EPTI jsut think that was not important enough on D1.
Newbie Student Mafia XIII - Page 47
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43188 Posts
I jsut think that was not important enough on D1. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43188 Posts
So either he is a Townie that is a terrible teammate, and due to his pride and ego, refused to admit to a mistake that he had made, and instead lied about it so he wouldn't look bad...or...he is Scum. We can have a discussion about why he lied. But the discussion about WHETHER he lied, is OH-verrrr. Saying things like this doesn't really help n00bKing, because not only it deduces your credibility because of ad-hom but it is also impossible he is lying here and is town as he has repeatedly discredited your point. Keep things simple. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43188 Posts
| ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 02:56 Damdred wrote: I vote him third but misspell,his name so on the wagon later rather than third. I think everyone understands you were early on the voting wagon, and isn't counting the misspelling against you. Like you say, you were effectively third, not sixth. Rels was sixth. Which is part of why I find it funny that people want to credit him for getting behind the lynch "early" or criticize me for switching to him "late" when he was the 6th vote and I was the 7th vote. *shrug* | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
It's really interesting. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43188 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:20 n00bKing wrote: I think everyone understands you were early on the voting wagon, and isn't counting the misspelling against you. Like you say, you were effectively third, not sixth. Rels was sixth. Which is part of why I find it funny that people want to credit him for getting behind the lynch "early" or criticize me for switching to him "late" when he was the 6th vote and I was the 7th vote. *shrug* I am giving him credit for getting behind the lynch early because; - he was one of the first (if not the first) people to call out Barakos - whether he voted for him or not at that point is irrelevant, it's relevant that he did nothing to push anyone else's lynch, which mafia normally does fi one of their own is under attack and there is a strong thread presence (like Rels) in the thread. Like, in my opinion, it pretty easy to see that he never even entertains another lynch other than Barakos. If i am wrong here feel free to correct me. | ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:15 raynpelikoneet wrote: Saying things like this doesn't really help n00bKing, because not only it deduces your credibility because of ad-hom but it is also impossible he is lying here and is town as he has repeatedly discredited your point. Keep things simple. Assume deduces = reduces? If so, then I don't think the fact that he continued to battle back makes it impossible that he's Town. Once he decided to make the lie, he could decide to try and stick with it, because admitting that it was a lie will be seen as suspicious. Like, let's say that he shows up and admits that he contradicted himself, and apologizes for it. You're going to then say it is "impossible" that he's Town, because he kept trying to discredit my point? In that scenario, you're actually motivating him to stick with the lie instead of coming clean, because if he tells the truth now you'll lynch him. See what I mean? You can say I'm overthinking it, but I don't think we should push him into a position where he feels like there is more downside to admitting the truth than continuing to lie. | ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:22 Damdred wrote: I'm actually not referring to you here noob but rather the way moose is reading people differently for the same things and when confronted still uses uneven ways to read people Yes, I know I wasn't involved in the conversation directly. Just making a side comment, that I don't think you need to worry about people accusing you of being late to the wagon. | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
On July 25 2015 00:47 Rels wrote: Actually your quotes are super damning. He really did a 180 on his expectations of you. ##Unvote ##Vote MoosyDoosy Actually rayn myself and eels for into,it at this point. I wanted your opinion on it earlier but yeah. He gave a half hearted answer I went to call him out but he ninja me and voted moosey and then said I pressured him into it even though my post came after the vote and never fully explained himself. It's one of the problems I gave, and he said he wanted to push moosey instead of Barak I believe | ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
Alright it's going to be very simple. I'll even use quotes from your post. Rels wrote: Never said his remarks required thought. Rels wrote: As you say, each SEPARATE remark is a "off-the-cut instant reaction". Not contesting each remark individually required thoughts. Rels wrote: I'm not saying NocturneMage prepared his post before the game started. I'm saying he thought long and hard before he posted it, instead of being free of mind and posting what he felt. What I'm saying is his POST required thought. So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened. The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". Final words: I do not care that each separate remark took thoughts or not, and only precised it when you accused me of "representating your position". My argument is that he posted on 3 different subjects in his first post. I'll take the time to deal with you tomorrow when I have time. Unless you attack me again with things like that of course. | ||
