Raise Benmage
All should do this ^.
Ahahaha...yes!CryMeARiver wrote:Hey, look, I already don't like you.Benmage wrote:vote CryMeARiver
Raise Benmage
All should do this ^.
This makes me want to do a Fonz on you guys. So I will.
Please agree to the following contract or explain why you will not.
1) I will not claim VT unless I am at L1, I am the leading wagon with an impending deadline, or during a massclaim, or our claim can somehow shed light on someone elses (for example: someone claims to have tracked you going somewhere).
2) I will provide reasoning with each and every one of my votes.
3) I will not selfvote, barring the 2:1:1 endgame scenario.
4) I will not lie about my roles. Period.
Benmage wrote: Whats point 5 there drip...?Hey look Drip! I found more scum! Noob scum looking for an easy bandwagon!Benmage wrote:wait...none of those 5 things make sense..
So since you are CLEARLY such a brilliant player...explain the contracts awesomeness for us lesser minds.CryMeARiver wrote: The contract is meant because it supports town points CLEARLY.
I know i was being sarcastic...i'm thinking quite the opposite actually.CryMeARiver wrote:I never said I was a brilliant player.Benmage wrote:So since you are CLEARLY such a brilliant player...explain the contracts awesomeness for us lesser minds.CryMeARiver wrote: The contract is meant because it supports town points CLEARLY.
This is not sufficient reasoning for me to abide by it.CryMeARiver wrote: Numbers 1, 3, 4 are just pains on lynches. No one likes having all the WIFOM when it comes down to a serious lynch.
This is true. I share a similar sentiment, and probably 99% give reasoning, or have given reason beforehand (and the 1% i'm sure had reason either not too, or came shortly after).CryMeARiver wrote: Number 2 is because I ABSOLUTELY HATE when people vote without providing reasoning. I really don't care if the reasoning is "I like so and so's case on so and so", but give me something. Also, it's an antitown thing tobandwagonvote someone without giving them something to defend themselves against, barring RVS,which we are now out of.
There are other much better ways to exit a rvs, or to begin scumhunt rather than declaring the rvs over.CryMeARiver wrote: Because lengthy RVS's do not help the town in any way, so I am looking to start genuinely scumhunt.
DrModem wrote:RVS for me doesn't end until day 2.
Cha-ching.... from what i've seen/heard about the contract is suppose to protect from retard(newb) play...I'm sure we are all capable of playing just fine without a contract, and if people suck, we can handle poor play ourselves.LynchMePls wrote: I think the contract is great, but I'm not sure I understand the point of proposing people agree to it. If we're town, we should be doing all those things anyways, and it isn't like the scum aren't going to agree to it as well. I don't think proposing it does anything but distract us from actually scum hunting.
Uhh this just doesn't read logically.... there can be a multitude of things to keep someone from dying, or to dissuade Nk's.vezopiraka wrote:That thing is not useful. So we have to pick a double voter? on day 1.
If we target scum we have a double voter scum.
If we raise town we have a double voter dead.
If we raise town scum may create WIFOM and make us lynch him.
All cases equal bad for town. I still suggest raising the one we are lynching
A policy lynch could also be for a consistent VI...someone who is always a hindrance to the town regardless of alignment, take zewt, or zazier for example.LynchMePls wrote: I hate the idea that you would lynch a certain player just because you dislike their play style.
Would you be so kind as to rephrase, or highlight, or by any means you want to the case on said "two scum".Drippereth wrote:
Enough the whole raising thing though, people who are just talking about it and just ignoring the two scums that have already been flushed out are scummy.
People always like to vote on "assummed" scummy behavior, or picky backing on others ideas...often i find i have to pull peoples teeth to get a few simple bullets, highlights, or rewording (maybe i want it in different words) and stupid ass people can be so obstinate...i have to ask my self why? And 2 options come to mine, stubborn scum, or dumbasses...you pick which you want to be in your next post.Drippereth wrote:It's now 3 scums. Just read our posts. They are short enough.Benmage wrote:Would you be so kind as to rephrase, or highlight, or by any means you want to the case on said "two scum".
I'm an obstructionists?? Do tell....how is asking someone to highlight, or restate a case at all bad?Rifka Viveka wrote: Benmage, thats the obstructionist attitude that gets you scumpoints in my book. Are you analyzing the thread posts? If you are why could you have questions as to why some players are scummy?
