Open 458: Carbon-14 (Over!)

Empking · Post Post #5 (isolation #0) » Fri Oct 26, 2012 2:53 am

In post 4, Shamrock wrote:but, aw geez, did I use the version that makes you grow moustaches and develop Italian accents

Wait we might be up against the Mario brothers?

Vote: Batt

Empking · Post Post #20 (isolation #1) » Sat Oct 27, 2012 10:12 pm

Vote: Electric

L-1

Empking · Post Post #23 (isolation #2) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:02 am

In post 21, CityElectric wrote:Why did you put me at L-1, Empking?

The game isn't going anyway and that looks to me like a ploy by someone. Nobody could change their vote without look scummy (thank you shos for illustrating that) and the game would be stagnant so I 1. Decided to take one for the team 2. See you want in the centre of the stagnant-causing (you) and voted you.

Empking · Post Post #25 (isolation #3) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:40 am

In post 24, CityElectric wrote:
In post 23, Empking wrote:
In post 21, CityElectric wrote:Why did you put me at L-1, Empking?

The game isn't going anyway and that looks to me like a ploy by someone. Nobody could change their vote without look scummy (thank you shos for illustrating that) and the game would be stagnant so I 1. Decided to take one for the team 2.
See you want in the centre of the stagnant-causing (you) and voted you.

Can you please clarify the bolded part? My head can't make sense of it...

"you want" should be "who was"; yeah I should have proofread it.

Empking · Post Post #27 (isolation #4) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 1:59 am

In post 26, CityElectric wrote:Why vote me over Mhork then?

You were the most recent.

Empking · Post Post #36 (isolation #5) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:29 am

In post 35, Lord Mhork wrote:Can you explain how he made the game stagnant? It might just be 'cause its early and I'm not feeling well, but I don't understand what you mean.

Two days with only a handful of posts don't just come into existance by themselves. Yours and City's irrelevant discussion about irrelevancy that when nowhere relevant caused it.

Empking · Post Post #38 (isolation #6) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:39 am

In post 37, CommieX wrote:
Empking wrote:The game isn't going anyway and that looks to me like a ploy by someone.

How so? How does the game stalling before it starts help scum?

The less time town spends in fruitful hunting the better chance the scum have of winning. I would also point to motivational effects.

Empking · Post Post #52 (isolation #7) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:14 am

In post 40, Radelle wrote:How is this a ploy by someone? By whom? There are either two mafia/werewolves in the game and more than that have posted to create this atmosphere. If you actually think there is a ploy, then why not vote for the two people (Mhork and Commie) who were most actively stagnating the game by dicking around?

You later say that City's irrelevancy was the most recent, but shos posted right after City essentially saying nothing. So I don't buy that. You specifically wanted to vote City while not voting others. What makes this especially scummy, is that you had simple explanations at your disposal: To put City at L-1 to see reactions, pressure, etc. But you unnecessarily over-explain it with a not so rational response. Now you're not really posting anything relevant yourself.

1. Are you actually trying to pretend that City "multiposts that don't advance the game" Electric didn't create the atmosphere and Commie "jumped on the wagon with one post" X did? Really?

Re: the rest,
1. What sudden vote by shos?
2. When did I suggest it was scummy?

Vote: Radelle

Empking · Post Post #53 (isolation #8) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:15 am

In post 11, CityElectric wrote:
In post 10, Lord Mhork wrote:VOTE: CityElectric

OMGUS!
Plus I've got the same issue. Is it City? or is it Electric?

I prefer City

In post 14, CommieX wrote:
In post 12, shos wrote:
In post 11, CityElectric wrote:
In post 10, Lord Mhork wrote:VOTE: CityElectric

OMGUS!
Plus I've got the same issue. Is it City? or is it Electric?

I prefer City

VOTE: Electric

You sir, are some sort of rebel without a cause. I've got my eye on you

Lord Mhork wrote:

Well if you don't wanna use my full title, I'm cool with Mhork.

Would a real lord say such a thing?

