thats when im doing cases on things or players. the spam of post was for DLM to respond to as well as the others. scince you want to wagon me. and i am kinda here (tired atm). what would you like to know. throwing pressure and then saying "lets see" wont accomplish anything. So ask me questions
In post 279, bjc wrote:I like those posts by LMB. Has any real pressure been put on ika this game?
unovte; vote: ika
I don't believe so.
ya there has been i just dont care aobut it becasue i am town. If you have the need to ask me something go ahead. Im all for a lynch on me if it will show that nacho and time should be looked into. and should be next to be lynched after my flip
In post 79, emeraldemon wrote:Hey so you wanted to see my town game right? Let's do this thing
So one thing makes me hesitate about bjc / ika scumteam: 16 it would surprise me a little for a scum to draw attention to a partner like this in the first post.
Other than that though, pretty much everything from them has felt scumteam.
The only other person who's posted anything is Abbott, but unfortunately it's all pretty null. Need more stuff from everyone.
Post 16 is why I had an early town slot on bjc, his awareness of my pregame post made me think he is town because i figured scums don't care about that stuff and would not pay attention. He was obviously aware of my pre-game post. The only other reason would be is if we were both scums, however i am not. It is possible that he is but right now its null-town coming from him atm.
In post 80, bjc wrote:How about stuff from you? What's with your vote on ika? What do you make of Robw's vote on ika?
Heres a good post, he trying to spark some discussion and trying to get reads on people here. I am starting to get irked by the big buddying of him and the votes on me. But its feels more genuine. One of the few things that makes me wonder is he wants contents from people but does not give contents of his own. I gave a good few questions for discussion but he has yet to answer them when he said he would.
In post 23, Nachomamma8 wrote:Thanks for the link!
I'm probably not going to read it; just be obviously town and we will get along just fine.
He did that last game and coasted to a win as scum
Early game reads:
emerald town: is putting himself much more in the spotlights than he did in his scumgame+feels genuine.
Ika town: really trying to hunt but well...uh walling is not necessary. Great to see someone try, though.
Not seeing much scummy intent anywhere yet but I might reread some more.
VOTE: nacho
Get out of spectator mode.
To me this is 2 prong. This gives me more confidence in emerald being town due to you having experience with him. I didn't glance at his game because I was lazy but due to biassed reasons I am considering you town and will take that emerald is town.
Your reasoning for nacho seems also valid that if he is merely coasting and seems to be doing right now. It is becoming annoying and not helpful. He seems to be trying to take a null path. I first took it as IC trying to play neutral but looking back even as an IC should not coast like he is.
In post 82, emeraldemon wrote:@bjc
I made a long post about why I voted ika (59), did you read it?
Yes, Robb W needs to come out and post.
@tiershift
Man, I really hope you are town this game. So you don't think ika and bjc are buddying?
This post gives me more confidence in you being town because of the second half thats addressed to tiershift. I do think you are sligtly stuck in the me and bjc buddying, but i am going to take it as a newbie thing. If one of us were to flip scum, then you should follow up on it. However there is also a flip-side that a scum will buddy with a strong town read to try to get them out. However I say that our "buddying" is more just general chat and discussion.
In post 83, TierShift wrote:Nah, ika is town. Just look at the total lack of self-conciousness.
As for bjc buddying, define buddying.
Bjc, you got any experience? Sure seems like you do. Why do you think emerald is scum?
Abbott, why do you say wagons are the way out of RVS, then place a lone vote?
This gives me a good town read from you, you jump right in and start asking questions and want to obviously discuss things. You are obviously a player who has a few games under your belt and knows what you are doing.
Note: I'm not one to call someone's play "bad" or call people names and pull some high-rank crap because I think that's annoying and I think people who make the "that post was so bad" kind of posts either:
-Can't properly explain what's wrong with the post
-or-
-Are 14 years old.
So why do I say this? To clarify that my use of awful was to describe how it jumped out at me, not that the substance was awful.