For those who are less book oriented as I am....and clearly the reason for voting him where in my last post .LynchMePls wrote:@Benmage does that vote come with any reason at all?And why do you feel the need to worsen his soft claim by pinning down who he was referring to?
FOS: Benmage
1. And your point? I wanted concrete evidence from Drip, and received nothing but stubbornness.Rifka Viveka wrote:Would you be so kind as to rephrase, or highlight, or by any means you want to the case on said "two scum".People always like to vote on "assummed" scummy behavior, or picky backing on others ideas...often i find i have to pull peoples teeth to get a few simple bullets, highlights, or rewording (maybe i want it in different words) and stupid ass people can be so obstinate...i have to ask my self why? And 2 options come to mine, stubborn scum, or dumbasses...you pick which you want to be in your next post.
And is this "oh 3 now" suppose to scare me...like asking you to rephrase scummy positions could possibly be interpreted as scummy, give me a fucking break, play better.First quote. 1)Hard to read this as anything but challenging the scumstate of those two players. 2)Second quote, you add to this by saying only scum or dumbasses could think this...which especially feels like your lawyering for others. 3)Third quote, i didnt call you an obstructionist, i said it was an obstructionist attitude.I'm an obstructionists?? Do tell....how is asking someone to highlight, or restate a case at all bad?
4)It looks like your calling people out to layout their entire reasoning so you can proceed to discredit it instead of directly defending those players as not scummy, when they clearly are scummy.
5)Finally your vote on drip is less than worthless.
Explain this "opportunistic" attack you speak...please quote my words that you feel were opportunistic.Mina wrote: 4) I agree with this:Benmage has been rubbing me the wrong way all game. He comes across opportunistic in his CMAR attacks (if you reread him in ISO, he makes fun of CMAR for his "contract" and attacks it as a bad idea, but doesn't seem to really believe that CMAR is scum) and overdefensive to the slightest bit of criticism.Drippereth wrote:¯\(°_o)/¯Benmage wrote:And is this "oh 3 now" suppose to scare me...like asking you to rephrase scummy positions could possibly be interpreted as scummy, give me a fucking break, play better.
By "oh 3 now" I didn't meanyou... Why did you assume I meant YOU? I was referring to vez.
But your feeling targeted is a slight scumtell.
I disagree, raising the best town person is going to that much more detrimental to the scum.Mina wrote:I disagree with danakillsu and Rivka on raising. I'd rather give a double-vote to a mediocre townie than smart scum. Smart scum is the kind most likely to stay alive to LYLO/MYLO and lose the town a lynch. IMO, we should raise players who are most likely to be town, not players who sound reasonable.
Fair enough...I didn't really see the reasoning behind the axel support.Mina wrote:I'm just saying we shouldn't be going, "This guy made a reasonable post about theory on page 2! Raise him!"
Unreasonable evidence?? Drip said it was in his iso, I was asking for him to highlight it or rephrase it for me...how is that unreasonable?Rifka Viveka wrote: I refer to the process of raising the expectation of evidence to an unreasonable level early in the game. Its the extended version of a player getting caught in the RVS and defending himself using the argument ''you cant catch scum in the RVS''. Why would you even use the word ''concrete'' in that context?
This is just a retarded ramble...if anything I think cops/investigative roles take away from games and players using skill to play. Moreover I could never be construed as a "fence-sitter" or idle person waiting for someone else to do my job for me. And whats this offsite reference? I'm one of if not the, most experienced and best player in this game (from this site).Rifka Viveka wrote: Im sure you have played mafia offsite. Perhaps you have played in a game heavy with roles, where the players spend more time explaining why the scum cant be caught and this that and the next thing are null cause they do it to. Then they no lynch and wait for cops and vigs to bail them out. This attitude pisses me off. We can find scum, we probably already have and several people need to be gunned down
1) Tis a work in progress.Rifka Viveka wrote: Then ill reverse the question;how does your vote on drip find lynch scum? You think drip should be lynched?
Just catchin up in the bit I'm behind in...you made a post regarding me, should I not of responded...Rifka Viveka wrote:You trying to troll me, benmage?
He's voting someone who I feel is showing some pretty obvious town-tells. He's also being obstinate which is either poor town play or scum.hasdgfas wrote: Post 158 - Benmage: GAH! Don't point it out. Ugh. AAAAAH! And why drippereth?
