|
Somberbrero posted:Do you trust Narco? I don't have any role-based reason to trust or distrust Narco.
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
merk posted:I don't have any role-based reason to trust or distrust Narco. What's weird is that she seems to have a role-based reason to trust you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
AnonymousNarcotics posted:merk is playing like an rear end in a top hat but I know he's town. I may know something about him. Just trust me, guys. I glossed over this post when he made it on my phone, but it kind of jumps out as scummy to me now. We're unconfirmed masons. Our doc is filled with me telling him why lynching numerrik is the right call with citations to multiple games and how TNL is scum because he was happilly diving into defending numerrik rather than find scum (which is wrong in hindsight and just kind of looks stupid now that I'm reading it). I don't see why he'd know I was town based off of that discussion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
hahahahahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Ok, I've spent my time poorly. I only have a couple more minutes here. I need to find a scum and then go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
merk posted:I glossed over this post when he made it on my phone, but it kind of jumps out as scummy to me now. We're unconfirmed masons. Our doc is filled with me telling him why lynching numerrik is the right call with citations to multiple games and how TNL is scum because he was happilly diving into defending numerrik rather than find scum (which is wrong in hindsight and just kind of looks stupid now that I'm reading it). I don't see why he'd know I was town based off of that discussion. This right here should prove merk isnt scum What scum in their right mind wouldn't leap on an opportunity to be confirmed town?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
a worthy uhh posted:This is a horrifically scummy hyperbolic oversimplification a worthy uhh posted:This is another hyperbolic oversimplification that is intentionally ignoring information that doesn't fit the idea he wants to push I think you're looking at the content in a vaccuum without trying to understand the intent behind the content. Somb clearly believes with the utmost certainty that the right decision is to lynch numerrik. Why wouldn't he say whatever he possibly could to make that happen? I don't think either of his oversimplifications (which I agree they are) are scummy. The issue with somb's approach is that it wasn't very persuasive, but that doesn't mean it comes from a scum player. Out of all the somber votes, I think this one is the scummiest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
jesus christ stop claiming ##unvote I should be around near the deadline, but I'll be doing a reread beforehand. I'm not confident on a few of my reads and need to re-evaluate before moving forward.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:This right here should prove merk isnt scum not sure that i think this evidence is that strong, but i agree with the main point.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
merk posted:I think you're looking at the content in a vaccuum without trying to understand the intent behind the content. Somb clearly believes with the utmost certainty that the right decision is to lynch numerrik. Why wouldn't he say whatever he possibly could to make that happen? I don't think either of his oversimplifications (which I agree they are) are scummy. The issue with somb's approach is that it wasn't very persuasive, but that doesn't mean it comes from a scum player. Saying things like "NUMERIK HAS A KILLING ROLE!" is clear hyperbole and a borderline lie. I really disagree that you can say whatever you want about someone to push a case; that's loving ridiculous imo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
I think everyone should step back a bit from the numerrik issue. Both town and scum wanted numerrik lynched or didn't want numerrik lynched under the guise or reality of general mafia arguments. If you're making a vote against someone that is solely entrenched in your disagreement over how to handle numerrik, you're voting based on a disagreement over a general mafia theory rather than whether the person is posting fake content. It's different if you're using a scum's willingness to maintain the numerrik argument as a justification for a vote. That I could get behind, but I didn't really see that. The one person that originally jumped out at me for it was TNL, but reading it again out of the moment the same feelings don't come up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
CapitalistPig posted:This right here should prove merk isnt scum I don't agree with your approach but yeah I am feeling much better about mark.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Saying things like "NUMERIK HAS A KILLING ROLE!" is clear hyperbole and a borderline lie. I really disagree that you can say whatever you want about someone to push a case; that's loving ridiculous imo. I will say whatever I think is persuasive at any point to get the person I want lynched. You saw me do this last game as town against you. Just because you're wrong, ridiculous, or whatever, that doesn't make you scum. Try to look at the intent behind the content - is it fake? I don't think somb was faking that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
merk, what's your opinion on jeddit and CapitalistPig? I'm feeling a little better about the latter, but jeddit's pinged a few people as scummy and been offered as a lynch candidate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
He's also one of the few lynch candidates you haven't talked about yet. I know you are short on time and not sure how you are going about "finding a scum and then going."