This post gives me a better understanding of how you play and what i should expect from you. It helps when I know what i should be expecting. Seeing how you only have 3-4 games played. You seems to have a good start. There are a few things that I do think you could improve on thoguh. But I will save that for post game
In post 85, TierShift wrote:It awfully jumps out at you, but the substance isn't awful. Why is it scummy again?
If you want a wagon, vote nacho, IC wagons are cool.
In post 85, TierShift wrote:It awfully jumps out at you, but the substance isn't awful. Why is it scummy again?
If you want a wagon, vote nacho, IC wagons are cool.
Well at the time it seemed scummy, almost OMGUS in nature but ika voted for nacho, not emeral.
Cool.
unvote; vote: nacho
this puts nacho at l-2.
VOTE: nacho
this is l-1, his coasting nature and trying to stay null at first looked like to me as an IC play but is more biassed of a reason and he should actually not be doing so and legitimately coming out to help. Also after ISOing him, his post stick out to me as scum for what they say.
Explain to my why the majority must agree to l-1 someone now? explain to me how l-1 someone is scummy. if i was scum, it would of benn easier to hide my vote in a big wall of that text and then have somoen accadently hammer, instead i clearly announce it that its l-1 after my spoiler post. i think you need to check again
In post 279, bjc wrote:I like those posts by LMB. Has any real pressure been put on ika this game?
unovte; vote: ika
I don't believe so.
ya there has been i just dont care aobut it becasue i am town. If you have the need to ask me something go ahead. Im all for a lynch on me if it will show that nacho and time should be looked into. and should be next to be lynched after my flip
That whole sentence is just wifom. Using reverse-psychology as a defense.
In post 79, emeraldemon wrote:Hey so you wanted to see my town game right? Let's do this thing
So one thing makes me hesitate about bjc / ika scumteam: 16 it would surprise me a little for a scum to draw attention to a partner like this in the first post.
Other than that though, pretty much everything from them has felt scumteam.
The only other person who's posted anything is Abbott, but unfortunately it's all pretty null. Need more stuff from everyone.
Post 16 is why I had an early town slot on bjc, his awareness of my pregame post made me think he is town because i figured scums don't care about that stuff and would not pay attention. He was obviously aware of my pre-game post. The only other reason would be is if we were both scums, however i am not. It is possible that he is but right now its null-town coming from him atm.
In post 80, bjc wrote:How about stuff from you? What's with your vote on ika? What do you make of Robw's vote on ika?
Heres a good post, he trying to spark some discussion and trying to get reads on people here. I am starting to get irked by the big buddying of him and the votes on me. But its feels more genuine. One of the few things that makes me wonder is he wants contents from people but does not give contents of his own. I gave a good few questions for discussion but he has yet to answer them when he said he would.
In post 23, Nachomamma8 wrote:Thanks for the link!
I'm probably not going to read it; just be obviously town and we will get along just fine.
He did that last game and coasted to a win as scum
Early game reads:
emerald town: is putting himself much more in the spotlights than he did in his scumgame+feels genuine.
Ika town: really trying to hunt but well...uh walling is not necessary. Great to see someone try, though.
Not seeing much scummy intent anywhere yet but I might reread some more.
VOTE: nacho
Get out of spectator mode.
To me this is 2 prong. This gives me more confidence in emerald being town due to you having experience with him. I didn't glance at his game because I was lazy but due to biassed reasons I am considering you town and will take that emerald is town.
Your reasoning for nacho seems also valid that if he is merely coasting and seems to be doing right now. It is becoming annoying and not helpful. He seems to be trying to take a null path. I first took it as IC trying to play neutral but looking back even as an IC should not coast like he is.
In post 82, emeraldemon wrote:@bjc
I made a long post about why I voted ika (59), did you read it?
Yes, Robb W needs to come out and post.
@tiershift
Man, I really hope you are town this game. So you don't think ika and bjc are buddying?
