|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On June 24 2013 05:35 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 05:34 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 05:29 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 05:19 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 05:16 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 04:59 Hapahauli wrote:@ CoraI will say that GK has a really good point about your "read" on Ange. Finally there's his last set of reads, which clearly make no sense from a town perspective. I simply can't visualize a townie making the Ange read in particular, given her contributions to getting scum lynched on DAY 1. All in all, this is a guy with a lot of activity who hasn't had a whole lot of stances on who's scum. He's content to suspect lurkers and be pretty wishy-washy on everyone else. Ange in particular he's gone from "possibly Ange" to "probably not Ange let's not consider lynching her even though I think she's scummy" in very short order when pressured about it. Like what kind of townie does that??? The Oats read I could possibly see a townie making, but everything else just doesn't make sense at all to me from a town perspective. Why would you be suspicious of the person who was the driving force behind the Godfather lynch? And even if you are suspicious, your quotes on her don't come across as very natural... Perhaps Ange, as it would be really easy for scum to cast doubt on me and push for my lynch D2. That got me really suspicious. So you mention that you're "really suspicious" of her right here, but then when someone confronts you about it, you immediately back down to a very non-committal stance: I'm not say Ange is 100% scum and that we should try to lynch her. I'm not even saying Ange looks very scummy and we should thing about lynching her. I'm just saying that it makes me a bit suspicious. And now it's a "bit suspicious". Perhaps I used the wrong wording in how suspicious of Ange I was. Her sub-par D1 play was only revived by the fact that she voted for DP at just the right time. Then she goes on about how I look bad for voting DP which is so ridiculously obvious. I'm still feeling on edge after the DP vote because I thought I was going to be a prime lynch candidate because of it. I considered (and still do, but to a lesser degree) myself to be lynch bait and when she mentioned my name I saw her possibly as scum jumping on the lynchbait. She shouldn't be hailed as an angel just because she voted for DP. Everyone still has to do their part in the town. Ange is obviously town and you are a prime lynch candidate. Way to follow thread sentiment yet again Yamato. Step up your play. ROFL. Get real. Lynched scum D1. GGNORE That doesn't give you an excuse to do nothing the rest of the game.
It does mean lecturing him is a completely counterproductive thing to do though.
|
On June 24 2013 05:39 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 05:35 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 05:34 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 05:29 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 05:19 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 05:16 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 04:59 Hapahauli wrote:@ CoraI will say that GK has a really good point about your "read" on Ange. Finally there's his last set of reads, which clearly make no sense from a town perspective. I simply can't visualize a townie making the Ange read in particular, given her contributions to getting scum lynched on DAY 1. All in all, this is a guy with a lot of activity who hasn't had a whole lot of stances on who's scum. He's content to suspect lurkers and be pretty wishy-washy on everyone else. Ange in particular he's gone from "possibly Ange" to "probably not Ange let's not consider lynching her even though I think she's scummy" in very short order when pressured about it. Like what kind of townie does that??? The Oats read I could possibly see a townie making, but everything else just doesn't make sense at all to me from a town perspective. Why would you be suspicious of the person who was the driving force behind the Godfather lynch? And even if you are suspicious, your quotes on her don't come across as very natural... Perhaps Ange, as it would be really easy for scum to cast doubt on me and push for my lynch D2. That got me really suspicious. So you mention that you're "really suspicious" of her right here, but then when someone confronts you about it, you immediately back down to a very non-committal stance: I'm not say Ange is 100% scum and that we should try to lynch her. I'm not even saying Ange looks very scummy and we should thing about lynching her. I'm just saying that it makes me a bit suspicious. And now it's a "bit suspicious". Perhaps I used the wrong wording in how suspicious of Ange I was. Her sub-par D1 play was only revived by the fact that she voted for DP at just the right time. Then she goes on about how I look bad for voting DP which is so ridiculously obvious. I'm still feeling on edge after the DP vote because I thought I was going to be a prime lynch candidate because of it. I considered (and still do, but to a lesser degree) myself to be lynch bait and when she mentioned my name I saw her possibly as scum jumping on the lynchbait. She shouldn't be hailed as an angel just because she voted for DP. Everyone still has to do their part in the town. Ange is obviously town and you are a prime lynch candidate. Way to follow thread sentiment yet again Yamato. Step up your play. ROFL. Get real. Lynched scum D1. GGNORE That doesn't give you an excuse to do nothing the rest of the game. It does mean lecturing him is a completely counterproductive thing to do though.
What else is there to do? The only thing that's happening is people putting really illogical cases on me and asking me questions I've answered 6 times.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
I suggest "nothing" is more productive than having digs at obvious townies.
|
Oh come on. Let them fight. I need to hear more from Cora anyway.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
People should clearly be watching HSC 
|
Stephano is best commentator
|
On June 24 2013 04:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
Are you serious? Did you really just call me wishy-washy?
