Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (62 users) | |
|
| dahdum United States. May 11 2012 05:16. Posts 46 | Profile # |
I'm at work so can't respond fully, but Tofu's response is reasonable and in line with what I expect from him as Town. So I am jumping on this new wagon, because reasons.
##Unvote
##Vote Anacletus |
|
|
 Anacletus United States. May 11 2012 05:31. Posts 670 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 05:03 Crossfire99 wrote:
Anacletus, don't think that defending yourself is scummy; it is just good play and everyone should do it. If you know you are town, then defend yourself and prove it. If you are actually town, and go down without a fight, then you have done nothing for us except die.
Also, what does scumwagon mean? I am unfamiliar with the term and don't know what it means.
I'll disregard this for numerous reasons not worth explaining.
On May 11 2012 04:56 ShiaoPi wrote:
The thing is you already got a lot of attention, probably the most right now.
I presented you the reasons why I am suspicious of your behaviour, what about trying to explain your thought-process? And for what kind of "evidence" are you waiting? I do not really understand the logic behind waiting for something to happen before defending yourself. The only thing which will give us any kind of evidence is a lynch, since that is still a bit away, I don't get your logic here.
My logic wasn't to kill Tofu as I said, I was just trying to get a head count on who was voting and who wasn't. I seriously doubt anyone who was voting for him originally is mafia. So I was just keeping track for myself of various things. I also seriously doubt that I'll get hung day 1 which is why I'm not really making a big deal out of it. But on the off chance that I do get hung, you'll see that I'm town and you'll have to make some decisions on whether the mafia bandwagoned me, or if the mafia tried to look innocent by not voting. |
| | http://talk-to-stimey-please.1324083.n2.nabble.com/ |
|
|
| BroodKingEXE United States. May 11 2012 05:38. Posts 794 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 04:46 ShiaoPi wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 04:43 Anacletus wrote:
Well, shit, I guess opting to lynch someone because several others were voting for them was silly.
I'm not mafia TT
Is that your defense? Seriously? BroodkingEXE if you believe me scum and starting a scumwagon, I would like to know the reasons how you came to that assumption.
Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing. |
| |
|
| Jailbreaker United States. May 11 2012 05:56. Posts 59 | Profile # |
:D
dahdum, why are you searching for a bandwagon and state your reasons as "because." Can you give a little more insight plz?
I do like how you say + Show Spoiler +"Actually, throwing around votes is an excellent way of getting people to speak up. You're defending him right now, he'll respond, and we can interpret later if/when he flips what that says about you. "
Anacletus, your first post is ##Vote, thats a nice way to say hello! bwahahahah jk.+ Show Spoiler + I am only voting because I don't have much to add. I would also like to point out that *if* we hang tofu for his suspicious behavior and he is mafia then we can rule out those voting as being mafia, no?
Unforgiven_ve, okayokay.
ShiaoPi, well shit, if you don't defend yourself, then the shitstorm builds up on you and you get lynched.
posting this now, going to formulate a new post based on BroodKingEXE, ShiaoPi, Hyaach (page 7 to 8)
|
|
|
| Anacletus United States. May 11 2012 06:29. Posts 670 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 05:56 Jailbreaker wrote:
if you dont have much to add, then why post?
If you haven't read my posts posts then why post about my actions?
Reading the full thread and knowing what is going on is pretty powerful in mafia man, as I've addressed this already. |
| | http://talk-to-stimey-please.1324083.n2.nabble.com/ |
|
|
| ShiaoPi Taiwan. May 11 2012 06:32. Posts 1357 | Profile # |
On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote:
---snipped---
Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing.
I do get what you mean by "misleading due to size", there are indeed many uncertainties inside, which you could consider as "null reads". Given the fact that we have day 1 and the low amount of posts we have from some people, not being able to give out a 100% read strikes me as being absolutely normal. Reiteration is also featured because I tried to be transparent in my thoughtprocess, you may say that these things devalue the usefullness of the post, but I believe they were needed.
Do I have to repeat it again? My suspicions on hyaach are not dropped. Reread it again, I clearly state that he is still on my watchlist and also point out his lack of evidence/reason for the vote.
Here it is:+ Show Spoiler +
His later posts are better than his first as they are actually related to the current discussion. His vote on Anacletus seems reasonable as well given my argumentation above. Although it seems obvious why he is pressuring Anacletus a little bit of explanation of your reasoning would in my eyes go a long way to gain more credibility as a townie. His posts still lack analysis, length and depth, which makes him still kind of fishy.