In post 17, CityElectric wrote:
In post 8, shos wrote:Lol theb ur gonna vite me a lot

God, I think I finally figured out what's that supposed to say. Do me a favor and post in proper English next time.

Can anyone say with a straight face that it's Commie doing the most messing around in the posts?

Empking · Post Post #55 (isolation #9) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:28 am

Shos:
Assume the game is two Mafia and a Cop and four townies (a favourable assumption to your view.)
Scum quicklynch
1/5 hit Cop, scumlynch then we have 1/3 = 1/15 = 4/60
4/5 hit townie, 1/4 hit Cop in the night, scumlynch then we have 1/3 = 1/15 = 4/60
4/5 hit townie, 3/4 hit townie, 1/4 Cop hit scum = 3/20 = 9/60
4/5 hit townie, 3/4 hit townie, 1/2 Cop hit non-killed town, if Cop comes out then 1/2 = 3/20 = 9/60
4/5 hit townie, 3/4 hit townie, 1/4 Cop hit scum target, scumlynch, 1/3 scum hit Cop, 1/3 we win, 1/60
4/5 hit townie, 3/4 hit townie, 1/4 Cop hit scum target, scumlynch, 2/3 scum hit townie, 1/2 we win, 1/60

=28/60 (7/15) EV and that's

ignoring

the named townie. Scum wouldn't quicklynch and if they did we should thank them.

To your latest post, Radelle voted me giving the reason that CE didn't mess around and Commie was the reicarnation of Loki (that's the gist at any rate). This is a belief thast no player could agree with, I contend. Unless someone givers a "yes" to 53 then it is fair to say Radelle is lying and Lynch All Liars.

Also, unless you were talking to someopne else, did I even mention you in my last post?

Empking · Post Post #58 (isolation #10) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:49 am

In post 57, shos wrote:well you quoted stuff that involved me. I didn't understand what you wanted and still don't, please explain again.

Raquelle suggested that CE was innocent from messing up the gamestate and that CX was the one that did it, then used that as justification to vote me. I think this is an untenantable position. Either it was an outright lie, or needing to find an excuse to vote me, just made something not caring about its truth value enough to check.

about your math - your odds are all good andd fine, but you didn't say what they mean. and I have no will to try and see. if I were scum and had the choice of rolling a die for gamewin with 54% to win, why not?
now what the hell are you talking about with 'named townie'?

With a Mafia/Wolves then the Seer/Cop is a named townie.

Empking · Post Post #64 (isolation #11) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 5:17 pm

In post 59, CommieX wrote:Why are you ignoring the fact that Radelle brought up Mhork?

Because it isn't relevant? Mhork was a member of the stagnanters, but City posted last. That was discussed before Radelle's vote.

what do you think of these two quotes both by Radelle:
" the two people (Mhork and Commie) who were most actively stagnating"
"You single out City and Mhork while completely ignoring Commie's involvement (however little). "

If that's not stealth backtracking (changing his position whilest refusing to admit false) what other thing is it?

Empking · Post Post #66 (isolation #12) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:51 pm

In post 65, CommieX wrote:
In post 64, Empking wrote:
In post 59, CommieX wrote:Why are you ignoring the fact that Radelle brought up Mhork?

Because it isn't relevant? Mhork was a member of the stagnanters, but City posted last. That was discussed before Radelle's vote.

My point being, why are you insisting on only defending me, rather than Mhork when we were mentioned in the same breath?

1. Answer my question.
2. I'm not defending you. I'm calling Radelle scum for lying.
3. Because Radelle wasn't lying when he said that Mhork also spammed the thread. A thought I agreed with before Radelle even mentioned it.

Empking · Post Post #67 (isolation #13) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 6:55 pm

Commie: As you can see by the following posts I acknowledged Mhork as a thread-messer-upper before Radelle.

In post 27, Empking wrote:
In post 26, CityElectric wrote:Why vote me over Mhork then?

You were the most recent.