Initially…probably just the contract being stupid…I didn’t like the whole “rvs” over things..a quick iso read and I’d say he could be scum, so yes to both.Mina wrote: 1)Benmage, do you think CMAR is scum, or do you just think his contract is a stupid idea?
Agreed, SSBF's sudden epiphany was interesting to follow.Mina wrote: 9)Super Smash Bros. Fan, I'd have felt much better about you if you'd stood your ground when Dripp asked you why you had no read on Richard. Instead you quickly tried to appease them, by saying "Yes, now that you mention it, I've just seen the light on that scummy scumbag!" Furthermore, you copiedvezopiraka's reasoning for suddenly suspecting Richard. If anything, I read that Richard post as mildly townish. (It reminds me of a time a town VI-ish player I was hounding snapped back with "can you just leave me alone and find actual scum?")
*puke*CryMeARiver wrote:I'll admit axel seems to be a very good player and I'll likely take his advice into consideration when using a double vote. Just putting it out there.
I'm against it...you have illustrated anti-town characteristics.Drippereth wrote: Who would be in favor of raising the Drippereth hydra? Who would be against? Please explain your decision.
Quote me some of his town-tells, or feel free to just explain why you think he's the best town read atm.LynchMePls wrote:Raise: Drippereth
Best town read atm, and if Doc's often protect Dripp anyways, makes sense. We're at L-2, so those not raising should really do so.
This doesn't make sense...Drippereth wrote:If Richard flips town, or has a credible claim, we lynch Kleedrac.Kleedrac wrote:Just in case I'm wrong does anyone have a descent case on Richard? I read him and didn't find him scummy so much as dumb-town. Am I wrong? All of the cases against him lack substance beyond-the-meta.
If Richard flips scum, Kleedrac is 100% not his buddy.
Get mod clarification. And get back to us ASAP.RichardGHP wrote:My PM didn't specify, but I would assume so, yes.Rifka Viveka wrote:Richard, does getting lynched count as dying?
I agree, I was talking more in generalities.LynchMePls wrote:He didn't just name claim though. He also gave a credible ability that fits the name claim flavor wise.Benmage wrote:People People...the scum last game had safeclaims, unless provable claims, nameclaims really shouldn't dissuade scummness.
Ah must've forgotten this part, been awhile since I read book 2...then yes that would make sense.LynchMePls wrote:When Renly dies Loras gets so pissed he kills two or his rainbow guards who were supposed to protect him. It makes perfect sense fluff wise.Benmage wrote:One thing that struck me as odd about the claim is that Ser Loras does the veng killing....I would've imagined Brienne doing that, but perhaps Brienne isn't in the game and this is how things had to work...ahh headache
So your reasoning for raising drip is:danakillsu wrote:I have already discussed this. I believe Drippereth is town, definitely have no reason to call them scum, and know they can handle a double vote well. Besides the fact that others are willing to raise them.Benmage wrote: Why?
Bronn, not Bran....The bad guys will have safe claims...I was just thinking, out loud. (Must be more than one anti-town faction)Percy wrote:@Benmage: Why you gotta hate on Melisandre, Tyrion and Bran? Speculation like this makes me . At the very least, you're telling the bad guys what names they should avoid claiming.
(Also, why do you think there is an SK?)
The fact that theres 2 of them makes it worse. (too many chefs in the kitchen) Conflicting mentalities.danakillsu wrote: They can handle a dbl vote well because there are two of them and they are both very experienced.
I'm not asking you to prove it, just show medanakillsu wrote: It's your vote, your call. I'm not going to try to prove that Dripp is town, because that is impossible at this point in time.
Large themed game...5 faction world...the books had constant backstabbing of sorts. Tyrion in the mini I believe, although a Lannister was town-aligned...there could be countless characters or factions used in the series as anti-town people/factions in this game.MagnaofIllusion wrote:Italiced for emphasis … where does your feeling about this come from? Is it based on the source material?benmage wrote:Bronn, not Bran....The bad guys will have safe claims...I was just thinking, out loud.(Must be more than one anti-town faction)
Granted, flavor is flavor who cares I was just thinking out loud...but let me ask you this, have you been in a large game of this size(on this site) with 1 anti-town faction. If so please tell me which one or link.MagnaofIllusion wrote:Personally I have no clue. I’m not versed at all in the source material and don’t see anything in the flavor to lead me to think anything regarding the possible make-up of Scum in this game. We have the name “War of the 5 Kings” which indicates possible multiple factions. On the opposing side we have the line “Following Ned's death fragile alliances were made as an effort to make sure a rightful King sat on the Iron Throne started” which indicates banding together, which alludes to a solo scum faction.benmage wrote:You believe there is one giganto scum team?
