Why?armlx wrote:Does this mean something? Show me where in that game you did the things I am attacking you for here, which could imply that they are not scummy behaviors by your meta.Firestarter wrote:Oh, really?
_____________________
[Note the visible line Im drawing under this...]
Simple. What I am doing with K7's meta to protect him is pointing out how the things he is doing right now aren't necessarily things that he does more often as scum. If you can prove that, the tells no longer apply and can be ignored in an attack as null tells.What will you hope to prove?
Are you really gonna base every assumption on a player, or try to strengthen what "you already think" based on a meta?
Somewhere between 50 and 100.How many games have you played here???
If they do that, I simply site games Y and Z where they are wrong.Im sure that any one player can go back and check all of your games, and if they want, contrive play to match whats happening here, or find opposite play when you were town....
armlx wrote:Simple. What I am doing with K7's meta to protect him is pointing out how the things he is doing right now aren't necessarily things that he does more often as scum. If you can prove that, the tells no longer apply and can be ignored in an attack as null tells.What will you hope to prove?
Are you really gonna base every assumption on a player, or try to strengthen what "you already think" based on a meta?
They are only null tells if you believe 100% that the accused is town.. You cannot possibly know this if you are town, and given K7's play, he is more scummier than town.
A Meta is not 100%, and I'd prefer if you didn't jump to "protect him" as you say, it seems every attack on him has you following with your comments...
...protecting him.. I dont like this.
Somewhere between 50 and 100.How many games have you played here???
Ok
If they do that, I simply site games Y and Z where they are wrong.Im sure that any one player can go back and check all of your games, and if they want, contrive play to match whats happening here, or find opposite play when you were town....
As can anyone attacking K7, they can cite games where he hasn been scum and played like this... if he has.
My point is interpretation, you interpret K7's play in this thread as town based on other games, 5 games wasn't it, have you actually looked at the games you did not play in involving K7?
Theres also the idea he has seen you were in the game, done a meta on you, and seen that you "do" metas on players, and has adapted his playstyle to that of a townie in other games he played with you...
This is equally possible to him being town based on a meta...
Its interpretation, and I dont like how you are so lenient on 1 player because of it.
The fact remains K7 has acted very scummy in this thread as opposed to others... No amount of meta can change this.
CF Riot wrote:No he doesn't. What happened to saying he was steering the Forbid lynch? You decided not to use that anymore since I pointed out he wasn't?Knight of Cydonia wrote:
As I pointed out in my PBPA, he also at two points in Day 1 implies that he knows fobiddan isn't town.
andvote forbiddanlight
please dont vote yourself and hunt scum thanks.
Yes, he does.ive allready stated what i think of self voting if your town.
so dont self hammer, thanks. unless your scum
You don't have to believe someone is town for something to be a null tell. If you come in on page 50 and start citing someone who has done numerous scummy things all game as being scummy for "random voting", its fair to say that is a null tell.Firestarter wrote:[
They are only null tells if you believe 100% that the accused is town.. You cannot possibly know this if you are town, and given K7's play, he is more scummier than town.
A Meta is not 100%, and I'd prefer if you didn't jump to "protect him" as you say, it seems every attack on him has you following with your comments...
...protecting him.. I dont like this.
I am merely interpreting it as not scummy enough to lynch, not town or scum necessarily, which means that a lynch on him is essentially random aka poor idea right now.My point is interpretation, you interpret K7's play in this thread as town based on other games, 5 games wasn't it, have you actually looked at the games you did not play in involving K7?
Theres also the idea he has seen you were in the game, done a meta on you, and seen that you "do" metas on players, and has adapted his playstyle to that of a townie in other games he played with you...
This is equally possible to him being town based on a meta...
Its interpretation, and I dont like how you are so lenient on 1 player because of it.
The fact remains K7 has acted very scummy in this thread as opposed to others... No amount of meta can change this.