Now in rereading it myself I probably could have worded it a bit better.
-His posts are now related to the discussion, which is sth. beneficial to us.
-I did not say I vote with him, as in "he has convinced me", I state that I believe his vote to be understandable, since I am suspecting Anacletus myself for the reasons I posted. The next sentence is poorly phrased, I admit it. I should not have said that he could "gain more credibility as a townie" but instead said that it could move him away from the scumcamp, since he still appears fishy to me due to lacking analysis, length, depth. I did not want to make him into a "townie".
My reasons to vote on Anacletus, could be worded in the way you did, but they can also be put as I did: mismatch in behaviour, posting a vote without reasons and contradiction of himself. Anacletus' last post is finally one which makes sense, after the ones before. Finally some explanation going on, I still believe that something is fishy about Anacletus and I am not the only one, you do so as well + Show Spoiler +
This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though.
|
|
|
| Darkfirex5 United States. May 11 2012 06:43. Posts 65 | Profile # |
sorry im a student so i have school, currently i think this is a weak bandwagon forming on Anacletus. While his defense is weak:
On May 10 2012 23:26 Anacletus wrote:
I am only voting because I don't have much to add. I would also like to point out that *if* we hang tofu for his suspicious behavior and he is mafia then we can rule out those voting as being mafia, no?
But if he's town, shit.
Yet the first person to begin the voting on Anacletus was Hyaach, his reasoning seemed just as weak:
On May 10 2012 23:33 Hyaach wrote:
No edits are allowed.
IMO, i did whatever firmtofu wrote was just a innocent day 1 remark. There is nothing more suspicious about his post than yours actually.
And say "if" he was mafia, what if the mafia decided to throw him under the bus? Not a good way to rule out anything.
I'm also just voting you because there's nothing to discuss here /sarcasm
The start of this "bandwagon" is begining to form off of this, though Anacletus did have a poor response which made him more suspicious the voting on him lacks solid reasoning.
On May 11 2012 03:56 FirmTofu wrote:What... I said that purely in jest, teasing him about the newbie game that just completed. I didn't think you guys would go batshit insane over it.
Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 00:23 Crossfire99 wrote:
He posted less than an hour into the day and he makes a reference to a previous game. I don't know what happened in the previous game, but it seems like dahdum was mafia and Firmtofu wasn't and that the town lost (I infer this from his little >< face). It seems like he is complimenting dahdum's play and hopes they are on the same side. What's bad about that?
As for his lynching lurkers stance, he was like one of the first posts, so no one really posted and it seems he was stating that we should wait to judge people until they posted. If people still lurked after a while then he seems to support lynching the lurkers. This isn't a terrible stance if I am interpreting him correctly, so I want clarification from him on this, though.
Crossfire put it best. dahdum was in a game before this and I just commented on how I hope he isn't scum again because he played well last game. I didn't think I was acting suspicious at all, but apparently it was? Regardless, we should switch up our votes onto some more scummy targets. There are certain people that are playing very pro-town right now, but may be doing so just to gain the town's trust. It's extremely hard to tell from just Day 1 behavior, so I think our best for a lynch would be to hunt those people who are genuinely acting scummy or playing poorly. Anacletus seems like the perfect target to start.
Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 23:26 Anacletus wrote:
I am only voting because I don't have much to add. I would also like to point out that *if* we hang tofu for his suspicious behavior and he is mafia then we can rule out those voting as being mafia, no?
But if he's town, shit.
This quote is suspicious, for reasons mentioned previously my numerous people. However, there is an interesting phrasing of words I find rather intriguing. See bold. What motive would anyone have to say that sentence. Is it not already a statement of fact? Why did he feel the need to reiterate something that is quite obvious to everyone that is playing: If we lynch Tofu and he's town, then we are in trouble. Well, no shit Sherlock. Generally when town people die, the mafia gets farther ahead. Here's my theory. Anacletus knows I am town, because I'm not on his mafia team. Therefore, he knows if and when I get lynched, I will flip town. That statement is guilt insurance and a scum tell because of it. He is trying to insure himself now so that later, he can say "Aw crap, well I was wrong, but look at my previous post where I admitted I might be wrong!"When town members vote people, they don't know whether they are right or wrong. When mafia vote people they know the exact alignment of the person they are voting. I believe this knowledge just leaked from Anacletus the mafia. ##vote:Anacletus
I bolded the part im talking about (didnt cut out any as to take something out of context^). Another thing now is that Tofu anounces the role of being a townie, and the reason (supposidly) why Anacletus targeted him was because he knew he was town (because he was mafia)? Now im questioning then why did he target you (tofu) only because you were town. Why initiate like that on a post that seemed insignifigant. I'm building suspicion on the reasoning for starting this bandwagon on Anacletus. Im still not placing a vote down yet but the starting reasonings for the votes lacks evidence and the follow up points (to me dont seem solid).
