+- Eagle Time (https://eagle-time.org)
+-- Forum: Archive (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Forum: Adventures and Games (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=30)
+---- Forum: Forum Games (https://eagle-time.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Thread: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Five? (3/21) (/showthread.php?tid=413)
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - amosmyn - 04-30-2013
GX has been replaced by Coldblooded
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - amosmyn - 04-30-2013
Also for the sake of making things easier, the Crooks Hollow has the nickname "The Town". Its canon.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Granolaman - 04-30-2013
Credit that wall is nigh on unreadable. You need to :
A: Attach names to each read and "point"
B: Attach posts numbers to each one as well
I think you fell into the same problem as Yewchung on my posts where you got really fucking fixated on my Frago vote (which I retracted after it was revealed to be an honest mistake) and failed to read everything else
You've also got conflicting reads. You're just going by what's strange versus who's arguing with who. (namely everyone I've defended you read as town and everyone I've argued with you read as scum, yet I'm like your scummiest read overall?)
Also if I have the most scum points does that mean I'm winning?
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - ICan'tGiveCredit - 04-30-2013
(04-30-2013, 04:36 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »You've also got conflicting reads. You're just going by what's strange versus who's arguing with who. (namely everyone I've defended you read as town and everyone I've argued with you read as scum, yet I'm like your scummiest read overall?)
nO, that is purely a coincidence.
PLus i never even saw you defending them
or my sleep-deprived eyes somehow skipped over those parts
(04-30-2013, 04:36 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »Also if I have the most scum points does that mean I'm winning?
Yes, you have a score of negative twenty-seven
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Cat - 04-30-2013
I feel like credit is town but his reads are junky.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - ICan'tGiveCredit - 04-30-2013
(04-30-2013, 07:46 PM)Cat Wrote: »I feel like credit is town but his reads are junky.
I don't know why my reads are considered junky. post #324 shows what the overall reads are for you guys and post #310 can be used for reference as to why.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Granolaman - 04-30-2013
Dude you /just/ admitted you hadn't actually read the posts. Your reads are junky. Next time try focusing on a couple people at a time.
For instance: Tell me specifically why Anacreon, Cat, Beru and myself are your top scum reads. Cite your sources.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - ICan'tGiveCredit - 04-30-2013
OK
Anac is scum because this here post shows him siding with Mathgirl despiting knowing full well that Mathgirl already knows that her questions (CDV) don't work.
and then cat voting mathgirl for no reason here. Yeah doth that not make her scum?
And then you:
[/quote]
Fuck yeah bandwagons! But no, Mathgirl's clean with me. This game was having a slow time starting up and she tried getting the conversation going, despite the lynch-drawing way she did it. Even if she starts acting super scummy I'd still say keep her around for now.
[/quote]
post 146
what's THIS then???????? Jumping on bandwagons, that's scummy. And keeping mathgirl even if she's acting scummy.
SO SHOULD WE LYNCH TOWNIES THAT HAVEN'T POSTED AND NOT LYNCH SCUM THAT DO?!
---------------------------------
How's that?
-------------------------------
This all I can gather for now as I may/may not be gone for 22 hours. I might be able to come on a bit later, I might not.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - AKillerCuppaTea - 04-30-2013
The way i see it, there are three main reasons no one died tonight:
1) Roleblocker - in which case, i think the roleblocker should claim.
2) Doctor/other protective role - in which case, stay shush about it
3) Mafia decided to no kill (for some absurd reason).
Oh, and: Vote: Mirdini
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Palamedes - 04-30-2013
Why Tea why. Not so sure a roleblocker should pop up right now because, as Tea pointed out, the kill could have easily been stopped by a doctor. (Also want to see logic re: Dinivote because he's one of my better townreads.)
Also: anacreon you still haven't said what the fuck is up with you. Because something happened to me last night that seems to imply that you're wonky as shit.
Oh yeah Pilot any info?
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Granolaman - 04-30-2013
Credit confirmed as raving lunatic. Moving on.
Re: Roleblocker claiming. I think we should give people the chance to claim roleblocked first. Town will want to claim it to help clear up what happened last night and to protect the roleblocker's identity. If no one claims in, let's say 48 hours, then the roleblocker should come forward with their target and we'll have ourselves a strong scumspect.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - 0_o - 04-30-2013
(04-30-2013, 10:23 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »Credit confirmed as raving lunatic. Moving on.
Not really, though he seems to be a bit disorganized.
(04-30-2013, 09:15 PM)ICantGiveCredit Wrote: »Quote:Fuck yeah bandwagons! But no, Mathgirl's clean with me. This game was having a slow time starting up and she tried getting the conversation going, despite the lynch-drawing way she did it. Even if she starts acting super scummy I'd still say keep her around for now.
post 146
what's THIS then???????? Jumping on bandwagons, that's scummy. And keeping mathgirl even if she's acting scummy.
SO SHOULD WE LYNCH TOWNIES THAT HAVEN'T POSTED AND NOT LYNCH SCUM THAT DO?!
Granola, from an objective point of view it's fine that you're fine with Mathgirl, but not that you want to keep someone who's acting scummy. I'm not sure if you mis-worded something, but Credit's right and BAD POLICY.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Cat - 04-30-2013
Keeping people who talk is bad policy?