Well I see you as scum right now if that wasnt obvious by my posts so far in this game, if it hasnt been maybe I need to be clearer. The point is, my vote of you falls under your third line, I see you as scum and by avoiding my case, people seem to be disregarding your case and going to one I dont favor in comparison. So I am putting a pressure vote on you to get some answers and to get other people to pay attention as well.Corinthian wrote:Town doesn't vote someone they think is probably town just to get a reaction.
It's simply not rational to think that voting someone will gently indicate to them that you'd like a reasonable, well-thought out case now, please.
Players lay pressure votes on what they see as potential scum.
Not true. I can vote for quite a few people without getting OMGUSed, although some people seem to OMGUS regardless. If you are saying someone OMGUSing a case against them is a scum tell against the person pushing the case because they are fishing for an overreaction, then I dont know what to say. OMGUS = slight scum tell.This generally provokes an OMGUS reaction, which the pressurevoter then takes as confirmation of their hunch.
*facepalm* no no no. With this logic if I was scum, I would just need to lurk and whoever votes me gets lynched for trying to make me look bad. This sound pretty defensive to me, as you are turning the fact that I am attacking you as a point against me.The reason to lay a vote on someone "to make them speak up" is so that they'll say something you can use to attack them with.
I cant comment on this without losing it.Ninja, post 881 was a good way to get a reaction from me. Simple, direct, non-antagonistic questions.
Actually there is a wagon on you right now, and by my quick count, you are tied with K7 for the votelead (at last). The K7 vote seems very opportunistic though when compared to what you had been saying. There were a few mentions of you feeling uneasy about K7, although you never started pushing a case against him. FL was what you spent most of D1 and D1.5 setting up, and when it died out, you left that to move to K7. Now with what you just said, you have it set up to move back to FL if K7 gets lynched (or vice-versa) regardless of what happens with their flips. I am getting a feeling that we have Corin-scum and FL/K7 town here given how he is playing.regarding Faerie: yes, absolutely. I'm voting k7 because he's scummy, too. If they're both scum, then who cares what order we lynch them in?
regarding my play vs k7: this one will take longer to respond to. A big difference would be that despite Llama's best efforts, there is no wagon on me that I would need to hide from.
(Have to go to work now. Will almost surely have time tomorrow for more posting.)
However, Im liking the Corinthian wagon alot more at this point.armlx wrote: You don't have to believe someone is town for something to be a null tell.
If you come in on page 50 and start citing someone who has done numerous scummy things all game as being scummy for "random voting", its fair to say that is a null tell.
Im agreed on this point, but its not the case with K7 in here.
The reason for every attack having my comments is because I have yet to see an attack that is not disrupted by his meta.
But the whole point of my attacks are to gauge the named player, your input, although welcome in parts, stops input from the named player from being posted.
As can anyone attacking K7, they can cite games where he hasn been scum and played like this... if he has.
_________________________________________________________
I am merely interpreting it as not scummy enough to lynch, not town or scum necessarily, which means that a lynch on him is essentially random aka poor idea right now.
Not random, its that you dont believe in the reasons given from the players voting/suspecting him.
It very much falls on the interpretation of different players views.
What is the case with K7 then?Im agreed on this point, but its not the case with K7 in here.
How?But the whole point of my attacks are to gauge the named player, your input, although welcome in parts, stops input from the named player from being posted.
If you lynch someone for a bunch of null tells, it is essentially random.Not random, its that you dont believe in the reasons given from the players voting/suspecting him.
It very much falls on the interpretation of different players views
Sounds like a terrible deal. you can't discount analysis just because it was wrong once before.SpyreX wrote:I said it before, and I'll say it again. If it comes down to lynching Corin, fine. If he turns up town, the word meta becomes a lynchable offense and we lynch K7. Deal?
Your play here constitutes a large shift from the normal active player, which was untrue of the last game according to the person who said that in this thread.what the hell is this? I've only played one game on this site. How can you possibly say my behavior differs from my observed town norm based on one game of hurry-up mafia?
Sure, I'll bite.Lets just start from the beginning. Would someone care to summarize the cases on each person who they think meta is being used to skew an attack on?