I’m gonna give you the opportunity here to tuck your tail between your legs and walk away…do not talk to me again, unless I talk to you first.I doubt it wrote: Benmage: Looking at his posts in ISO, it's a whole load of setup speculation, role fishing and discussion about raising, plus other fluff posts, but very little scumhunting. Who's scum besides Drippereth?
Wait what.... I have this terrible pet peeve against stupidity.Drippereth wrote: I will add that Benmage's in-game persona is not, erm, likable.
Drippereth wrote: The brain module that stops him from making scummy post is not functional, possibly much like RichardGHP's
Well we can start with that this is an emotional response. Which more than likely has no logical foundation, therefore is a poor move and makes you look bad.I doubt it wrote:Benmage wrote: I’m gonna give you the opportunity here to tuck your tail between your legs and walk away…do not talk to me again, unless I talk to you first.Unvote
Vote: Benmage
There was no threat chief...there was sound advice.I doubt it wrote: Plus, what reason would he have to threaten me like that when all I did was ask a simple question? He's scum.
Pffftbb...you defending me. Don't listen to those cup-cakes that cry when one person defends another...We should all be on a Crusade against stupidity.Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:Just want to make this clear to everyone. I am not defending Benmage, I am just trying to find faults with I doubt it's case on Benmage.
QFT (btw loved the color scheme)Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote: Your case on Benmage is overall, poorly executed. There are good cases and bad cases and you've just made a bad one. Scummy one even.
I wish there was an emoticon that hangs your head into your hand-half covering your eyes with a slight shake of the head and an exasperating sigh. (Doing it now).I doubt it wrote: Benmage: Looking at his posts in ISO, it's a whole load of 1)setup speculation, 2)role fishing and 3)discussion about raising, plus other 4)fluff posts, but 5)very little scumhunting. 6)Who's scum besides Drippereth?
1- If he is an alt, perhaps this game isn't beyond his scope...if this is his first game on this site, he really should've joined a newbie game first. That's why they are here. Which criticism? Him sucking? Alt or not he sucks. Is it newb suckage or just suckage is what I was getting at...And by him...i mean his posts .MagnaofIllusion wrote:Question 1 – Why does it matter if he is an alt? Would your criticism be invalid if he was one?benmage wrote:@I doubt it First are you an alt? If you are not, here’s some initial sincere advice: this game is out of your league and you should seek to be replaced asap and join a newbie game. Moreover regardless of alignment you are probably going to be lynched soon because Oh My God U Suck, pissing off whichever people/side you are on
Question 2 – You pick I doubt it as someone way out of their league but don’t address any number of other players who have made less than stellar contributions. Why shouldn’t the presumption be made that this is solely because he chose to attack your play?
Off the top of my head I can't recall when i began suspecting CMaR, readin my own iso or his would probably remind me...buttt i'd say a multitude of things including his sucking up to axel, the contract, discussion with him and his general play thus far.Mina wrote: ---
Benmage: I see you responded to MagnaofIllusion's questions to you. I understand that my post #486 was huge and you might have missed that I also mentioned you, but could I get a little reaction to point #5?
I more or less answered Mina's statements with my response to Magna, about my post towards I doubt it.Percy wrote: tl;dr: Benmage's reaction is a scumtell for me, but not a strong one.IGMEOY, waiting for Benmage catchup.
Mmmmm nah, after I get caught up to present, and do some analyzing I'll comment on things I found pertinent.hasdgfas wrote: Hey benmage, how about you give us some ideas of your thoughts of what you've reread so far?
Pretty sure he replaced in, and Raiv was commenting on his summary post....its something to considering looking in to...Drippereth wrote:Who's this Thor person, I didn't know he existed, how did Raivann notice him unless they're buddies?Raivann wrote:Thor's post seems scummy to me as well, he is making sure not to offend.
I'll look again, but its going to be easy for scum to look town when they have the luxury of actually scum hunting.Drippereth wrote: LynchMePls is town. Read his posts. Shining beacon of townie-ness, every single one of them.