This post gives me more confidence in you being town because of the second half thats addressed to tiershift. I do think you are sligtly stuck in the me and bjc buddying, but i am going to take it as a newbie thing. If one of us were to flip scum, then you should follow up on it. However there is also a flip-side that a scum will buddy with a strong town read to try to get them out. However I say that our "buddying" is more just general chat and discussion.
In post 83, TierShift wrote:Nah, ika is town. Just look at the total lack of self-conciousness.
As for bjc buddying, define buddying.
Bjc, you got any experience? Sure seems like you do. Why do you think emerald is scum?
Abbott, why do you say wagons are the way out of RVS, then place a lone vote?
This gives me a good town read from you, you jump right in and start asking questions and want to obviously discuss things. You are obviously a player who has a few games under your belt and knows what you are doing.
Note: I'm not one to call someone's play "bad" or call people names and pull some high-rank crap because I think that's annoying and I think people who make the "that post was so bad" kind of posts either:
-Can't properly explain what's wrong with the post
-or-
-Are 14 years old.
So why do I say this? To clarify that my use of awful was to describe how it jumped out at me, not that the substance was awful.
This post gives me a better understanding of how you play and what i should expect from you. It helps when I know what i should be expecting. Seeing how you only have 3-4 games played. You seems to have a good start. There are a few things that I do think you could improve on thoguh. But I will save that for post game
In post 85, TierShift wrote:It awfully jumps out at you, but the substance isn't awful. Why is it scummy again?
If you want a wagon, vote nacho, IC wagons are cool.
In post 85, TierShift wrote:It awfully jumps out at you, but the substance isn't awful. Why is it scummy again?
If you want a wagon, vote nacho, IC wagons are cool.
Well at the time it seemed scummy, almost OMGUS in nature but ika voted for nacho, not emeral.
Cool.
unvote; vote: nacho
this puts nacho at l-2.
VOTE: nacho
this is l-1, his coasting nature and trying to stay null at first looked like to me as an IC play but is more biassed of a reason and he should actually not be doing so and legitimately coming out to help. Also after ISOing him, his post stick out to me as scum for what they say.
Explain to my why the majority must agree to l-1 someone now? explain to me how l-1 someone is scummy. if i was scum, it would of benn easier to hide my vote in a big wall of that text and then have somoen accadently hammer, instead i clearly announce it that its l-1 after my spoiler post. i think you need to check again
If you put someone at l-1, scum can quickhammer easily. And the person being hammered is most likely not scum if everyone else doesn't read him as scum. Getting peoples' agreement is important.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:11 pm
by ika
In post 304, Wagon Me Pal wrote:
That whole sentence is just wifom. Using reverse-psychology as a defense.
no, i think you are overanalizing it now, lets take a setp back for one moment, you seems confused and mind-trapped i am scum. lets take this by scnario
what will you do when you find out im town
If you put someone at l-1, scum can quickhammer easily. And the person being hammered is most likely not scum if everyone else doesn't read him as scum. Getting peoples' agreement is important.
not exactly, if someone quick-hammered and he fliped town, the hammer voter would have a lot of explaining to do. if he was qucik hammered and fliped scum then its an entire diffrent scnario. i think you are too mind set right now.
agreement is important but l-1 is not needed for agreement, a lynch vote should be more agreed on, not l-1.
if you think l-1 needs agreement plz explain why. what would have to be more important then hammer voting? why does the majority need to agree for a player to do an action? a player should have the free mind to chose what to do and decide. if anything majority should agree on is a hammering. not a mere l-1 vote on day one.
in LOYL (or whatever it is) maybe then i could see more incentive, but here, its not going to do much to get an agreement to l-1 a player.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 4:14 pm
by ika
and i was being open to you witht the staement, im here, ask me questions. not asking is not doing anything. right now all i see is
"ika is scum, vote him" but i dont see the reasoning. is there something that you are not understanding that i need to clarify?