In post 40, Radelle wrote:

@Empking
,

How is this a ploy by someone? By whom? There are either two mafia/werewolves in the game and more than that have posted to create this atmosphere. If you actually think there is a ploy, then why not vote for the two people (Mhork and Commie) who were most actively stagnating the game by dicking around?

Now stop being so vain as to think all my posts are about you, and give your read on Radelle.

Empking · Post Post #70 (isolation #14) » Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:25 pm

In post 69, Radelle wrote:Tick tock Emp. Have no idea how to respond to me? I'm not the type to let scum just ignore an attack on them as they try to bury their head into the sand to victory.

Where's "tick tock" coming from. You haven't asked me anything that wasn't of the "when did you stop beating your wife" variety; rhetorical questions are one thing, pretending to get prissy when they don't get answered is quite another.

The fact is your questions are a based on a bunch of baloney; I haven't been defensive of Commie let alone overdefensive, I was pointing out that you lied. You try to say that I "Implied shos' change in vote looked scummy" but in order to do that you have to cut out half of a sentence; as you know the "change their vote" was a reference to my voting City and shos voting me for it.

The idea that shos' vote on me that occured just after putting a player on L-1 on Page One could be considered sudden is risible.

The idea that I should base my suspicion on Page 1, a page that I said was stagnant, is farce. The idea that I'm scum for not doing so is scum just messing about.

You ask a huge number of questions, all mixed up in prose, all of them rhetorical and all with with no basis in fact, and then try to pretend I'm ducking out by doing the polite thing and ignoring it.

Empking · Post Post #72 (isolation #15) » Mon Oct 29, 2012 1:57 am

In post 71, CityElectric wrote:It is stranger that Mhork's Post 15 doesn't appear in his Post 53

I claimed that you and Mhorke made most of the mess. Radelle when "Nuh huh, it was Mhorke and Commie, Vote: Empking". We agree on Mhorke. We disagree on you and Commie, look at 53 and tell me who is most guilty at of the two of you; and whether Radelle's claimed view is even halfway believable.

Empking · Post Post #74 (isolation #16) » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:06 am

In post 73, CityElectric wrote:Both equally guilty, I believe, Commie maybe a bit more than me. What made you think I'm the more guilty one of the two?

2>1

Howe do you come to Commie as worse?

Empking · Post Post #76 (isolation #17) » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:16 am

Unvote

- Not sure who to vote for.

Empking · Post Post #78 (isolation #18) » Mon Oct 29, 2012 2:25 am

In post 77, CityElectric wrote:What made you doubt your vote on Radelle?

My vote was how it's impossible for town to consider Commie worse than you. Since I've got a town read on you that idea is a non-starter now that you've said you think Commie was worse.

Empking · Post Post #82 (isolation #19) » Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:25 am

In post 79, CommieX wrote:Yes, if you look at them side by side they do. Why did you have to ask me about this point in order to bring it up? Why not just do it?

Why just do it when I can get a read on you at the same time?

Mhorke; I haven't seen your other game but I'm betting they didn't spend the first two days still on page 1. If they did then you're doing something wrong so stop it.

Empking · Post Post #98 (isolation #20) » Tue Oct 30, 2012 6:29 am

In post 96, Radelle wrote:
In post 78, Empking wrote:Since I've got a town read on you that idea is a non-starter now that you've said you think Commie was worse.

City was not a town read for you. What does this even mean?

Read the sentence before the one you quoted and put them together, and yes, you're right that I didn't have a town read on City on page one.

Empking · Post Post #99 (isolation #21) » Tue Oct 30, 2012 6:38 am

Radelle: When did City imply that her argument relied on my voting to "put pressure on [City]"? I'd like a quote please.

Vote: Radelle

- "If they are so rhetorical then answer directly." Speaks for itself, she's not scumhunting but just posting, I think, in the hopes people ignore her to floart her way to victory.

Radelle: When did you stop beating your wife? Answer directly now.