Lastly:
On May 11 2012 04:52 BioSC wrote:Good morning. Lets get to business. Somehow I managed to miss this post back on page 5.
Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 13:10 Darkfirex5 wrote:
On May 10 2012 08:17 BioSC wrote:
If they are lurking scum players, town gets a nice snipe. Should they be town, they would be just as bad as scum in that they wouldn't help town anyways.
Well, might as well get started first game :3 I'm questioning why do you speak about town in third person as if you are speaking as if town isnt including yourself, so im asking why are you not using "we" and refering to town as a "they." Also you are justifying killing town just because they arent active, a vote helps even if they are a lurker, its another person who can still vote and help kill off all of the mafia.
If you are going to put pressure on me, at least make it substantial/useful. If you are going to quote me, quote the whole post, not half of it and take it out of context. "They" is referring to lurking players, which I am not, thus I didn't use "we". This suspicion about "misused" pronouns is silly, and only drives me to wonder about you. You have only made one post so far, and wasn't very helpful. So far, the only lurkers here are you and Mufaa, whom has yet to post ANYTHING. Not enough to drive my vote to you, but I'm sure to keep an eye on your posts.
I was refering to why you said town gets a nice snipe instead of we are geting a nice snipe, i was only adding on some slight pressure on the begining, which was similar to other posts. The way you get very defensive and attack my one post only asking about your reference to town/mafia. FOS: BioSc From your posts folowing, i think less of you as being mafia, and more so townie, that doesnt mean i wont continue keeping an eye on you too. |
|
|
| dahdum United States. May 11 2012 06:58. Posts 46 | Profile # |
On May 11 2012 05:56 Jailbreaker wrote:
:D
dahdum, why are you searching for a bandwagon and state your reasons as "because." Can you give a little more insight plz?
Actually I believe I said because reasons.
If we never get any wagons going, we never pressure mafia into having to take a vote/stance. I'm at work so I can't write long explanations, but since I 100% want somebody to die today, I'm fine voting for whomever the current scummiest is. No-lynch is not an option. |
|
|
| Darkfirex5 United States. May 11 2012 07:05. Posts 65 | Profile # |
| It's not the end of the day yet so lets not start bandwagoning yet. If you want to kill someone, post something constructive on why we should be making this band wagon so early^ |
|
|
| Mufaa May 11 2012 07:08. Posts 174 | Profile # |
Sorry about the lack of posts so far. We just fired the GM at our store so I'm currently doing 2 open-close(10am-1am) shifts. Can't really give analysis like I'd like to until I get home but here are some initial thoughts.
Anacletus is definitely my number 1 scum read ATM but it's very early still and reading old TL newbie games our towns have a nasty habbit of lynching bad townies who really don't give away any info first day.
And obviously first day mafia lynch would be astronomical for us, remember that the game is balanced around a night 1 mislynch. We can still get great info from a mislynch but we have to be smart about it and pressure people into making better posts. As it stands I've seen a lot of good initial concerns being brought up followed by other people agreeing or taking a side without contributing that much to the discussion. As a town, we shouldn't want that because what if both reads are wrong? We have then wasted nearly all of day 1 focusing on two people and all we'll have confirmed dead townie and a split on who defended each person.
I'm not saying I think both Tofu and Ana are confirmed town, but we need to be diligent about forcing everyone to contribute. As far as I know any of you could be scum and I hope you guys share a similar opinion until we can get some content out of people to get some good reads going. |
|
|
| Mufaa May 11 2012 07:11. Posts 174 | Profile # |
| Also, how long do we have until the end of the day. I'd really like to get some analysis in but being on my phone makes it kind of hard. I'll start throwing some responses to individual posts but I can't really use filters to make a case til I'm home. |
|
|
| Darkfirex5 United States. May 11 2012 07:21. Posts 65 | Profile # |
| Mufaa: we have until May 11 8:00pm Eastern time to vote. (im asuming you know everything time wise with what i said cause your in the U.S) |
|
|
| Unforgiven_ve Venezuela. May 11 2012 08:02. Posts 1230 | Profile Blog # |
12:00 hours to go.