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Trying to get someone lynched vs trying to convince everyone they're scum One is not town behavior
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
No, this is the right vote. ##unvote; ##vote Quandary Look at Quandary's content today. It consists of the following reads: Glock: "townie as poo poo" imgay: "i like this guy" CPig: "i do not understand the CPig case" Jedit: "this is the scummiest post in the thread" based off of a numerrik vote 100Yrs: "this vote is straight scummy 101" Not a single Quandary read advances scum hunting discussion in any way. When he calls a player scum, he does so without really saying why, without prodding that player, and without trying to persuade others to vote with him. He wants to be background noise with his scum reads. Compare that to when Quandary calls someone town, which he does so in connection to other player cases. He's taking opportunity to talk negatively about cases made by others without advancing any cases of his own that actually matter. This is what a d1 scum player looks like: make it look like you're contributing without saying anything that will bite you in the rear end three or four days from now. This is scummy 101.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Someone direct me to a good somber case
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:He's also one of the few lynch candidates you haven't talked about yet. This is going to sound completely backwards, but I'd vote Jedit solely for the post that sparked Quandary's vote. It was a driveby vote on numerrik that didn't do anything.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
merk posted:I will say whatever I think is persuasive at any point to get the person I want lynched. You saw me do this last game as town against you. Just because you're wrong, ridiculous, or whatever, that doesn't make you scum. Try to look at the intent behind the content - is it fake? I don't think somb was faking that poo poo. Yes I think the intention is fake. If you know something isn't true but you're yelling it out anyway, your agenda isn't to make good lynches happen but to make your lynches happen. Your example from last game is not a good one because if you had thought critically about the facts instead of tunneling you wouldn't have mislynched a townie. In any case you weren't actively lying about events to make it happen. "NUMERIK CLAIMED A KILLING ROLE" is a huge stretch of the truth if not a deliberate lie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:CapitalistPig I didn't get anything out of the meta junk, the gambit, or whatever happened, and I don't really remember anything from CPig during the day. I don't have a read.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Yes I think the intention is fake. If you know something isn't true but you're yelling it out anyway, your agenda isn't to make good lynches happen but to make your lynches happen. I was consistently stretching the truth to try to convince anyone and everyone to vote you because I strongly believed I was right. That is what I see somb doing here. Can you not see somb unable to 'think critically about the facts' and instead is trying to push that lynch through because he knows in his head it's the right call? I'm not voting somb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
merk posted:I glossed over this post when he made it on my phone, but it kind of jumps out as scummy to me now. We're unconfirmed masons. Our doc is filled with me telling him why lynching numerrik is the right call with citations to multiple games and how TNL is scum because he was happilly diving into defending numerrik rather than find scum (which is wrong in hindsight and just kind of looks stupid now that I'm reading it). I don't see why he'd know I was town based off of that discussion. Why did you claim your unconfirmed masonry just to make this pretty weak callout post?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Actually, I will leave my vote on ##unvote; ##vote Jedit Jedit didn't get into the game at all until the numerrik debate where he gladly posts paragraphs. He made a driveby vote which came under scrutiny and then he puffed up his chest to defend it. I think his approach to numerrik is very scummy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
merk posted:This is going to sound completely backwards, but I'd vote Jedit solely for the post that sparked Quandary's vote. It was a driveby vote on numerrik that didn't do anything. I'll respond to your case in a min but  at you attacking me partially for calling Jedit scummy based on a single post, and then immediately calling Jedit scummy solely for the exact same post
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
merk posted:I was consistently stretching the truth to try to convince anyone and everyone to vote you because I strongly believed I was right. That is what I see somb doing here. I see Somb trying to push a poor gotcha moment on a new player and then doubling down into hyperbole when called out on it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Why did you claim your unconfirmed masonry just to make this pretty weak callout post? If you can find any harm whatsoever in claiming an unconfirmed masonry, I'd be happy to hear it. I usually don't even talk in unconfirmed masonries but did so here because I stopped posting in the main thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I see Somb trying to push a poor gotcha moment on a new player and then doubling down into hyperbole when called out on it. I guess we're going to have to disagree on that item. Moving numerrik aside, what do you think of his build up to voting me?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Quandary posted:I'll respond to your case in a min but There's nothing wrong with that. Every case is independent of unflipped players. I have to go. I'm leaving my vote on Jedit. I think that's my best case. See you on d2... or not!