I've had 2 main scum reads, and I did not back down off of them really easily. I've been suspicious of Oats since like 20 minutes into the game, and I was suspicious of Yamato and argued back and forth with him and Hapa until Hapa convinced me that I was wrong about my read.
When it came down to who to vote for, I chose between someone I strongly believed was town and someone I wasn't sure about.
Regarding Hapa, I really believe he is town. I've made multiple posts saying so and giving legitimate reasons why. Did you read them?
It's really hard to me to not doubt you here because while I was caring about the lynch and making active choices, you threw your vote down on someone who wasn't getting lynched and said "Hey guys, I'm out, peace". How is that scum hunting? I've done a lot more scumhunting than you have.
Your read on me looks just like you are butthurt from my vote on you and you're just trying to put pressure on an easy target. You're not even doing what Ange did. She used it for discussion, while you are using it as the basis of your argument. You realize how scummy that looks? Of course it looks really terrible that I defended DP with a lot of confidence. Anyone with half a brain as scum would see that I would make a good lynch target due to my vote.
Being wrong doesn't make me scum, bro. Try again.
You may have taken some stances earlier in the game, but near the deadline and for everything thereafter, you've been running to the same tune of let's lynch lurkers and been pretty much wishy-washy about any other scumreads (except maybe Oats). I assumed that was clear when writing my case, but apparently it wasn't.
|
On June 24 2013 06:00 goodkarma wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 04:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
Are you serious? Did you really just call me wishy-washy?
I've had 2 main scum reads, and I did not back down off of them really easily. I've been suspicious of Oats since like 20 minutes into the game, and I was suspicious of Yamato and argued back and forth with him and Hapa until Hapa convinced me that I was wrong about my read.
When it came down to who to vote for, I chose between someone I strongly believed was town and someone I wasn't sure about.
Regarding Hapa, I really believe he is town. I've made multiple posts saying so and giving legitimate reasons why. Did you read them?
It's really hard to me to not doubt you here because while I was caring about the lynch and making active choices, you threw your vote down on someone who wasn't getting lynched and said "Hey guys, I'm out, peace". How is that scum hunting? I've done a lot more scumhunting than you have.
Your read on me looks just like you are butthurt from my vote on you and you're just trying to put pressure on an easy target. You're not even doing what Ange did. She used it for discussion, while you are using it as the basis of your argument. You realize how scummy that looks? Of course it looks really terrible that I defended DP with a lot of confidence. Anyone with half a brain as scum would see that I would make a good lynch target due to my vote.
Being wrong doesn't make me scum, bro. Try again. You may have taken some stances earlier in the game, but near the deadline and for everything thereafter, you've been running to the same tune of let's lynch lurkers and been pretty much wishy-washy about any other scumreads (except maybe Oats). I assumed that was clear when writing my case, but apparently it wasn't.
Please read my filter and tell me where I championed a lurker lynch.
On June 23 2013 05:15 cDgCorazon wrote:
My problem is lynching sloOsh is that I could blame Adam, OO, and Ange for mostly the same things: lack of scumhunting and lack of activity. Why single out sloOsh?
|
Great, I didn't expect to come home this late. Kind of sad now as I wanted to get some more scum hunting done but that will have to wait till tomorrow, I probably won't be around until evening again (EU timezone).
|
On June 24 2013 06:03 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:00 goodkarma wrote:On June 24 2013 04:50 cDgCorazon wrote:
Are you serious? Did you really just call me wishy-washy?
I've had 2 main scum reads, and I did not back down off of them really easily. I've been suspicious of Oats since like 20 minutes into the game, and I was suspicious of Yamato and argued back and forth with him and Hapa until Hapa convinced me that I was wrong about my read.
When it came down to who to vote for, I chose between someone I strongly believed was town and someone I wasn't sure about.
Regarding Hapa, I really believe he is town. I've made multiple posts saying so and giving legitimate reasons why. Did you read them?
It's really hard to me to not doubt you here because while I was caring about the lynch and making active choices, you threw your vote down on someone who wasn't getting lynched and said "Hey guys, I'm out, peace". How is that scum hunting? I've done a lot more scumhunting than you have.
Your read on me looks just like you are butthurt from my vote on you and you're just trying to put pressure on an easy target. You're not even doing what Ange did. She used it for discussion, while you are using it as the basis of your argument. You realize how scummy that looks? Of course it looks really terrible that I defended DP with a lot of confidence. Anyone with half a brain as scum would see that I would make a good lynch target due to my vote.
Being wrong doesn't make me scum, bro. Try again. You may have taken some stances earlier in the game, but near the deadline and for everything thereafter, you've been running to the same tune of let's lynch lurkers and been pretty much wishy-washy about any other scumreads (except maybe Oats). I assumed that was clear when writing my case, but apparently it wasn't. Please read my filter and tell me where I championed a lurker lynch. Show nested quote +On June 23 2013 05:15 cDgCorazon wrote:
My problem is lynching sloOsh is that I could blame Adam, OO, and Ange for mostly the same things: lack of scumhunting and lack of activity. Why single out sloOsh?