Seeing as voting is obligatory and i dont know if i can login to post again, im gonna vote for myself just in case. But i will try to check before time ends.
But first my 2 cents, when i see someone posting a LONG "analysis" on day 1 basing his opinions in a couple post, the first thing that comes to my mind is "he's trying too hard", maybe too appear as town leader and stuff, im not necessarily pointing fingers, ShiaoPi post is kinda helpful so far. But im gonna keep an eye on you and a couple more "in-depth analysts"
I loled at Anacletus "I'm not mafia TT", lol, thats so fishy, reverse psychology maybe? You still are my top 1 tho, but i dont like the random bandwagon, i feel we are being guided to you.
Mufaa finally posted, im gonna try to check for his opinion, i think thats all of us?
Seeing as i have no more information about any of you besides the couple posts...Day 2 is gonna be another historie tho
##Vote Unforgiven_ve
i repeat, i will try to change my vote before the time ends, and seeing abstaining is not allowed. |
| |
|
Radfield  Canada. May 11 2012 08:04. Posts 2679 | Profile # |
Current Day 1 Vote Count
Anacletus(4): Hyaach, Firmstofu, ShiaoPi, Dahdum
FirmTofu(1): BroodKingEXE, dahdum, Anacletus
Unforgiven_ve(1): Unforgiven_ve
Voting ends in 24 hours, at 20:00 ADT[local].
Keep in mind that this is plurality lynch. Whomever has the most votes at the end of the day will be lynched.Last edit: 2012-05-11 08:07:32 |
|
|
| Anacletus United States. May 11 2012 08:04. Posts 670 | Profile Blog # |
You give me way too much credit, Unforgiven_ve. I was only bandwagoning to see who wasn't voting and who was. My plan so far is more of a cluster-fuck spider-web of ideas written in a language that I don't know.
##Unvite
##Vote Unforgiven_ve
I don't actually want to vote for you, I just don't want to leave my votes on someone with other votes so he can get swing voted. I had no intention of actually hanging someone today. |
| | http://talk-to-stimey-please.1324083.n2.nabble.com/ |
|
|
| BioSC United States. May 11 2012 08:08. Posts 609 | Profile Blog # |
----------redacted----------
On May 10 2012 08:17 BioSC wrote:
If they are lurking scum players, town gets a nice snipe. Should they be town, they would be just as bad as scum in that they wouldn't help town anyways.
Well, might as well get started first game :3 I'm questioning why do you speak about town in third person as if you are speaking as if town isnt including yourself, so im asking why are you not using "we" and refering to town as a "they." Also you are justifying killing town just because they arent active, a vote helps even if they are a lurker, its another person who can still vote and help kill off all of the mafia.[/QUOTE]
If you are going to put pressure on me, at least make it substantial/useful. If you are going to quote me, quote the whole post, not half of it and take it out of context. "They" is referring to lurking players, which I am not, thus I didn't use "we". This suspicion about "misused" pronouns is silly, and only drives me to wonder about you. You have only made one post so far, and wasn't very helpful. So far, the only lurkers here are you and Mufaa, whom has yet to post ANYTHING.
Not enough to drive my vote to you, but I'm sure to keep an eye on your posts.
[/QUOTE]
I was refering to why you said town gets a nice snipe instead of we are geting a nice snipe, i was only adding on some slight pressure on the begining, which was similar to other posts. The way you get very defensive and attack my one post only asking about your reference to town/mafia. FOS: BioSc From your posts folowing, i think less of you as being mafia, and more so townie, that doesnt mean i wont continue keeping an eye on you too.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. I would probably be more suspicious of you if you weren't of me. I wanted to address this because I felt it trivial to discuss when there was more obvious things to consider and talk about. |
| |
|
| Unforgiven_ve Venezuela. May 11 2012 08:11. Posts 1230 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 08:04 Radfield wrote:
Voting ends in 24 hours, at 20:00 ADT .
oh, my bad, i thought we just had 12 hours left.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You give me way too much credit, Unforgiven_ve. I was only bandwagoning to see who wasn't voting and who was. My plan so far is more of a cluster-fuck spider-web of ideas written in a language that I don't know.