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Granolaman - 04-30-2013
At this point I'm almost certain I'm miswording things or at least hiding relevant info underneath piles of crap. Anyways in Post 149 I've already defended my stance and mentioned that it wasn't absolute. Everyone who's bitching at me about it seems to overlook that post.
And Credit, I take back the lunatic part, you're just extremely newbish. Instead of analyzing actions and grouping them as scummy or not scummy, you need to look at why people are doing those actions.
Also your "evidence" against cat and anacreon are both from super early game (you also said one's scum for voting MG while the other's scum for defending her?!)
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - AKillerCuppaTea - 05-01-2013
(04-30-2013, 10:07 PM)Palamedes Wrote: »Also want to see logic re: Dinivote because he's one of my better townreads.
Ironically, because key people have him as a town read. Why? What has he done? For what reason is he particularly townie? From my PoV, the only things he's really talked about is mechanics-related thing which in my eyes is always pretty much a null read. Scum can easily say "this hyopthetical role should do this to be pro-town!" and it looks really good, cos in a way, it IS pro-town to say these things, but in actuality it saves them from actually having to have an opinion on other people in the game.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - 0_o - 05-01-2013
(04-30-2013, 11:06 PM)Cat Wrote: »Keeping people who talk is bad policy?
Keeping people who talk even when/if they act "super scummy" is bad policy.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - ICan'tGiveCredit - 05-01-2013
(04-30-2013, 11:06 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »At this point I'm almost certain I'm miswording things or at least hiding relevant info underneath piles of crap. Anyways in Post 149 I've already defended my stance and mentioned that it wasn't absolute. Everyone who's bitching at me about it seems to overlook that post.That's not a good defense of your stance considering you're asking us to overlook a post that is trying to "get the game rolling" in the wrong direction (that is, with her immediately placed in a box labeled, "Town") and now you've snowballed with it and man, now accusations are flying!
(04-30-2013, 11:06 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »And Credit, I take back the lunatic part, you're just extremely newbish. Instead of analyzing actions and grouping them as scummy or not scummy, you need to look at why people are doing those actions.
I thought it's already apparent why people do it but okay:
If you're defending someone who made a nonsensical post a.k.a ("I know these questions are bad buuut... let's answer them anyway!" and statements like these may be harmless in real life, but in mafia, they are an attempt at making one's self look town despite contributing almost zero effort) then that means you're allied with them. You don't want to get them in trouble. But that comes at a risk of sharing the blame if the post was as "weird" as MG's was.
As I stated before in the clusterfuck that is post 310, the posts are "weird" for a reason. A bad reason. Those statements are wolves in sheep's clothing. They are therefore scummy and defending them makes you look the same way.
(04-30-2013, 11:06 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »Also your "evidence" against cat and anacreon are both from super early game (you also said one's scum for voting MG while the other's scum for defending her?!)The posts in question were overlooked and and now I'm shedding light on how they're not actually sufficiently good stances!
Also, it's one thing to defend mathgirl with really bad reasons "Hey, there's no harm in saying that! She's only trying to 'get the game rolling'!" but it's another to vote mathgirl with no reason provided. The reasons why anacreon and cat are scum, respectively (anac defending w/ bad reasoning & cat voting w/o reasoning).
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - anacreon - 05-01-2013
Pala i dont know how to respond to that with out claiming.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - anacreon - 05-01-2013
ebwop: but yes i am wonky.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - seastormjt - 05-01-2013
I wonder how people would react if I said Anacreon was 100% town.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - Palamedes - 05-01-2013
I'd react reasonably well and would ask for his opinion on Mirdini/Pilot. Now. I'd also ask you to not be so ridiculously obvious.
He's just wonky as hell and last night was messed up.
And Tea I'm not so happy with that? I mean if you want my reasons I can say that nothing he's said has pinged badly with me, he defended people who were not lurking from being lurkerlynched (as opposed to Garuru who just said 'I am not lurkerlynching this specific guy'), and he was one of the main guys breaking things out of RVS. 'I think he's scum because other people think he's town' on its own is a terrible reason to vote someone regardless.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - ICan'tGiveCredit - 05-01-2013
Sea, i'd react with this
![[Image: Facepalm_facepalm.png]](https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-QxXzCX1G_5Y/UP6CjTJ2QPI/AAAAAAAAAgc/Ib7-kHlT0jo/s1600/Facepalm_facepalm.png)
Also, you're the guy in the back.
Maybe I wouldn't react with that if you gave some definitive reasons why though even I wouldn't be able to come up with any
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - TehPilot - 05-01-2013
(05-01-2013, 01:26 AM)seastormjt Wrote: »I wonder how people would react if I said Anacreon was 100% town.
I'm okay with this.
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - seastormjt - 05-01-2013
Eh
Nope
RE: -=- Crooks Hollow III Mafia -=- Day Two: Back to the Tables (21/21) - TehPilot - 05-01-2013
(04-30-2013, 10:07 PM)Palamedes Wrote: »Oh yeah Pilot any info?
Got warning I was struck with a pre-night action. If it's what I think it is, then it's made Anacreon a better read in my eyes.