Your vote post I would say. Sure, you talked about other people up to that point, but in the end lurker lynch.
On June 23 2013 07:11 cDgCorazon wrote:
I really feel like DP lynch would be really terrible so I would go for any other option besides DP.
GK is in that list of people who have played subpar and I would be up for his lynch. Right now there is a clusterfuck of people who have played like this. Might as well get rid of one of them now (as Hapa said).
##Unvote
##Vote: Goodkarma
And right now, we have this. Maybe Oats, and lurker lynch (because apparently you really didn't mean Ange, even though this is clearly a list-type post with three elements...)
On June 24 2013 00:06 cDgCorazon wrote:
You.
Perhaps Ange, as it would be really easy for scum to cast doubt on me and push for my lynch D2. That got me really suspicious.
The third one is probably in one of the lurkers and semi-lurkers (GK/ShiaoPi/Coag/OO/SloOsh and others I'm probably forgetting).
Lurkers are definitely something you have no problem lynching, and there are FAR TOO MANY lurkers on that list for all of them to be scum, making that point kinda out-right meaningless since you're not taking any kind of stance there on which ones actually are scum...
|
On June 24 2013 05:26 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 04:24 Hapahauli wrote:
@ Marv
Can you explain your reads on sloOsh (seemingly null) and Coag (strong town) respectively?
I have sloOsh at very strong town given how much sense he's making. Also regardless of GK's allignment, he was the hammer vote on the Godfather, which makes me incredibly skeptical of any sort of suspicion on him.
As for Coag, I'm not sure what his behavioral tells are, but his vote on DP actually isn't that important. It wasn't made in the last minute scramble, and almost seemed like a throwaway vote made in the middle of D1 when DP had virtually no chance of getting lynched. coag actually voting for mafia is one of the strongest tells you're going to get out of him probably. And he still seems more interested than I think he would be as mafia. And yes, I already conceded slOosh should have been greener than I put him.
my vote wasnt actually important(aside from lynching scum) it was a throway vote for sure and I was really fucking lucky that DP turned out to be scum as well as lucky he even managed to get lynched at the time I voted him he wasnt really a lynch candidate or being pressured at all. I dropped my vote on him and had the intention of changing it eventually and didnt get around in time to re evaluate/change it.
I could definitely be scum just fucking off on my own and bussing my own team mate for the lulz. I have totally done it in the past countless times for little to no reason other than to just do it for the sake of doing it.
But the truth is im still townier than like 75% people here.
|
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out.
|
GK, it really looks like you're mis-representing Cora's vote on you. From the very post you quoted...
On June 23 2013 07:11 cDgCorazon wrote:
I really feel like DP lynch would be really terrible so I would go for any other option besides DP.
GK is in that list of people who have played subpar and I would be up for his lynch. Right now there is a clusterfuck of people who have played like this. Might as well get rid of one of them now (as Hapa said).
##Unvote
##Vote: Goodkarma
The lurker lynch seems like a post-justification for his vote. He had a town-read on DP and didn't want to see him lynched. Whether or not that read on DP is scummy is a subject for another debate, but it is what it is.
Also, why do you care about list posts? List posts are non-alignment indicative.
I have my reasons to be suspicious of Cora, but all the reasons you're coming up with aren't very robust.
|
|
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out.
This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town.
|
On June 24 2013 06:29 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out. This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town.
Unfounded?
|
11589 Posts
On June 24 2013 06:30 cDgCorazon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:29 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out. This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town. Unfounded?
There's no good reason to believe that he's mafia.
|
United Kingdom36156 Posts
I think every single one of GK's cases this game has been "not very robust".
|
On June 24 2013 06:31 yamato77 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 06:30 cDgCorazon wrote:On June 24 2013 06:29 yamato77 wrote:On June 24 2013 06:26 cDgCorazon wrote:
If you thought I was actually thinking about LAL-ing D2, you're wrong. I want Oats dead and I will vote for him as soon as possible.
Also in my votepost, I did not mention the word "lurker". I used the word "subpar", which could include lurking, but also applies to players like Oats who have played an active yet scummy game. That one is interpreting my words in a way that makes your case.
D2, I'm worried about Oats getting lynched. I'm very sure he is scum and I want to see him die. Once he dies, we can focus our energy elsewhere. D2 will also allow for players who have played a quiet game to either step up or stand out. This unfounded push on Oats is exactly why you're not town. Unfounded? There's no good reason to believe that he's mafia.
I'm pretty sure Hapa has a scumread on him too...
|
Somewhat.
He's being a lot more trolly this game which is throwing me off. The raw activity suggests he's town, but his refusal to substantiate anything is maddening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
