Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
Oooh. Nice find! As you said, it might mean nothing but it's curious.
Also, at this point in the game I feel that the feeble reasons I had to vote for Misting are not enough anymore so for now, I'll unvote.
However, I'll keep my FoS raised at him after seeing him berate kank and PG for using the "noob" excuse when doing so is simply expected noob behavior and not really a scum tell (unless they were trying to use that excuse to try to fix an unmistakable scum tell they leaked before, which neither of them has, as far as I can tell.)
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
I play a lot of games and read a lot of games and tend to know if a player has been around much at all. That being said, when I read the player list, I thought that Ferro Man, Raging Levine, Misting, Captain Eddie, LampDwellr, Kank, Tom, Macius, Bolly, A Bear, Stardust, PG and Maokun were all noobs. I recognize only some of those names and that's only because mafia isn't the only part of the forum I read. Furthermore, EtR, Reya, Kahedron, and IB are all newer players, not quite noob anymore, but still figuring out the game. Maybe Kahedron is more experienced that I'm thinking, but he plays very few games from what I've seen. That leaves Seppel, Wrath of Dog, Dork Knight, Wessel and Voxxicus as players that I know have experience playing this game.
Also, I believe this is particularly useful information.
It occurs to me that noob-bashing is mostly town behavior. Scum gains little by targeting a noob town: he or she will likely be easily suggestionable or misplay and be mistaken by scum later in the game so he or she actually have possibilities of becoming an asset. On the other hand, town loses very little from noob-bashing early on: if they catch a noob scum, it's great, but if they accidentally lynch a noob town the loss is almost irrelevant in the long run while -in a game with so many noobs as this- risking to lynch one of the few veteran town is a loss that far outweighs the benefit of somehow catching a veteran scum early on. Specially since scum will most likely make a priority of nightkilling veteran towns.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
Why would you make a vote on me for acting the same way I did in the two games I had with you? In both of those games I was town.
It seems like you are aware of how easily I got killed those two games and are trying to make that happen again.
Self-meta is the worst kind of meta. It's not a good defense.
Please elaborate. What do you mean?
Does it make sense to you for person A to vote for person B based on the fact that person B's attitude is the same as it was in other games... in which person B was town?
Why would you make a vote on me for acting the same way I did in the two games I had with you? In both of those games I was town.
It seems like you are aware of how easily I got killed those two games and are trying to make that happen again.
Self-meta is the worst kind of meta. It's not a good defense.
Please elaborate. What do you mean?
Does it make sense to you for person A to vote for person B based on the fact that person B's attitude is the same as it was in other games... in which person B was town?
No, it doesn't make sense for me to vote for anyone based exclusively on behaviour in past games, because meta is stupid.
And that's all I'm hearing from you here. You need to learn to defend yourself with something that isn't just "But I did it the same way this one time when I was town!"
Meta is stupid, because players play into their meta.
If a given player can play like they would as Town when in fact they are scum, and they can then point to games where they did the same "townie things" and everyone takes it as granted that they're town because they did certain "townie things they do every game", then it comes back to bite you in the ass if you give them a pass. It's even more dodgy and bad if they point to their own meta as a reason for poor play.
So, my summary is: Meta is a super weak tell at best, but if someone points to their own meta as excuse for poor play... It's lazy and no excuse for a proper defense.
Don't just say "I did it THIS WAY in that one game where I was Town". That's lazy.
Provide reasoning, tell us what you were thinking when you posted x or y. Honestly I don't even know why you are self-meta-ing right now, but it's a bad crutch for bad play.
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
Right now Stardust feels really scummy for his strange, terribad meta vote, as well as ignoring my points / question about it. WoD also seems scummy, because it feels like he is working with Stardust (trying to get pressure on me while attempting to get pressure off of Stardust) and he is using awful logic.
Before I vote fore anyone, though, I really want to hear Stardust's response.
Well, you see son, sometimes, a man has to think things over before he makes a big decision. If ya just fire up the lawnmower and have at it before you think it through, you'll never have an award winning turf.
Why is making a simple vote a "big decision" in your view?
You seem to be convieniently forgetting how this particualr meta got started, with Stardust voting Tom because he was acting the same whay he was in other games. What Tom is doing is pointing out that in those games, he was town, therefore Stardust's vote only makes sense if his reasoning is "Tom is acting the same as he does as town on purpose because he is scum", which is certainly not the argument.
In summary, Tom was defending against meta by pointing out the flaw with it.
This is so obvious to me, I have a hard time beliveing your not intentionally twisting it. Vote: Wrath of Dog
Wut... I was just pointing out why self-meta is bad. I was not attacking Tom. I was just calling out something he said which irritated me. As I said in my post, I don't know how it started.
Also: Bad news... I'm losing access to internet at work due to people being idiots, so I'm going to have to request replacement in this game, which is irritating.
I'm sorry guys, I was looking forward to playing in this game.
Perhaps you guys can have an Iso brought into this game at claim range
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
Right now Stardust feels really scummy for his strange, terribad meta vote, as well as ignoring my points / question about it. WoD also seems scummy, because it feels like he is working with Stardust (trying to get pressure on me while attempting to get pressure off of Stardust) and he is using awful logic.