no, i think you are overanalizing it now, lets take a setp back for one moment, you seems confused and mind-trapped i am scum. lets take this by scnario
what will you do when you find out im town
not exactly, if someone quick-hammered and he fliped town, the hammer voter would have a lot of explaining to do. if he was qucik hammered and fliped scum then its an entire diffrent scnario. i think you are too mind set right now.
agreement is important but l-1 is not needed for agreement, a lynch vote should be more agreed on, not l-1.
if you think l-1 needs agreement plz explain why. what would have to be more important then hammer voting? why does the majority need to agree for a player to do an action? a player should have the free mind to chose what to do and decide. if anything majority should agree on is a hammering. not a mere l-1 vote on day one.
in LOYL (or whatever it is) maybe then i could see more incentive, but here, its not going to do much to get an agreement to l-1 a player.
1. That's the point, you are scaring us and using wifom to make us think that you are town. Ask an IC/SE.
2. Because it puts the player at danger of scum quickhammer, and if the majority doesn't think he's scum then he is most likely town. So it's best to get everyone's agreement or else scum might hammer a town player.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:03 pm
by Wagon Me Pal
I'm really starting to get convinced that ika is scum. Still thinking putting nacho at L-1 was okay, and using wifom for defenses.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 5:47 pm
by ika
1. That's the point, you are scaring us and using wifom to make us think that you are town. Ask an IC/SE.
2. Because it puts the player at danger of scum quickhammer, and if the majority doesn't think he's scum then he is most likely town. So it's best to get everyone's agreement or else scum might hammer a town player.
1] no i am asking you becasue you are the one who think im scum. they are moot. let me ask you, do my post show any fear? i am asking you openely to ask me questions instead of walling up and refuting everything. you are stuck in a tunnel that i am scum when i know i am not. i am asking you a simple question
"when i flip town, what will you do?" how will you go about it? dont give me the "you will flip scum answer" becasue that is wrong
2. well it takes 50% to bring them to l-1 and majority to hammer so if somoen hammers its
A] they flip scum
B] they flip town
the agreement would be to hammer not l-1. remmeber a LYNCH is majority, l-1 is just half.
can ic/se maybe clarify what i am trying to tell him here. im not sure if hes being dense or does not understand what i am saying here.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 6:59 pm
by RayFrost
Putting someone at l-1 does not inherently run the risk of the person getting lynched in so much that putting any other vote on the person runs the risk of the person getting lynched.
There's no real case of scum quickhammering a l-1 outside of lynch or lose. This is because of the fact that instantly hammering someone without coming to an agreement that there's nothing more to discuss will garner a lot of attention (if not suspicion), essentially putting the scum into the spotlight in a bad way. Questions will come firing out of everyone's mouths, and as scum you tend to not want everyone's eyes on you. There is no real value for scum to quickhammer, and any reasonable townie would wait until it was agreed or that they felt further discussion had no value (ie the town was just running in circles saying the same thing over and over in different ways)
The point about the l-1 is not valid. I don't feel that ika is using wifom to manipulate anybody anywhere.
Although I personally feel that ika is scummy, I do not believe that the points you are raising against him are at all valid.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:01 pm
by RayFrost
In post 306, ika wrote:and i was being open to you witht the staement, im here, ask me questions. not asking is not doing anything. right now all i see is
"ika is scum, vote him" but i dont see the reasoning. is there something that you are not understanding that i need to clarify?
This is a townish post. This is why I said scummy instead of scum. The read is weakening seeing how he defends against lyme.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:02 pm
by RayFrost
In post 279, bjc wrote:I like those posts by LMB. Has any real pressure been put on ika this game?
In post 276, Wagon Me Pal wrote:Also guys, I can't believe I'm saying this to a IC/SE, but are you FREAKING out of your mind? We have good scum reads and do not blindly lynch RobW for inactivity. He'll get replaced soon which is much better then wasting a lynch.
We're not blindly lynching anyone for inactivity.
oh really? plz tell me more how we are not blindly doing it for inactivity.
Well, firstly, we aren't necessarily lynching anyone at this point in time. It's two votes. Two votes a lynch does not make.
