidence to use
However, I admit this is also a newbie town trait.
I don't have a problem with posting, I don't want to post meaninglessly. Writing about things that are actually useful and will help everybody is difficult, because when I look at what I've drafted it looks moronic and doesn't help anybody. Answering being directly called out is a lot easier, since I don't have to cast about for what to say, I just have to explain how I'm playing. On November 03 2012 13:40 debears wrote:
Honestly, this post is just absolutely worthless. It has no actual input. Says nothing about the current happenings of the thread.
I wanted the conversation to shift away from talking about Cheese using jokes or not. It was a meaningless thing to discuss. Pointing it out so early and then dwelling on it for so long meant that it isn't a good scumtell for Cheese, while also making him aware of the fact he was doing it (Assuming that it WAS a scumtell, it no longer is). That entire discussion was just a waste of time, so I would say that it makes sense that my post, pointing it out, was equally useless. I definitely have been reading the thread, but haven't done a very good job of blending in. That's not really the point, anyways. You haven't been blending in, because you've been actively advancing the interests of town. I'm not a good enough judge to know if you're doing so genuinely, but you're the most active player currently (IMHO). I haven't read past this post yet, but I'll go ahead and do so now. If I see something, I'll comment. So what is your exact read on me? Scum, slightly scum, null, slightly town, or town? On November 04 2012 03:03 debears wrote:
@Sylver
Do you consider me a good lynch candidate based on activity?
and I have put more than one sentence in a post. My most important posts have more than 1. Those are the key Why is debears so concerned about what specific people think of him? Surely if you're town you just behave normally and address concerns as they come? Or maybe he's trying to get people to say that he's town, so he can use it in his defense later. Regardless I do not see a town motive for asking these questions. All they do is divert from what people are discussing, for an answer that doesn't mean a thing. If people think you're scum, they'll say so, no need to ask. My final point is his entire case against me. It comes out of nowhere. Please read through debears filter and find posts where he questions me or says he's suspicious of me. It's too convenient. Has anyone noticed that after he posted his case things have gone "smoothly"?
1) Alright. You are forgetting the context here. Djo was arguing that CC's jokes were a scumtell. They were not, based on CC's personality in the scum QT and the pregame from both games.
1. Djo's argument was considered dumb by everyone else at this point
2. It was destructive to the thread
3. a. Since Djo's arguments were dumb, I was thinking he was either 1) Misguided townie or 2) Scum
If I tell him to back off and he's a misguided townie, it stops a useless argument in the thread
If he's scum, it stops him from painting a bs case on a townie
2) When someone refuses to answer a simple question that takes 2 seconds to answer, that is anti-town. Rad jumped on me for asking Alsn to look over my filter. If you're going to accuse me of something, I want specifics. So, when Rad said that is wasting time, I asked for a percentage off the top of his head, and he freaked out.
Also, the reason I stopped going on about it is that you did give me a percentage. I've gone over this with Alsn and he gets it. Ask him if you don't understand. I wanted to show Rad that there was a considerable amount of content in my big filter to go with the fluff, since multiple people had bought into Sylver's so much fluff argument.
If you honestly think I'm purposely posting stupid stuff to raise my filter to 30 pgs, then you are wrong. If you look at the obs qt from last game, multiple vets commented on Djo's 30 pg filter pace. I'm just having fun with playing this. Also, look at my filter. Look at the content that is in there. I'm making cases, asking specific questions, driving discussion. In other words, I'm a town leader, which is what I have been striving for all along. The 30 page filter will be, if I get there, a byproduct of actively discussing scumreads with others.
Also, why would I set a page filter limit as scum? To look active? To spam the thread? As I recall, I don't have a problem with being active. It's a null tell. As town, l want to do it to generate discussion, take a leadership role, and force scum to post.
Also, I would like to point out that veteran players on this site, like Marv, do have long filters as town, because they can control the pace of the game. It's a style I think I like, so I'm going for it.
3) Yet again, you are taking my posts out of context.
In the first, Obsy made a whole post about me, and he didn't make a clear read in it. I asked him specifically which of those were his read. Specificity = bad for scum
Second, Sylver had mentioned how much fluff and long filter don't play well for town
On November 04 2012 03:00 sylverfyre wrote:The biggest red flag to me was: Show nested quote +On November 03 2012 11:39 debears wrote:
Btw to all obs
I will attempt to reach the fabled 30 pg filter If your 30 page filter looks like this, debears, how the is anyone supposed to process it as information? You write twenty sentences per page of filter. That's what I'm complaining about. You can put more than one sentence into a post. Please do, for the sake of the town.Alright, enough about the fluff. I simply have asked a favor. As for the continued Vote on debears: At this point, I'm more concerned about you making up conspiracy theories about me. You OMGUS voted me (not surprising) but you're standing by it for really weird reasons. I'm not the only one calling them weird. Making up weird reasons about me is not getting us anywhere. I am finding it 1% more scummy with each straw you grasp at. Maybe you're overreacting because you're a scum in a bind? I find it strange, and suspicious.
That was why I asked whether he would consider me a lynch target based off activity. If he would have said yes, I would have painted him as scum on the spot because activity is a null tell when you're active.
Summary:
I believe either a) this case is based off heavy confirmation bias or b) scum bias (meaning Clarity would be scum)
Considering the rest of Clarity's filter, and my earlier case on Clarity, this strengthens my scumread on Clarity
1) This case is based mostly on taking my posts out of context
2) The part that isn't lacking the whole context has already been explained before, meaning that Clarity isn't reading the thread
|
On November 05 2012 04:49 Alsn wrote:
debears, I know you had a pretty lengthy flame war with Zbo, but as I recall it I always thought you were the reasonable one in that particular feud. IIRC I even pointed it out during the game. I just find your reactions so far uncharacteristic.
Whether Obzy has thick skin enough to shrug it off is besides the point. You were being demeaning to a new player which is exactly what you did last game. Admittedly, you seem to be painting "everyone" with bullshit this game, which is a slight change.
I actually am a bit concerned, seeing that there's a lot of people who has avoided taking any stances completely until wagons were already well under way. I'm starting to suspect that both you and Clarity might end up being town, but at this point I don't have a better option.
I'll see if I can make a better case against someone else, but I don't see how it would benefit town if we fumble around frenetically leading up to the lynch(see my play D3 last game). Especially since it's still D1, the most important thing is to simply make sure that we hold people responsible for their actions going forward.
Anyway, I'm still not inclined to trust that you've town's best interest in mind. But I'll keep an eye out for how the thread develops.
Someone has crept up on my radar: Slyverfyre. I will post on him in a little
Alsn, I strongly recommend you to read the end of the game where I accuse Z-Bo,then SS, then SDM within a short amount of time. I flipflopped so hard cuz I wasn't sure. I found all of them scummy to some degree.
I still don't get why you guys are thinking it was a personal attack on Obsy. I'll call people out when I think they aren't contributing. Being on the aggressive side usually makes them more alert and responsive. I think the key here is that I haven't kept bashing him. I like his posting since.
|
Can we get another vote count please?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