Before I vote fore anyone, though, I really want to hear Stardust's response.
Once again, I have to say... wut?
Working with Stardust?
I don't even know who he is. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, as I said, I took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rant about meta.
Why would you make a vote on me for acting the same way I did in the two games I had with you? In both of those games I was town.
It seems like you are aware of how easily I got killed those two games and are trying to make that happen again.
Self-meta is the worst kind of meta. It's not a good defense.
Please elaborate. What do you mean?
Does it make sense to you for person A to vote for person B based on the fact that person B's attitude is the same as it was in other games... in which person B was town?
No, it doesn't make sense for me to vote for anyone based exclusively on behaviour in past games, because meta is stupid.
And that's all I'm hearing from you here. You need to learn to defend yourself with something that isn't just "But I did it the same way this one time when I was town!"
Meta is stupid, because players play into their meta.
If a given player can play like they would as Town when in fact they are scum, and they can then point to games where they did the same "townie things" and everyone takes it as granted that they're town because they did certain "townie things they do every game", then it comes back to bite you in the ass if you give them a pass. It's even more dodgy and bad if they point to their own meta as a reason for poor play.
So, my summary is: Meta is a super weak tell at best, but if someone points to their own meta as excuse for poor play... It's lazy and no excuse for a proper defense.
Don't just say "I did it THIS WAY in that one game where I was Town". That's lazy.
Provide reasoning, tell us what you were thinking when you posted x or y. Honestly I don't even know why you are self-meta-ing right now, but it's a bad crutch for bad play.
Several times in this post you say I have "bad play" or "poor play". Why do you think I'm playing badly or poorly?
You seem to be convieniently forgetting how this particualr meta got started, with Stardust voting Tom because he was acting the same whay he was in other games. What Tom is doing is pointing out that in those games, he was town, therefore Stardust's vote only makes sense if his reasoning is "Tom is acting the same as he does as town on purpose because he is scum", which is certainly not the argument.
In summary, Tom was defending against meta by pointing out the flaw with it.
This is so obvious to me, I have a hard time beliveing your not intentionally twisting it. Vote: Wrath of Dog
Wut... I was just pointing out why self-meta is bad. I was not attacking Tom. I was just calling out something he said which irritated me.As I said in my post, I don't know how it started.
Also: Bad news... I'm losing access to internet at work due to people being idiots, so I'm going to have to request replacement in this game, which is irritating.
I'm sorry guys, I was looking forward to playing in this game.
Perhaps you guys can have an Iso brought into this game at claim range
What is the difference between attacking me and calling out something I said?
Where did you say in your post that "you don't know how it started"?
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
Right now Stardust feels really scummy for his strange, terribad meta vote, as well as ignoring my points / question about it. WoD also seems scummy, because it feels like he is working with Stardust (trying to get pressure on me while attempting to get pressure off of Stardust) and he is using awful logic.
Before I vote fore anyone, though, I really want to hear Stardust's response.
Once again, I have to say... wut?
Working with Stardust?
I don't even know who he is. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, as I said, I took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rant about meta.
Why do you say "wut?" like I'm not making sense and then pretty much concede to my points later in the same post?
What do you mean by "I don't even know who he is"? You don't know him personally? You don't know him around the site? Seems like an awful way to claim that he is not your scum buddy.
Where did you say previously that "you took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rand about meta"?
How did you not understand the context, when, in the original post (the first quoted post in this very post I'm typing) you quoted two posts made by me that pretty much explained the context?
Eron why the vote? Despite having a quote that is ultimately a barn to move the game on a bit your vote is nude. Of the pair why did you go for I.Baloth who merely agreed with the sentiment as opposed to Wessel who suggested it.
I can answer this, but I won't, since you addressed it to Eron.
Why post this? Seems like yet another post that is completely pointless and just serves the purpose to make us think you are town.
Also, ***, it seems you missed my above question. Please answer it, and then answer Kahedron's question (Eron already answered it, and I want to see what you have to say, specifically, in answer to Kahedron's question).
(bolded and oranged for emphasis)
Please do that before you go.
------------------
Also, Eron, I'd like you to do something very similar. In the following post, you pretty much said that you had a response to my question. I'd like your response now.
Does it make sense to you for person A to vote for person B based on the fact that person B's attitude is the same as it was in other games... in which person B was town?
You also claimed that the coming interaction between me and *** was most likely going to be important. I believe the interaction you were referring to has transpired, so what are your thoughts on it?
A. Your frustration at non-playing players is fine, we are all frustrated that they aren't playing. However, the solution to that problem is and has always been asking the mod to find a replacement. Voting for a player that's not in the game is a scum strategy. Not only does it let you vote and attack someone who doesn't fight back, but it makes you look like you are providing content to the thread without actually providing anything. That's why I'm calling you scummy.
D. This is the kind of thinking that made me call A Bear obvtown. While I'm inclined to believe you hear, the fact is that you made this comment after I had declared mass=paranoia to be a towntell. There's no way of knowing if your faking it or not. BTW, the jokey "Who's there?" bit at the beginning of this makes me less inclined to believe it.