Empking · Post Post #111 (isolation #22) » Wed Oct 31, 2012 5:48 am

I actually think shos has a good point. If Batt can't give a reason then shos' explanation is the only one really.

Unvote,
Vote: Batt

Empking · Post Post #117 (isolation #23) » Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:09 am

In post 115, Battousai wrote:I don't like playing the, "If I was scum, I wouldn't do that...," but come on. If I wanted to appear like I had a list, I would jot down everyone's name and right something quick next to it to explain. Maybe put a few neutrals, a leaning town, and a couple leaning scums and be done with it. And it's not like I was feeling pressure to scumhunt. "Lord Mhork and CityElectric have been prodded" if at least one of those were town, then I think I'm in good position to lay back and do nothing.

I don't think you'd be able justify missing a list with everyone's names and reasons and go "whoops, ignore that!" and portray that as an accident. The way you posted

is

the way scum would have.

And yes, I would still like a reason.

Empking · Post Post #119 (isolation #24) » Wed Oct 31, 2012 7:26 am

In post 118, Battousai wrote:Reason I didn't want to say anything, was mainly because I didn't want scum to know I had them down to 50/50.

I don't buy "I didn'tv want the scum to know I had two town reads" as an argument. I agree though that the three minute thing is null.

Empking · Post Post #139 (isolation #25) » Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:22 am

In post 136, Battousai wrote:So, if I said these are a list of scum in no particular order...

Then you might have gotten away with it. Yes.

Empking · Post Post #141 (isolation #26) » Thu Nov 01, 2012 7:57 am

In post 140, Battousai wrote:I mean come on... I list 4 people, then refuse to say why... why would I do that as scum?

To make it seem like you're doing secret embaressed scumhunting.

Empking · Post Post #147 (isolation #27) » Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:06 pm

He asked two questions and I answered them. He made an explanation and I repudiated it. Trying to call that scummy is a stretch even for you.

Empking · Post Post #169 (isolation #28) » Sun Nov 04, 2012 7:47 am

In post 167, Radelle wrote:The difference between you and shos responding to Batt, is that you can see shos churn out his thought process, ask questions going through his mind, and try to deferiantiate between what Batt is doing is town or scum motivated. What you say on the other hand, seems to go through the, "how can I make this look bad" word filter.

I don't see that at all.

---New Point---

I've been trying to work out my thoughts from Batt's recent posting which looks town to me. I think it might be scum purposely agreeing with me to try and get me off his back; but if it is then it worked.

Unvote, Vote: Radelle

Empking · Post Post #181 (isolation #29) » Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:38 am

I will not fakeclaim Cop/Seer as VT.

If you find Radelle scummy why not vote Radelle?

The Batt wagon came from his list of mystery.

Empking · Post Post #184 (isolation #30) » Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:35 am

In post 183, CommieX wrote:I don't like how Emp's attitude towards Bat went from "shos makes a good point" to "DIE SCUM DIE" very quickly. Seems like sheeping to me.

Sheeping isn't scummy. 99% it's needed to lynch scum.

Empking · Post Post #194 (isolation #31) » Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:24 am

Radelle, put someone at L-1 will you.

Empking · Post Post #227 (isolation #32) » Wed Nov 07, 2012 12:31 pm

Out of Sala and shos, Sala is by far the scummiest. I'll endorse a hammer when conversation stalls.

Empking · Post Post #229 (isolation #33) » Wed Nov 07, 2012 1:05 pm

In post 228, Salamence20 wrote:
In post 227, Empking wrote:Out of Sala and shos, Sala is by far the scummiest. I'll endorse a hammer when conversation stalls.

Wait...

What?

Empking, I know I accidently mislynched you back in New York, but come on, that was so long ago.

All AtE aside, I'm town. Come lynch shos.

shos is my strongest, only town read. Actually, just remembered that you replaced CE; shos is my strongest townread and you're my second (surfing on CE's good karma) which is really annoying. Are you sure you can't vote Radelle?

Empking · Post Post #254 (isolation #34) » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:31 am

Do we want the Seer with result to claim?

