I'm not even going to come close to trying to fix the BB formatting. I am just going to quote his responses, and respond to them. If you're not sure what any particular point is referencing, then you have two courses of action:
1) Ask.
2) Read back to my original post and his original response.
Ectomancer wrote:Once again, TSQ is out to convince everyone that he is a uniquely brilliant tactician. We all know that various players do all types of things to break out of the random stage. However in this game, TSQ seems to feel that he is the first person to ever try a stunt on page 1. Guess what, it happens all the time, and screwing with the person pulling the stunt is not a tell of any kind, regardless of how proud you are of it.
The part about the daykill is equally ridiculous. He is bothered about mentioning the possiblity of a daykill? Maybe he shouldn't have said it himself then? Still if you need it spelled out for you, why did I mention the daykill in my vote? Hello McFly, in your statement you claimed that you would kill the next mother fucker who voted for you. Kison voted for you, thereby "volunteering" to be the day kill be you since he was the "next mother fucker". That meant it was safe for anyone else to vote you today, hence my reference to YOUR statement.
"This post almost looks like he's TRYING to get kison daykilled."
This line must be here for dramatic effect.
Ecto has a habit. Instead of arguing against a point, he'll make up a new point, and pretend that's what you said all along. Right here, he's trying to belittle my point by saying that I claim to be a brilliant tactician who was the first one who thought that acting like a moron d1 might bring results. You might notice, as well, that this has nothing to do with my point, is completely false, and is also not at all responsive to my actual argument that there is a townie way AND a scummy way that people can react to such tomfoolery. I described EXACTLY what I thought was a tell, and why. His only ACTUAL response to the attack is "THis is not a tell of any kind." That's pretty piss poor for a block of text that big.
Then...He concedes my point on kison. My logic was this: Scum would want to vote me, but would not want to vote first, because a scum would fear the poossivle day kill more, because there are less scums then towns. Ectos response basically says "What? Of course I voted him...Someone already agreed to be the daykill." Way to bite RIGHT into my attack. Next time read the argument before responding so indignantly.
Then he says I'm "being dramatic." Well... Actually, I was just reinforcing my logic, which you completely ignored.
<<<>> Alright, first I am not addressing his detailed contention that LAL is a poor strategy. Well let's look at it.
Ectomancer wrote:1) Lynch all liars is dumb meta game strategy, you can ask anyone good and they will tell you this
Whoa! How in depth, cutting and incisive. How could I not have remembered to respond in kind? I guess Jeep isn't (or wasn't) a "good" player. I'm afraid I will have to side with a player who seems to be an icon on the site than the self-described disruptive moronic player. >>>>>
Once again, ecto has ignored my point. Whether or not LAL is or is not a good strategy was IRRELEVENT to my attack on him here. My argument was that he did not even attempt to argue against it, but instead tried to make me look worse by citing a joke which was in a different post, and then attacked CPE for nothing more than disagreeing with him about what is valid town strategy. His comments here about jeep, (most of his tells are regarded, even by him, to be outdated, BeeTeeDubs.) while very snarky and clever, are completely irrelevant to my attack, which still goes unresponded to.
Ectomancer wrote:Yes...yes I did use 1 post to attack you for 2 separate posts...so?? I can only imagine you are trying to fluff your case here. And No, I did not say I was doing the same thing you were doing (AKA acting like a moron). The only thing we did that was similiar was to do something to get out of the random stage. Our actual practice of it was you acting like a moron and me voting for the moron, which, as I said is no more of a tell than you acting like the moron.
Wow...Ecto...Wow... read my case, THEN FUCKING RESPOND TO IT. I am claiming that you made an attack based off of the fact that I pointed out that there were two posts in one post, concealed as one. Once again, his snarky, indignant reply is non topical.
As to the performative contradiction: Ecto, my dear lad. I provided reasoning, and logic as to why scumz would act a certain way in response to my tells. You have not once said WHY scum would react to your behavior, therefore it is more moronic then anything I have done.
My logic is this: Scum want easy lynches. The player acting like a moron is an easy lynch, a lot of the time, therefore scum will attack the player acting like a moron and attempt to get them lynched.