|
MoosyDoosy
United States4519 Posts
On July 27 2015 02:56 Damdred wrote: I'm not sure how what you are describing is different in any way from here. I have good town reads early. I call out scum!barakos I vote him third but misspell,his name so on the wagon later rather than third. I continue to have ok reads and try to figure people out. So what's causing the hesitation when earlier you liked my posts? At first I liked your initial reads. But as the game went on and you became more aggressive and active which is way different from what I’ve seen of you before, I started getting really paranoid and read your earlier reads as something only Mafia could say so early on with confidence. …Eh, I still think it’s strange that you’re pushing so hard when you normally don’t but your voting states otherwise. I might also just have had a wrong feel of your meta since the two games that I’ve been in with you, you’ve been very chill and only threw out reads occasionally. | ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:26 raynpelikoneet wrote: I am giving him credit for getting behind the lynch early because; - he was one of the first (if not the first) people to call out Barakos - whether he voted for him or not at that point is irrelevant, it's relevant that he did nothing to push anyone else's lynch, which mafia normally does fi one of their own is under attack and there is a strong thread presence (like Rels) in the thread. Like, in my opinion, it pretty easy to see that he never even entertains another lynch other than Barakos. If i am wrong here feel free to correct me. I think whether he voted for him or not at that point IS relevant. Because he makes that ONE post casting suspicion on Barakos, but then drops it, long-term, without voting for him. Haven't you ever done that with one of your scum teammates? Call out a post of theirs, not vote for them, and then head in another direction? It looks pretty clear that he entertained other lynches, when Barakos was not the 1st person he voted against, but the 3rd person he voted against. Maybe you could benefit from just reading Rels' filter. It's not short, but it might help you see where I'm coming from (even if you still aren't convinced of Rels being scum by the time you get to the end) | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
| ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:31 Rels wrote: So what you said: "Rels said his post didn't require thought". "Rels said his post required thought". Is not what happened. The situation is: "Rels said each remarks in his post didn't require thought" (in response to you BTW. The original case does NOT care if each separate remark are cut off thoughts or not) "Rels said his post required thought 'cause there are remarks on three different subjects". I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." | ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
| ||
|
Damdred
15669 Posts
| ||
|
MoosyDoosy
United States4519 Posts
| ||
|
Rels
France13467 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:35 n00bKing wrote: I'm going to label this as "Rels having fun with semantics." And I am going to label it as "the 3rd time Rels has been forced to retcon a story, after there being 5 times he has contradicted himself." LOL Actually that makes me relieved, I'm now sure you're mafia 'cause no way townie behaves like that. (= Keep continue discrediting me tonight. Hopefully Flexes is vig'd and we can settle this tomorrow. | ||
|
raynpelikoneet
Finland43188 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:29 n00bKing wrote: Assume deduces = reduces? If so, then I don't think the fact that he continued to battle back makes it impossible that he's Town. Once he decided to make the lie, he could decide to try and stick with it, because admitting that it was a lie will be seen as suspicious. Like, let's say that he shows up and admits that he contradicted himself, and apologizes for it. You're going to then say it is "impossible" that he's Town, because he kept trying to discredit my point? In that scenario, you're actually motivating him to stick with the lie instead of coming clean, because if he tells the truth now you'll lynch him. See what I mean? You can say I'm overthinking it, but I don't think we should push him into a position where he feels like there is more downside to admitting the truth than continuing to lie. If you always do this mafia can lie for whatever reason and you will never find mafia. Townies should never lie, unless they can clearly point out why it's beneficial for the town (see for example fake claims). | ||
|
n00bKing
United States1202 Posts
On July 27 2015 03:37 MoosyDoosy wrote: n00bKing, I'm reading your filter next but I'm gonna say that I don't feel good about you getting tunneled this hard on Rels. Something that I said might happen and warned you about before too. :/ I don't think "tunneled" means what you think it does. Tough to accuse me of "tunnel vision" when I am continuously giving thoughts on other players besides Rels, and continuously engaging in discussions that have nothing to do with Rels. If there is any player that you aren't sure what I think of them, that's about to be corrected. | ||
| ||