Empking · Post Post #257 (isolation #35) » Sat Nov 10, 2012 6:42 am

Not Seer

Empking · Post Post #263 (isolation #36) » Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:09 am

In post 261, Battousai wrote:You see, most of the last rl day of D1, I was online. I was paying attention to all new posts... and I was also paying attention to who was online and who wasn't. Guess who's name kept popping up as online, yet hardly posted at all. Empking.

Er. No, I was not online after I stopped posting. If anyone cares to check the "View My posts", you can see that unless I'm a Golem that needs no sleep, I was clearly not just lurking in the background hoping for a Commie lynch.

So,

FOS: Batt

Empking · Post Post #265 (isolation #37) » Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:57 am

In post 264, Battousai wrote:To play the sleep card, I just looked through your view posts. The 4 or so days previous you were offline for what could be considered sleep at (all my time) 11pm - 11 am, 8pm - 9am, 10am - 4 pm, 6pm - 8am. So saying you couldn't have been on 'cause you sleeping is false. You could have easily slept anywhere in that 12 hr period. I was online and saw you on for around an extra hr after your last post, and several hours before your first.

Well yes, maybe an hour after it I was on and didn't post but that's not inactivity.

Empking · Post Post #279 (isolation #38) » Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:15 pm

In post 278, shos wrote:so it's a 1v1 between you guys, right? right.

Right.

Empking · Post Post #282 (isolation #39) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 9:45 am

In post 281, shos wrote:no idea. but he siteflaked iirc.

So obvious Amrun-alt was an Amrun alt?

Empking · Post Post #290 (isolation #40) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:02 pm

I still don't buy Mhork as scum, and I don't think Batt's motive for targeting me rings true.

Empking · Post Post #292 (isolation #41) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:05 pm

I'm guessing with that quick vote after 2birds, it's a shos-Batt team? I dislike being wrong about my original shos read though.

Empking · Post Post #295 (isolation #42) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:08 pm

In post 293, Lord Mhork wrote:Empking, whose claim do you believe?

Yours. I'm not 100%, and I'm not going to join in with this speedy circus.

Empking · Post Post #300 (isolation #43) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:59 pm

In post 297, Lord Mhork wrote:Emp what happened to your game. I remember you being all on top of these things and now you're just lurking around.

I'm really not.

Empking · Post Post #302 (isolation #44) » Mon Nov 12, 2012 3:04 pm

In post 301, 2birds1stone wrote:
In post 295, Empking wrote:
In post 293, Lord Mhork wrote:Empking, whose claim do you believe?

Yours. I'm not 100%, and I'm not going to join in with this speedy circus.
I actually think more LyLos should be quick lynches. Ideally, decide on who's hammering, popcorn claim if applicable, post meta if requested, then quicklynch. Non-LyLo days are for scumhunting.

3p you're right; 5p(+) you're wrong.

Empking · Post Post #309 (isolation #45) » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:28 pm

I'm pretty confident that it's shos. My reread during the night gave me that impression and I'm not likely to change my mind.

Vote: shos

Empking · Post Post #311 (isolation #46) » Wed Nov 14, 2012 3:46 pm

In post 310, shos wrote:I should be conftown for yesterday, lol.

No.

what made you think I'm scum?

2birds is towniest.

Empking · Post Post #319 (isolation #47) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 12:27 am

In post 317, 2birds1stone wrote:Ugh. This sucks. Tempted to sheep Batts and be done with it.

You realise that that was a pretty clear desperate gambit to stay alive, right? (I'm not trying to get townie points for that; I'd have still killed him if I, myself, was scum, but it seemed pretty clear that at the time of his last posts I was a town read.)

Empking · Post Post #321 (isolation #48) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 3:51 am

In post 320, shos wrote:
In post 303, Battousai wrote:
Vote: Lord Mhork
!

But I'm town, good try there Mhork. Decided to hammer before town gets duped. I'm really leaning hard on Emp-scum still.