E. Like I've said before, while I have a problem with your research, it's not what makes you scum to me. Its that you have been hiding behind the research in order to justify you not actually voting anyone in the game. You were using that research to post non-content things and appear useful to the town, your posts were all for appearances. I thought it looked scummy, I disproved the legitimacy of the research and I proceeded to explain my thought process and place my vote. I fail to see how that's predatory in any way, I made a case and made my vote. You OMGUS'd me, proceeded to skew my attack to be more about the research than anything else and have, at the time of this reading, suggested that I'm partnered with Lampdwellr just because we are both voting you, which has kept the terrible "noob-bashing" argument afloat.
F. I think this is the beginning of the ties you are trying to make between me and Lampdwellr. I did think I was first, but it turns out that you are right, he was. However, my vote reasoning and analysis are completely different. I'm already knee-deep in quotes so I really don't wanna go searching for it right now, but Lamp's reasons and my reasons have nothing to do with each other from what I remember. Secondly, you state later on that you believe Lamp and me to be in league, that we are both scum. Have you done any analysis on Lamp to show that he's had scummy actions on his own, or are you just tying him to me because we both voted you?
G) Once again, you are putting to much stock into how much stock I'm putting in the research, if that makes sense. The research argument was only a support to show that his justification for his non-content posts was flawed. So, my arguments were as such - Kank is posting non-content, which is scummy, and he says he can justify it, which is scummy too, because there's zero justification for posting non-content that I can think of. Regardless, his justification (the research) is flawed, so justified or not, his non-content is scummy! I said earlier, in an argument to Kank, that you can have a motive for someones crime, but you also need side evidence. The research argument is my side evidence for the larger "Kank is a no-content posting noob scum" argument I have been trying to make.
H) So apparently Lamp was on Kank too. However, twisting that into a "gang-up" seems like you are twisting the argument quite a bit. I have no fear of being coupled with Lamp, it's just that there's nothing to couple. The only thing we share is that we both voted Kank, for different reasons too. And I wasn't the one who brought ganging-up up. I can't remember who was attacking me at the time, I think it was PG, but I believe he mentioned that I was ganging up on Kank, which is why I brought it up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I) So, players I'd like to hear from soon, because hey look, they've disappeared! Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it. Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
A) I never actually voted for an absent player (My RVS fake-vote on Iso doesn’t count). Please check the record: I THREATENED to vote for an absent player, a la “Last one in the pool is a rotten egg!” I, more than anything, wanted to bring attention to the players that hadn’t started playing yet. Hmmm…I wonder if anyone else ever points out players that aren’t playing? Hmmm…
D) Mass paranoia=towntell? News to me. If you said it, I certainly didn’t see it. Remind me to base all of my behavior on how you think a proper townie should act at all times.
E) I make a casual, minor observation about what the early events were in previous games that were marked as “Normal” and that means I’m hiding behind a wall of non-content research fluff? I did it with the intent of people saying, “Oh, that’s interesting, next…” That seems to be what both you and LampDwellr seem to be fixated on is the fact that I shared a small sampling of day 1 results from a few past games. “Gallup Polling has determined that a townie will get lynched today.” Guess what? Gallup also said Mitt Romney was going to win the election. Is it a sure thing that we will lynch a townie today? Of course not.
F) You seem to be very interested in my scumminess, and that makes it very hard for me to believe that you have completely skipped over other players that started putting the squeeze on me before you ever did. (Raging Levine is actually still trapped in RVS mode where he was voting on me because I was in the future.)
How are we supposed to believe that you began your attacks on me before ever reading about another player that started doing that before you did, and now you even claim to not even be aware that he did.
Why would you not go back—what? A single page?--to see what else has been said and done in regards to this player’s recent activity?
I find that EXTREMELY hard to believe.
G) It sounds like someone is trapped in the past. How long are you going to stand on this “non-content posting” platform of yours now anyway? I can see that you’re desperately trying to hold a match up to me and see if I catch on fire. How many times are you going to try to light that same match again?
H) Welcome to the game. Yes, you are not the first person to start investigating me. The fact that you were trying to pretend that you were operating inside of a bubble and completely ignoring the other players is what is really makes me suspicious of you. Oh, I’ve been watching LampDwellr too and he’s got my curiosity as well, but nowhere near as much as your behavior.
I) Oh, so it’s scummy if I try to speculate guilt among the lurking/non-playing entities, but it’s completely townie behavior if you do the same thing?
Also, I believe this is particularly useful information. It occurs to me that noob-bashing is mostly town behavior. Scum gains little by targeting a noob town: he or she will likely be easily suggestionable or misplay and be mistaken by scum later in the game so he or she actually have possibilities of becoming an asset. On the other hand, town loses very little from noob-bashing early on: if they catch a noob scum, it's great, but if they accidentally lynch a noob town the loss is almost irrelevant in the long run while -in a game with so many noobs as this- risking to lynch one of the few veteran town is a loss that far outweighs the benefit of somehow catching a veteran scum early on. Specially since scum will most likely make a priority of nightkilling veteran towns.