This is my biggest argument against you, and yet you seem completely incapable of actually responding to it.
Ectomancer wrote:Let me take the opportunity to address this old situation again since TSQ brought it up.
He never explained his insult. Oh sure, he explained the
story behind the insult
, but never why he made it in the first place. I do have a reason. It was a scummy personal attack which I find to be a tell for scum who want to gain some element in the conversation, whether it be to add seeming weight to an argument, or to try and lower the relevance of another players comments.
Guys, lets continue the trend of ecto stating random filler crap that doesn't respond to my arguments! Also, he's dead lying here! I did explain what it was for...
TSQ wrote:Good, I was worried. Now, the first thing I have already explained. You know how in the random stage people push people hard...Well...You know, randomly? That's what I was doing. Quag is in a clan called "No Fat Chicks" on mtg: salvation, and I was joking trying to get him to vote for you. It wasn't an actual insult.
Looks to me like some good old explaining about what it was all about. The way people try to get silly bandwagons day 1... Yeah...I can't bring myself to believe he just forgot about this point, because not only was it addressed to him, but he responded to it.
Ectomancer wrote:Im proud of TSQ for this one. Now he uses his refusal to actually address my point about personal attacks being a bad argument style and more likely to be used by scum, to say that I am "harping" on his interjection of a personal jibe into our discussion. No, he was far too busy trying to convince us that it was nothing to look at. I dont call it "harping", I call it being tenacious and refusing to let your mistake just drop unaddressed.
I am getting tired of saying this guys, but, once again, ecto misses the point. My argument was that he is continually attacking a non issue in order to poison my well. This is an argument he does not respond to (something else I am getting tired of saying, Bee tee dubz) But furthermore, read it. If the whole "Ecto is a fat chick" seemed like an argument to ANYONE ELSE HERE, I will eat my hat. There is literally nothing attackish about it.
Ectomancer wrote:Backing down? It's called applying pressure and moving along when you have the information you wanted.
I wouldn't call catching someone in a lie an arbitrary reason. You still are not getting license to lie from me. I know you are trying to put the onus on me by claiming "Im going to lie as town, so deal with it.". My position is, "If I catch you lying, I'm going to lynch you". If you are in a game with me, deal with that fact.
No, it's called testing the waters. If I had drawn a couple more votes, and people had started voicing support for your theories, THEN YOU WOULD HAVE STAYED ON ME. THis is not inherently scummy on it's own, but look at your voting history this game: You have consistantly stayed on the most popular bandwagon at the time. This is where this point derives it's impact.
Ectomancer wrote:You preface by saying that posts 9-12 are not game related but are deriving scumtells from them? Posts 9-12 were me dealing with you and your friends being a bunch of assholes. You know that, the rest of the players know that. I get the impression you added this in to add to the volume of this post. "There is so much material he must be scum!"
Ok guys. Here's the list of arguments I made in the paragraph he was "responding to":
1) The fact that he wants to have someone bandwagoned for non-game reasons is scummy.
2) Scum would want to jump on a wagon being championed by someone else.
3) He's possibly setting up a 1-2 misslynch.
4) He attacks aniX with personal attacks, which is one of his own scum tells, since people often derive their scum tells from what they themselves do as scum, this is damning.
Can you guess how many of those arguments he actually just responded to? If you guessed NONE YOU WIN!
Ectomancer wrote:I apologize to the rest of the players. I realize this should have just been sent as a PM directly to the mod to avoid derailing the conversation.
Carry on, I shall lurk in the meantime.
Ectomancer wrote:Again you grab an off topic post to find scumtells. Every member of this game deserved that apology from me. Every member of the game is STILL waiting on your apology for contributing to the derailing of the game over something as simple as using forum names. I'm sure they will never get it. Town take note now at the volume of material in this "case" that is essentially fluff to make it look bigger and more impressive. Pay attention to his phrasing that I "backed out of my position under pressure" as if it were a bandwagon or something game related at question, when in fact it was over whether those players were breaking forum rules by using names other than players forum names.
hehehe...The volume of the case isn't fluff. YOU are just not answering arguments. That makes one of us look bad. And guess what, it's not me.