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Thanks. I agree with your case on Quandary and think he's a good lynch for today. Still would like to reread some of the other characters of this thread, however.Quandary posted:Someone direct me to a good somber case As soon as I get back, I'm going to go back and try to do this. If I cannot formulate a coherent case around Somber, looking back my only major point against him was the numerrick lynch (which I found exploitative and an easy lynch for scum to jump on), I'll come back to Quandary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
ok well yeah, maybe it doesnt PROVE he isn't scum undoubtedly but it should knock some sense into the idiot heads that are currently voting for him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
merk posted:If you can find any harm whatsoever in claiming an unconfirmed masonry, I'd be happy to hear it. I usually don't even talk in unconfirmed masonries but did so here because I stopped posting in the main thread. Forget the harm, I don't see the benefit. You make yourself more of a target by claiming unconfirmed mason for starters. The big benefit I can see for claiming would be if you're scum and just don't want to participate with a mason who could catch you out on bad opinions. I don't see there being any benefit in claiming so early as town as you could potentially be giving up a useful source of information. merk posted:I guess we're going to have to disagree on that item. I disliked the way he was trying to get people to answer some question about whether Ernie was white-knighting another player in some dizzying attempt to circle his case around to you. It struck me as a convoluted way to go about making a case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
I still have a bad gut opinion on merk, do not like him bookending his recent posting spree with "oh now I have time to post, oh now my time is up." I really hate that visible clock-punching style of posting in games; it's what I do as scum when I know I've been absent and want to show everyone just how invested I am in the game. I also really do not like him claiming unconfirmed masons just to call Narco scummy for thinking he's town. It seems like a squandering of a good role for no reason that I can find.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
merk posted:No, this is the right vote. ##unvote; ##vote Quandary Merk how did you forget that Quandary also pushed PMom for the alignment slip? For that matter, for a guy so adamant about third-parties (going so far as to say PMom and Numerik were of the same alignment) why are you not pursuing that case?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
##unvote ##vote merk I've seen enough here to really not like his posting today. I don't know how he made a case on Quandary while omitting such a big part of Quandary's post history.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:##unvote ##vote merk I've seen enough here to really not like his posting today. I don't know how he made a case on Quandary while omitting such a big part of Quandary's post history. You do you rationalize the masonry?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:You do you rationalize the masonry? Not sure what you're asking here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
My gut says that Somber is a dumb townie as I really doubt scum would put themselves so much in the spotlight for such a dumb reason D1, but I'm confused by the difference in his mind between Numerik and P-Mom. By far the scummiest thing about Somber in my mind is that he bandwagons so drat hard on Numerrik but essentially ignores P-Mom, when realistically their situations are similar.Somberbrero posted:Hey, so it's not a policy lunch. If Numerrik had claimed third-party and been honest about his role, I wouldn't have lunched him on principle. Numerrik is lying though, and a lying third-party is very different from an open third-party. Hence why I've been paying much less attention to Pinterest. Somber, where did Numerrik lie? As far as I can see he willingly claimed, and was far more open and consistent with his role than P-mom has been. I don't understand why Numerrik is worth 3 pages of rants and raves about lynches but P-Mom is written off. I'm conflicted - my gut says he's town, but my mind says that he's scum who got onto Numerik as an easy case and that explains why he has ignored P-Mom when the situations are similar. I'm not sure if i want to lynch Somber, I'll come back to this later and look at others first
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I see Somb trying to push a poor gotcha moment on a new player and then doubling down into hyperbole when called out on it. This is exactly how I read somber
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 16:39 |
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:Not sure what you're asking here. merk posted:I glossed over this post when he made it on my phone, but it kind of jumps out as scummy to me now. We're unconfirmed masons. Our doc is filled with me telling him why lynching numerrik is the right call with citations to multiple games and how TNL is scum because he was happilly diving into defending numerrik rather than find scum (which is wrong in hindsight and just kind of looks stupid now that I'm reading it). I don't see why he'd know I was town based off of that discussion. Merk claimed to be masons with Narcotics
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 21:43
|
|