I see this as being very thoughtful, and I thank you for sharing this insight. Please don’t die and flip scum, okay? What do we do with any potential veteran players on team scum? I think there’s too good of a chance that the veteran scum players are just sitting back and laughing, as they watch the noob townsfolk kill each other off during the day as they then pick more of us off at night, while only posting enough not to get modkilled or replaced. I’d like to think that GrickyTimmick is a veteran player on the town’s side, but I haven’t been satisfied with his behavior and justifications for his actions and statements. Hence my vote firmly remains on him. LampDwellr: How do you see GrickyTimmick’s behavior and reasoning? GrickyTimmick: How do you see LampDwellr’s behavior and reasoning?
What do we do with any potential veteran players on team scum?
After some more thought, I started wondering (I know the following may be seen as gaming the mod but I think it's a necessary consideration for all of us to have): Going by GT's list we may presume there are around 10 truly "veteran" players and perhaps less. Would the mod seeing this would distribute them equally between town and mafia? Since scum is a much smaller group, it would mean that the concentration of veterans in scum is much higher than the one in town, which strikes me as desirable for the mod: Thanks to their sheer numbers, town has a decent chance of winning even with a high concentration of noob while a high concentration of noob in the scum team would lead to a quick, easy game for town as the inexperienced players are more likely to flail scum without realizing it. If I'm correct in having this consideration it would mean that a veteran is statistically more likely of flipping scum... not that helps too much, though, since we don't want to risk lynching one of our valuable few veterans mistakenly by "veteran-bashing."
That aside, I have a sort of technical question: Are they specialized roles in this game? Or will we only know for sure (as in besides claims) when/if they "activate"? (e.g. a doctor -or equivalent- successfully saves someone from a nightkill, or the morning turns out two corpses, indicating the presence of a third party assassin, etc.)
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
That aside, I have a sort of technical question: Are they specialized roles in this game? Or will we only know for sure (as in besides claims) when/if they "activate"? (e.g. a doctor -or equivalent- successfully saves someone from a nightkill, or the morning turns out two corpses, indicating the presence of a third party assassin, etc.)
I'm sorry but your apparently willful ignorance is now getting to the eye-bleedingly awful stage.
PG has linked to this post at least 3 times and some one else has done so making it the now 5th time it has been linked to in addition to the acronyms and terms it has the common roles used for both the town and the mafia.
Yes there are going to be Power-roles scattered amongst the 23 players and they are not going to reveal them selves until they absolutely have to so please stop the fishing trips. About the only thing you have done with your 11 posts is to convince me that you are new player with at worst a vanilla town role so can be safely lynched when the use of your vote becomes less useful than removing a potential distraction from the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
All in due time, my friend. As it happens, that time is now!
I wanted to try something. Looking at this game, the only person I have experience playing with is you. As you may be aware, your town games are quite... unique in the way you play, so I thought pushing you might give some interesting insight into your alignment. In addition to that, I thought it might be interesting to completely fabricate an argument and see what evolved from there. As it is, everything I said about you in my original response to Wessel was a lie. You've been playing well as far as I'm concerned (sorry I had to be mean), and I thought it would be exceedingly obvious that my argument was terrible, especially after you inevitably pointed out that you were town in those previous games. In a nutshell, I told an obvious lie in an attempt to generate some content, not just on you, but those who interacted with you (or me) in response to this.
As you can see, responding to your question any earlier would have kind of nulled some of my goals here. We did get some interesting stuff, but perhaps not quite as conclusive as I'd been hoping. The people involved:
#1, Tom: You reacted differently than in previous games, but not differently enough to make me feel comfortable calling you scum. Very likely you're just learning to be a better player. Good work, but you're not cleared yet. Something about you feels different, but that's just meta talking. In any case, Unvote.
#2, Wrath_of_DoG: His responses to Tom were interesting, made moreso by the fact that he pushed it even after Tom reminded him that Stardust is awful. WoD should have called me out as well (or probably just instead). Why didn't he? I don't have an answer to this question.
#3, Mistings: The only person to actually call my claim out as being terrible. Not sure what to make of that, if anything, but I get the feeling he may be on the right track voting for WoD.
#4, Eron: Seems to want to shoot Tom down in the same way that WoD did, but holds his tongue to let WoD do it instead. I get the impression that he wouldn't have mentioned me either, and that I don't like. I'll be looking forward to his next response to Tom.
#5, Kank: 196, making the comment that Tom might be replicating past behaviour to make us believe he's town. The only interesting thing here is that my terrible case is now being built up into something it's not. It's all just more meta, but now Tom's terrible play is being taken as a granted, just because I happened to say it.
I suppose that's really the most interesting thing to come out of all this. I tell a lie, no one calls me on it (except Mistings), and a case starts building based on that lie. To my fellow townies, please be more vigilant in the future. I should not have been allowed to get away with this.
@Kank, I say it feels like you're twisting the truth because in this post you said, "I checked back with all of the Normal Mafia games ran this year, and in every single one on Day 1, a townie was lynched." Yes, you told the truth, but it's either based on lots of games and helpful, or few games and not. What you said was very definitive, when you should know that mentioning the small sample size is extremely important to this information's value.