In post 305, Battousai wrote:I'm pretty sure Emp is scum here. He's playing to his scum meta, he's been paying attention to the game while not helping it. I'm thinking he came in strong just to counter it.

Of course, ignore all that if Mhork flips werewolf as that would mean Emp is confirmed town and scum is 2bird.

I'm not getting this, what is a gambit here? he would be conftown the moment mhork flips, so obviously he would die, I don't see a gambit to stay alive here - I see a dying person giving reads

He was conftown and that's why you killed him. He was hoping that if he went all out on me that you'd keep him alive, wrongly, thinking he'd vote me.

Empking · Post Post #323 (isolation #49) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:27 am

2birds: To make it clear to you:

shos thinks that in 295, I was scum trying to defend my buddy, and in 300 I was scum trying to distance from my buddy since he was obviously getting lynched. He's throwing stuff out to see what sticks.

2birds got mhorke lynched. That's the root of his obv-towness. I'll admit I got it wrong on Mhorke.

Empking · Post Post #326 (isolation #50) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 4:36 am

In post 324, shos wrote:r if I were scum, killing batt would be the stupidest decision I could make. would be better to nokill or kill 2birds. Batt has never had anything against me, and has never had anything supporting you. me-scum would have absolutely no reason to have him killed even if he was conftown. we almost formed a voting bloc together, me and him, remember? your accusations are terribly far fetched.

I'm not sure if a single thing here is close to the truth.

P-edit: Because he voted mhork, compared to you posturing and hoping that I'd vote Batt so you and Mhork could quick hammer.

Empking · Post Post #328 (isolation #51) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 5:48 am

In post 327, shos wrote:empking, you do realize that I can still quickhammer if I was already voting mhork.?

not if I changed my mind about which of the two I found scummiest. If you had voted Mhok and I followed you then you may as well given up on that day, since going "unvote, wait a minute" would have been obvious.

and what you say also applies to Batt, who is conftown, so you kinda fail

no because Batt (in spirit) was already voting mhork (in spirit). He had committed to a Mhorke lynch.

Empking · Post Post #330 (isolation #52) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:41 am

In post 329, shos wrote:oh in spirit, and I haven't? reread 271, 273, 278.

You had not committed to a mhorke lynch in an anyway comparable way as Batt had. Not even comparable.

Empking · Post Post #332 (isolation #53) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 6:58 am

In post 331, shos wrote:well obviously, since Batt was CCed. but I'm not following your point. you're saying that I am scum because I haven't *really* voted and only committed to vote "but not enough", ignoring the fact that Batt himself asked us not to vote so that we can discuss?

Look, I'll tell you what. this is lylo, and it's 1v1 me vs you. I should not be teaching you; you're not supposed to come and tell 2b1s why YOU are voting me. you should be convincing HIM to vote me. so far all you've shown is that 2b1s is townier than me; you haven't shown, not even to a slightly remote extent, why 2b1s should think that I am scum.

in other words - if you don't have any reason to show how I am more likely scum than you, you're wasting your breath and my time.

LyoL cases are worthless for scumhunting. They're just rhetoric tools to get in the way of actual investigation; that's why you made one.

Empking · Post Post #334 (isolation #54) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 7:44 am

In post 333, shos wrote:no, lylo cases are the most important, because if you know who the scum is, it's all good, but it's not enough - to win you need to convince your mate(s) that the other is scum.

you are not at all trying to get me lynched. you're just trying to call me scum. that is not town behaviour.

That is exactly town behaviour: Both players, irrespective of alignment, are trying to get the other lynch. Trying to get the other lynch is just the battle of rhetorics.

Empking · Post Post #336 (isolation #55) » Thu Nov 15, 2012 7:57 am

In post 335, shos wrote:...but you're not doing that at all.

Yes, because I know 2birds can just read the thread to get a scumread on you.

Empking · Post Post #352 (isolation #56) » Sat Nov 17, 2012 9:11 am

http://www.quicktopic.com/48/H/2HmYeb7gGwba