Pressure in a mafia game refers to more than votes: It refers to the sway of town opinion. What I was noting, is whenever the town seems to disagree with Mr. Ecto, Mr. Ecto seems to run away with his tail between his legs, and that is not something which is pro town. Mr. Ecto may want you to believe its just fluff, but it's actually a pretty substantial scum tell to look for town approval for your actions.
Ectomancer wrote:Really? I hopped onto the bandwagon with the most momentum? I voted Quagmire who had at the time....zero votes. In other words, no bandwagon at all. Also, where are the "out of game feelings"? I see speculation about roles based upon game flavor myself. Another example of building a case with fluff, or, dare I say it, an outright fabricated statement about me jumping on a bandwagon
that didnt exist even in the form of 1 vote.
Ok...Stop the attack right here for a second, because I want to explain something which I honestly think you don't understand (this is also not meant to be patronizing...Sorry if it is.) Because he doesn't understand this, this response is not scummy to me. If he did, this would probably be one of my biggest points of analysis.
See, momentum is not only comprised of votes: It's also comprised of town opinion. If there is a lot of town opinion pushing in one area, it is as momentum inducing as votes, in my opinion. There was a lot of discussion as to whether quag was the actual play or not, and you jumping in there seemed opportunistic. YOu can ride momentum and beat the actual votes, but you can't beat the momentum itself.
Taken out of context here. Go re-read the arguments over the forum names. The Anix vote was an OMGUS vote because I thought he was being a dumbass. If you think that Anix vote was anything other than me being irritated with that clique of people, then go ahead and chalk up a point for TSQ. For the rest of you, TSQ saying it doesnt make it so. People regularly put votes on other players for various reasons that dont always iinclude lynching them on the spot. This particular quote here is me trying in vain to get something out of Quag other than "vote Anix".
TSQ wrote:I know what he’s going to say in response to this “I wasn’t advocating an AniX lynch.” But that’s the point. A vote IS an advocacy. It’s saying “I want this person lynched.” And since I already said that he was hiding behind someone pushing the wagon, I don’t find this response all too compelling.
Ecto wrote:Baseless opinion comment by TSQ
Which is responding to baseless idle speculation by you. Jesus. You need to learn how to read. I have said numerous times that you seem to want to talk about non game related stuff more than game related stuff, you'd think you'd actually respond to such an argument...You know...Once.
Really? TSQ himself just illustrated that I was the one getting irritated with Quag. I was the one who put the first vote on him for his play. I was the one who put pressure on him to say something more than "vote Anix". I was the one who gave him some breathing room and then yes, voted him again when he refused to change his playstyle. And ladies and Gents, once again, I somehow jumped on the biggest wagon
despite there being zero votes on Quag at the time.
Mine was the first and Dean added his not long after.
Remember what I said about momentum. It's key here. A lot of people had been expressing anger and frustration at quag. The momentum was there, while the votes were not. Your vote was just the actualization of that momentum. I have already analzyed ad nauseum why voting players for out of game reasons is scummy, and since ecto has not responded to any of the other times, I will not post that reasoning here...
I don't think you have a grasp at all. I tell you who would vote for someone playing like Quag is playing. Town who needs every town body actively working to locate scum. Quag is of no help. Only scum would support not putting any pressure on a player who is not of help to the town
No. Actually, I would NEVER vote for a player like quag. EVER. You know why? Because a townie body is important just for it's not being scum. Mafia is a game of NUMBERS. Town needs to keep its numbers from reaching that of the informed minority, or it's GG. Advocating lynching someone for non game reasons means that you are advocating bringing the town one person closer to losing, and that sir, is about as anti town as you can get. YOU are the one missing the point.
ecto wrote:Now I'm to blame (again) for not playing his game of "I've got a secret" the way he wants. If you've got information, say it. You're acting like a pre-pubescent girl teasing her friends with the latest gossip. If you're town and have information we should hear, spit it out. Speaking of which, where is this "juicy info"? No lame excuses like saying "this case on you was the juice". I've clearly shown this case was much more of a raisin than a grape
Remember what I said about people deriving their scum tells from what they themselves do as scum. Remember ecto saying that it is scummy to attempt to pad arguments with petty insults? Put those together here.
Hope you all make the right choice.