I also have a hard time believing that you wouldn't have realised there were a small number of games since you must have done a search of some kind. The results would have shown just those four games. I feel misled. Town don't mislead. At least, not for no reason.
Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it.
Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
Thank you! That is so helpful! I especially love that you're bringing up both scum as lurkers and the 3/3 split when the rookies here have been given flak for both those thoughts, often by you! Excellent.
Lastly, nested quotes are a new thing in here. Please please please do your best to clean them up a bit when you're quoting someone! A few of these posts have been getting pretty unwieldy.
Okay, so I want to build a big post, but I'm at work and actually have things to do, so the highlights are:
Maokun is playing the noob card too hard and doesn't look town at all to me.
WoD is getting pressure for no reason.
PikachuGundam looks awful.
Everyone on the LampDwellr wagon looks poor to me.
GrickyTimmick is definitely town. (See Triskelion mafia for why my gut screams this at me)
I'm sorry but your apparently willful ignorance is now getting to the eye-bleedingly awful stage.
PG has linked to this post at least 3 times and some one else has done so making it the now 5th time it has been linked to in addition to the acronyms and terms it has the common roles used for both the town and the mafia.
Yes there are going to be Power-roles scattered amongst the 23 players and they are not going to reveal them selves until they absolutely have to so please stop the fishing trips. About the only thing you have done with your 11 posts is to convince me that you are new player with at worst a vanilla town role so can be safely lynched when the use of your vote becomes less useful than removing a potential distraction from the game.
Whoa, had a bad day? Yes I read that post after it was pointed to me twice (not 3 times or 5 or whatever other number you want to come up with) and no, the exact answer to my question wasn't in there.
Also how many times do you have to contradict yourself in a same post? Am I either the stupidest noob in the face of the Earth or am I "fishing trips" with my willfull, malevolent and feigned ignorance? You yourself seem to admit to yourself that I must be a noob town and go the extra mile to point my expendability (which I had just recently been reflecting about, but no, according to you I'm only capable of the most ignorant questions repeated time after time) so why the random accusation thrown in?
If I were to return your judgement I'd say that you at worst a completely despicable townie that would crucify a fellow member just because he got in his already frayed nerves regardless of the health of the game, or scum playing deftly that despicable townie card.
Maokun is playing the noob card too hard and doesn't look town at all to me.
Wow, look at that totally unexpected twist, guys! IB accusing a noob of acting too much like a noob trying to imply it's clumsy fakery And just in time to jump on kahedron's bandwagon to seize the momentum. I had been considering the reasons others offered to vote for you and with this, you have basically continue that trend.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
A. Your frustration at non-playing players is fine, we are all frustrated that they aren't playing. However, the solution to that problem is and has always been asking the mod to find a replacement. Voting for a player that's not in the game is a scum strategy. Not only does it let you vote and attack someone who doesn't fight back, but it makes you look like you are providing content to the thread without actually providing anything. That's why I'm calling you scummy.
D. This is the kind of thinking that made me call A Bear obvtown. While I'm inclined to believe you hear, the fact is that you made this comment after I had declared mass=paranoia to be a towntell. There's no way of knowing if your faking it or not. BTW, the jokey "Who's there?" bit at the beginning of this makes me less inclined to believe it.
E. Like I've said before, while I have a problem with your research, it's not what makes you scum to me. Its that you have been hiding behind the research in order to justify you not actually voting anyone in the game. You were using that research to post non-content things and appear useful to the town, your posts were all for appearances. I thought it looked scummy, I disproved the legitimacy of the research and I proceeded to explain my thought process and place my vote. I fail to see how that's predatory in any way, I made a case and made my vote. You OMGUS'd me, proceeded to skew my attack to be more about the research than anything else and have, at the time of this reading, suggested that I'm partnered with Lampdwellr just because we are both voting you, which has kept the terrible "noob-bashing" argument afloat.
F. I think this is the beginning of the ties you are trying to make between me and Lampdwellr. I did think I was first, but it turns out that you are right, he was. However, my vote reasoning and analysis are completely different. I'm already knee-deep in quotes so I really don't wanna go searching for it right now, but Lamp's reasons and my reasons have nothing to do with each other from what I remember. Secondly, you state later on that you believe Lamp and me to be in league, that we are both scum. Have you done any analysis on Lamp to show that he's had scummy actions on his own, or are you just tying him to me because we both voted you?
G) Once again, you are putting to much stock into how much stock I'm putting in the research, if that makes sense. The research argument was only a support to show that his justification for his non-content posts was flawed. So, my arguments were as such - Kank is posting non-content, which is scummy, and he says he can justify it, which is scummy too, because there's zero justification for posting non-content that I can think of. Regardless, his justification (the research) is flawed, so justified or not, his non-content is scummy! I said earlier, in an argument to Kank, that you can have a motive for someones crime, but you also need side evidence. The research argument is my side evidence for the larger "Kank is a no-content posting noob scum" argument I have been trying to make.