Please, explain to me
So, lets wait a little more
##Unvote |
| |
|
| Darkfirex5 United States. May 11 2012 08:28. Posts 65 | Profile # |
yeah Unforgiving i think i have to put my vote on you, ill wait a little longer before i do so, but just puting your vote on Unforgiven_ve does not seem to have any justification, you're just leaving your vote on someone with no backing/reasoning why, it seems you are trying to draw attention away from explaining yourself. You still seem the guiltiest out of everyone, maybe you should start voicing your opinon on how you are not scummy, rather than place a vote holder and do nothing productive... you're most suspicious to me. I dont know if i will be able to get on before 7 tomorrow so im voting you atm
[b\]##Vote Anacletus[/b] |
|
|
| Anacletus United States. May 11 2012 08:32. Posts 670 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 08:28 Darkfirex5 wrote:
yeah Unforgiving i think i have to put my vote on you, ill wait a little longer before i do so, but just puting your vote on Unforgiven_ve does not seem to have any justification, you're just leaving your vote on someone with no backing/reasoning why, it seems you are trying to draw attention away from explaining yourself. You still seem the guiltiest out of everyone, maybe you should start voicing your opinon on how you are not scummy, rather than place a vote holder and do nothing productive... you're most suspicious to me. I dont know if i will be able to get on before 7 tomorrow so im voting you atm
[b\]##Vote Anacletus
[/b]
You're required to vote - so I am putting my vote on someone who has no other votes - I'm just leaving it as a placeholder in case I forget later. How is that suspicious at all man....what the hell are you on about.... >_> |
| | http://talk-to-stimey-please.1324083.n2.nabble.com/ |
|
|
| BroodKingEXE United States. May 11 2012 09:09. Posts 794 | Profile Blog # |
On May 11 2012 06:32 ShiaoPi wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 05:38 BroodKingEXE wrote:
---snipped---
Your big post brings up a list of null reads. Its misleading due to its size when its content is a bunch of reiteration of events. Scum will make posts like this to make themselves seem useful. If you actually read your reasoning for voting for anacletus it is: he was not eager, a post lacking logic, and a bandwagon. The first two could be townie mistakes and bandwagons aren't very effective when people have strong objections to the canidate. On the other hand, you have voted with the person you first thought was scum and had dropped your suspicions based on...nothing.
I do get what you mean by "misleading due to size", there are indeed many uncertainties inside, which you could consider as "null reads". Given the fact that we have day 1 and the low amount of posts we have from some people, not being able to give out a 100% read strikes me as being absolutely normal. Reiteration is also featured because I tried to be transparent in my thoughtprocess, you may say that these things devalue the usefullness of the post, but I believe they were needed. Do I have to repeat it again? My suspicions on hyaach are not dropped. Reread it again, I clearly state that he is still on my watchlist and also point out his lack of evidence/reason for the vote. Here it is: + Show Spoiler +
His later posts are better than his first as they are actually related to the current discussion. His vote on Anacletus seems reasonable as well given my argumentation above. Although it seems obvious why he is pressuring Anacletus a little bit of explanation of your reasoning would in my eyes go a long way to gain more credibility as a townie. His posts still lack analysis, length and depth, which makes him still kind of fishy.
Now in rereading it myself I probably could have worded it a bit better. -His posts are now related to the discussion, which is sth. beneficial to us. -I did not say I vote with him, as in "he has convinced me", I state that I believe his vote to be understandable, since I am suspecting Anacletus myself for the reasons I posted. The next sentence is poorly phrased, I admit it. I should not have said that he could "gain more credibility as a townie" but instead said that it could move him away from the scumcamp, since he still appears fishy to me due to lacking analysis, length, depth. I did not want to make him into a "townie". My reasons to vote on Anacletus, could be worded in the way you did, but they can also be put as I did: mismatch in behaviour, posting a vote without reasons and contradiction of himself. Anacletus' last post is finally one which makes sense, after the ones before. Finally some explanation going on, I still believe that something is fishy about Anacletus and I am not the only one, you do so as well + Show Spoiler +
This post makes sense, Anacletus' play has been pretty wierd. I need to hear a response from him before I vote though.
.
Just needed explanation for your vote/post. This canidate seems really rushed though, people haven't looked at his latest posts for signs of scumminess. I agree that his past posts are suspicious, but we need to look at his current posts. Too much like a wagon for me to vote for him yet. |
| |
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