It's also not entirely about inactivity. That's actually a pretty worthless thing to vote someone for. "You aren't here, this vote will magically bring you back!" would indeed be a silly thing to think. It's a good thing Nacho and I aren't silly.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:18 pm
by RayFrost
The above being said, I actually feel a lot better about this than rob.
The most major points against bjc, in my opinion, are his complete flexibility, and lack of proactivity when it comes to scumhunting. He's been an almost completely passive recipient of the game. He posts, but many of them give the feeling of "I have posted content, now you guys can use this bone to go away and ignore me." How much follow up has he had on
anything
he's done this game? I'm not going to lie, he's got posts that are content-heavy in terms of giving reads and opinions, but almost all of them are one-offs. Like a butterfly settling on a flower without pollinating. Drop here, deposit opinion, fly away and deposit opinion elsewhere, rinse repeat. There's no commitment to anything, and there's a line between having shifting reads and a long list of votes by convenience. I feel like he's crossed that line.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 7:27 pm
by RayFrost
Oh and I just realized why you guys may get a feeling of being condescended toward from reading my posts. My signature.
Don't worry, my signature doesn't apply to any of my posts in this game. Except the one where I talk about ika saying I've got a few games when I've been on site as long as nacho. That one I think it could apply. Cuz not checking the join date or anything before talking about someone's experience is a bit silly. Not really game relevant though.
Abott, I'd just like to say that I don't need or want to appeal to emotion. I merely vented my frustrations in that post. I had one game somewhat recently where literally
the entire playerlist but me
had a bunch of meta-reads on each other to justify essentially ignoring 90% of what I said. Can you imagine putting in hours of work into a game only to have people go "nah, I know that person, that's just how they do" - not related to this game specifically, it's a generic hatred toward meta.
Also, I'm going to keep playing with my legos. I'm practicing for the annual Frost tournament wherein we attempt to use legos carved from ice to create statues of Michael Jackson during various stages of his life. I simply can't afford to stop practicing. Sorry if you step on any.
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:07 pm
by TierShift
UNVOTE:
Uhhhh...I think I might have been mistaken about ray being scum....that rant of posts was incredibly townish and denying most of my accusations (not scumhunting, taking the easy road, trying to paint only lurkers black), even though he did not address my post.
I have to say 279 is incredibly scummy but I'm just gonna take one step back now before hopping around even more.
LMB, what do you think about nacho so far?
Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2014 11:57 pm
by Wagon Me Pal
Nacho isn't on my scum list so far. So far, ika seems to be experienced and better at defending himself (but still scummy to me), and bcj is just newb scum sheeping ika.
I'll do more analysis on nacho later.
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:00 am
by Wagon Me Pal
My suggestion is lynch one of ika or bcj, if one of them flips scum, then we can lynch the other because of cases of scumbuddying shown before.
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:20 am
by RayFrost
What scumbuddyi-
Oh right that thing that you said about the stuff.
Heartily disagree. We lynch bcj, when he flips scum, we analyze things from there.
In post 276, Wagon Me Pal wrote:Also guys, I can't believe I'm saying this to a IC/SE, but are you FREAKING out of your mind? We have good scum reads and do not blindly lynch RobW for inactivity. He'll get replaced soon which is much better then wasting a lynch.
We're not blindly lynching anyone for inactivity.
oh really? plz tell me more how we are not blindly doing it for inactivity.
The big thing is that we're not lynching him right now!
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 4:36 am
by bjc
unvote
so I fell asleep before doing the content I was going to do.
Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 6:07 am
by bjc
Reading through (with some skimming) players I don't like:
Emeraldemon
Even in the actual content ED posts, I get this feeling (and this is how RayFrost describes my posting, minus the flexibility) "..lack of proactivity when it comes to scumhunting. He's been an almost completely passive recipient of the game. He posts, but many of them give the feeling of "I have posted content, now you guys can use this bone to go away and ignore me."