H) So apparently Lamp was on Kank too. However, twisting that into a "gang-up" seems like you are twisting the argument quite a bit. I have no fear of being coupled with Lamp, it's just that there's nothing to couple. The only thing we share is that we both voted Kank, for different reasons too. And I wasn't the one who brought ganging-up up. I can't remember who was attacking me at the time, I think it was PG, but I believe he mentioned that I was ganging up on Kank, which is why I brought it up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I) So, players I'd like to hear from soon, because hey look, they've disappeared! Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it. Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
A) I never actually voted for an absent player (My RVS fake-vote on Iso doesn’t count). Please check the record: I THREATENED to vote for an absent player, a la “Last one in the pool is a rotten egg!” I, more than anything, wanted to bring attention to the players that hadn’t started playing yet. Hmmm…I wonder if anyone else ever points out players that aren’t playing? Hmmm…
First, my argument cares very little whether you did or didn't vote them, the fact that you threatened to vote the last player in is enough. Second, I see what you did there and I'll get to it later. Point is, you threatening to vote players that are lurking or OOG or generally not playing the game is a showy way of allowing yourself to not play the game.
D) Mass paranoia=towntell? News to me. If you said it, I certainly didn’t see it. Remind me to base all of my behavior on how you think a proper townie should act at all times.
Well, I said it when explaining why A Bear is obv town. Your condescending remarks not withstanding, I am here to help if you need it and I do have knowledge of how town and scum behave.
E) I make a casual, minor observation about what the early events were in previous games that were marked as “Normal” and that means I’m hiding behind a wall of non-content research fluff? I did it with the intent of people saying, “Oh, that’s interesting, next…”
The non-content is your vote history and refusal to add to what's actually happening in the game. Your Research is the justifications for your non-content actions and it's flawed, which is why your actions can be proven to be non-content. This argument has been confused long enough.
That seems to be what both you and LampDwellr seem to be fixated on is the fact that I shared a small sampling of day 1 results from a few past games. “Gallup Polling has determined that a townie will get lynched today.” Guess what? Gallup also said Mitt Romney was going to win the election. Is it a sure thing that we will lynch a townie today? Of course not.
Then why bring it up? You are now arguing that your own data is flawed, just as I have been arguing. Good day sir.
F) You seem to be very interested in my scumminess, and that makes it very hard for me to believe that you have completely skipped over other players that started putting the squeeze on me before you ever did. (Raging Levine is actually still trapped in RVS mode where he was voting on me because I was in the future.)
Reading through the thread, your posts jumped out at me for reasons that I've explained a million times now, and I went head-first into the wall-post pool and came out with a goldmine. I built my case and analysis and didn't really look into anything that wasn't written by you. You'll have to forgive me for not including the only other serious vote that was on you at the time. Would you rather I just /barn his vote? Probably not. I find it much better to post my own case, my own reasoning and analysis.
Also, I find it funny that people attack me for ganging up on you with Lamp and when I vehemently deny that, you attack me for NOT working with Lamp. There's no happy medium here is there?
How are we supposed to believe that you began your attacks on me before ever reading about another player that started doing that before you did, and now you even claim to not even be aware that he did.
Believe it or not, that's up to you. What you really need to focus on is how whatever you believe affects my alignment. I don't think me not including Lamp's arguments in my own says anything about my alignment whatsoever, let alone me being scummy for it, as you are trying to imply.
G) It sounds like someone is trapped in the past. How long are you going to stand on this “non-content posting” platform of yours now anyway? I can see that you’re desperately trying to hold a match up to me and see if I catch on fire. How many times are you going to try to light that same match again?
The match was, is and will continue to be lit. Your early posts contain several examples of you avoiding gameplay with OOG issues. I've proven that. The only thing that's changed since then is me calling you out on it and you OMGUSing me with that vote of yours, and then twisting arguments every which way to call me scum for attacking you.
H) Welcome to the game. Yes, you are not the first person to start investigating me. The fact that you were trying to pretend that you were operating inside of a bubble and completely ignoring the other players is what is really makes me suspicious of you. Oh, I’ve been watching LampDwellr too and he’s got my curiosity as well, but nowhere near as much as your behavior.
So I'm scum because I'm possibly tunnelvisioning on you? I'll admit, I've been slightly tunneled on you for a while, but you've grabbed my attention in a fierce way ever since you decided to OMGUS me. Still, I don't feel like I've gotten out of hand, I've been keeping an eye on PG and throwing my support for IB and A Bear. The only thing suggesting my tunnelvision is that I missed Lamp's vote on you. I wouldn't say that I'm ignoring other players, I'm very much receptive to what's going on in this game. At the time I cased you, maybe you had me a bit too distracted, but I wouldn't say that I'm "pretending" by any means. That's a smear and you know it. You may think I'm pretending to have missed something, but I'm beginning to think it's you with the tunnelvision, because you seem to be twisting history as you see fit.
I) Oh, so it’s scummy if I try to speculate guilt among the lurking/non-playing entities, but it’s completely townie behavior if you do the same thing?
Wrong. What I did and what you did are two completely different things. You threatened to vote for one of the two people who haven't checked in, and only shortly after the game began. That's scummy because you are attacking players who've yet to post, you are attacking low hanging fruit (a scum tactic), you are threatening to vote them (remember, we don't vote lurkers, we ask that they be replaced), and you are doing it all after the RVS ended, so you could have been commenting on things that were actually happening in the game.
I wasn't calling for a vote. I called out several lurkers after several days had passed. I did this in addition to playing the game at hand. I called out both the players that had yet to check in and the players that had checked in a disappeared. I also made the comment that it's highly likely that one of the 6 lurkers I called out is scum. I also have good reasoning for calling out a few individuals.
First, Seppel and Voxx are incredibly strong assets to have on the town side. They are very experienced. If they are town, I want them in this game, and since I have no reason to believe that they aren't, I'm calling the out of lurking. Second, Reya is a player that I believe would lurk as scum. I believe his meta proves this, making it a good reason to call him out.
Finally, I believe that if there is one scum in those 6 and you held a gun to my head and told me to pick the scummy one, I'd choose Reya. But by no means is that a very educated guess. Any one of those players could be scum. None of them could be scum. All of them could be scum. Fact is, we don't know till they start posting more content. While I may have implied that scum lie in that pool of lurkers, I'm not going to point a finger at any specific person because I have absolutely nothing to support that theory. I've got only one lead, the meta lead on Reya, and meta is a shaky thing to trust. Fact is, lurkers aren't meant to be voted, they're meant to be replaced.
Point is, what you did was scummy because of the way you did it. You weren't calling out lurkers. You were threatening non-active players (by non-active I mean hadn't even checked in, different from lurking) with a vote in the early stages of the game as a means to avoid in-game play. I called out the whole lot of lurkers, not with intention of vote but just to call them out, after multiple days, maybe a weeks worth of time so that there's no doubt they lurked while also focusing my attention to in game matters.
GrickyTimmick: How do you see LampDwellr’s behavior and reasoning?
I don't know. Lemme read him up real quick.
KK, back. Turns out he hasn't posted for pages, but from what I've read, his logic is sound. He called you out a while back for only quoting half his sentence and you trying to make him look bad for it. He also stayed fairly calm under that pressure, whereas the returned pressure on you didn't go so well. You said you weren't concerned by me and Lamp calling you a "baddie" and Lamp was quick to point out that he said nothing of the sort, just that he voted you. You seem to have overreacted to the pressure on you there.
Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it.
Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
Thank you! That is so helpful! I especially love that you're bringing up both scum as lurkers and the 3/3 split when the rookies here have been given flak for both those thoughts, often by you! Excellent.
Wonderful sarcasm. Now put it away, get out your analysis, think hard for a while, and realize that what I did and what Kank did have only one thing in common. We were both talking about players not playing the game. Aside from that, there are no similarities, because the manner with which Kank called out lurkers was incredibly scummy, as I've explained. Also, do the math. 6 lurkers in a game with 23 players, that's 26.08% of the playerbase. There are likely 5-6 scum in the game. That's 21.79% of the playerbase at least. The chances of the whole 6 lurkers being the scum team is low, but the chances of one of those lurkers being scum is very very high.
By all means, though, if your sarcasm hat is that comfy, then overlook my logic and continue to throw politically-fueled jokes around to twist my words. I assure you though, your flashy bit of sarcasm might fill you with some ego-boosting bravado, but it only serves to make you look foolish when you are wrong.
BTW, I've been up all night and am having a fairly annoying day, so if there's just a touch of 'bite me' in the tone of this post, you have my apologies.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Who was that masked man anyway?
MTGSalvation: Now with more Drama than Season 5 of Supernatural!
Romney. He needs the support in these supposed "dark times". Also, he apparently only wrote a victory speech, that's what he told the media. So you know he needs a friend. He didn't even consider a loss.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Who was that masked man anyway?
MTGSalvation: Now with more Drama than Season 5 of Supernatural!
Wonderful sarcasm. Now put it away, get out your analysis, think hard for a while, and realize that what I did and what Kank did have only one thing in common. We were both talking about players not playing the game. Aside from that, there are no similarities, because the manner with which Kank called out lurkers was incredibly scummy, as I've explained. Also, do the math. 6 lurkers in a game with 23 players, that's 26.08% of the playerbase. There are likely 5-6 scum in the game. That's 21.79% of the playerbase at least. The chances of the whole 6 lurkers being the scum team is low, but the chances of one of those lurkers being scum is very very high.
By all means, though, if your sarcasm hat is that comfy, then overlook my logic and continue to throw politically-fueled jokes around to twist my words. I assure you though, your flashy bit of sarcasm might fill you with some ego-boosting bravado, but it only serves to make you look foolish when you are wrong.
BTW, I've been up all night and am having a fairly annoying day, so if there's just a touch of 'bite me' in the tone of this post, you have my apologies.
I was actually thinking about this post where you called pikachugundam scummy, not Kankennon at all.
Also, "politically-fueled jokes"? What party are you affiliated with again?
I am making 2 posts: a reactive CONTROL POST and a proactive AGGRO POST. This is the CONTROL POST. Tapped Hallowed Fountain, your turn.
Quote from "Wessel" »
What's your view of Kahedron's vote?
I think it's pretty dumb! I don't know anything about the setup. All I was saying at any point is that we CAN'T assume things about the setup, and we've got 3 people who've voted me for allegedly knowing so much about the setup. Dork Knight's vote is dumber because he somewhat apparently didn't read any of my responses at all, but Ka's came sooner and looks more like an eager "HAHA CAUGHT YOU" fallacy than Dork's.
They're both wrong, though. I don't know anything about the setup, didn't say I did, and I did say we shouldn't assume things about the setup. Good heavens.
~~~~~
Quote from "Kankennon" »
I'm noticing a pattern of LampDwellr and GrickyTimmick sharing many of the same opinions yet seemingly avoiding referencing or talking to/about each other.
I'd really like to see them grill each other for a change and show the rest of us novices just how it's supposed to be done.
I must say that I'm somewhat suspicious of a possible interconnection between them.
I don't know why Gricky's not talking about me, but the reason I am not talking about Gricky is I haven't posted in a couple days. I'll get to that in my next post.
Also: I'd really like to see you not make spurious claims, but we can't always get what we want. You think there is a linkage because we both voted you at roughly the same time for a decent reason; in fact we did so because of the decent reason.
~~~~~
Quote from "Dork Knight" »
I don't like the fact that LampDwellr seems to know something about the setup that only scum could know. His backpedalling that what he wrote isn't what he meant doesn't ring true to me. It sounds like scum who said too much and got caught.
vote LampDwellr
Quote from "Dork Knight" »
Well, you see son, sometimes, a man has to think things over before he makes a big decision. If ya just fire up the lawnmower and have at it before you think it through, you'll never have an award winning turf.
You need to think harder. I am not backpedaling. I clarified, but that is not backpedaling. I did not say that what I wrote isn't what I meant, I said the quarter-sentence that Kank posted isn't what I meant. What Kank did was the equivalent of me doing this:
Quote from "Dork Knight" »
what he wrote isn't what he meant
All I was ever saying - read the whole original post - was that strategy speculations based on 3 fem and 3 male scum are not accurate. That is the theme of the entire post. I don't think it's 90% likely that half the scum are male and half are female, and that is because of reasons I already posted. I didn't say, ever, "scum definitely aren't half male and half female." This is a pretty bad vote rationale, man. Almost like, distractingly facile.
~~~~~~~~~
Quote from "GrickyTimmick" »
F. I think this is the beginning of the ties you are trying to make between me and Lampdwellr. I did think I was first, but it turns out that you are right, he was. However, my vote reasoning and analysis are completely different. I'm already knee-deep in quotes so I really don't wanna go searching for it right now, but Lamp's reasons and my reasons have nothing to do with each other from what I remember.
I'm voting him because he made statements overqualifying himself and trying to pre-protect against "seeming scummy," and then said some fatalistic stuff that looked a bit noob-scummish. I think the "WAIT DID YOU SAY YOU KNOW THE SETUP" bad quote he did of me reads about 50/50 'he must be scum if he is voting me' and 50/50 'get offa me, town, I'll attack you back,' so that's a bit of a wash in my eyes.
~~~~~~~~~
Quote from "Kankennon" »
LampDwellr: How do you see GrickyTimmick’s behavior and reasoning?
Gricky looks aggressive to me, which is not a way scum typically plays with a village full of new players, who often think aggression looks scummy.
@Gricky: Can you point out to me which of my actions were scummy and why? I think you pointed out that my attack on A Bear was scummy because of low-hanging fruit followed by the more current explanation that lurkers/non-existents should be replaced and not lynched/voted for. That is the kind of information I need as a new player not to do such things and I thank you for your explanations. What else have I done though that makes me look scummy? (On IRC and in face to face Wolf, you just kind of poke at the person in question until they do something if you think they're lurking.)
@Maokun: Night actions are usually not explained. It's up to us (the town) to determine whether certain night actions have occurred from what clues the mod gives us and what the rest of the town does. (E.G. There was no one killed at night. This can be explained by 1) the doctor did his job and protected the person scum tried to kill, 2) the person scum tried to kill is bullet proof, 3) scum elected to take no night kill for some sort of benefit, 4) scum were confused and didn't know what they were doing, etc.)
So... in the interest of all the noobs (however many of us there are), do the veterans have any free advice that they'd like to share with the lot of us on how to not look scummy? Cuz I see Kank trying and I tried to post content, but then we get slapped in the face for being scummy, so a few pointers would help.
This may be seen as a 'fluff' post, but I'd rather ask for help than be continually slammed for trying to play and doing it wrong.
A. Your frustration at non-playing players is fine, we are all frustrated that they aren't playing. However, the solution to that problem is and has always been asking the mod to find a replacement. Voting for a player that's not in the game is a scum strategy. Not only does it let you vote and attack someone who doesn't fight back, but it makes you look like you are providing content to the thread without actually providing anything. That's why I'm calling you scummy.
D. This is the kind of thinking that made me call A Bear obvtown. While I'm inclined to believe you hear, the fact is that you made this comment after I had declared mass=paranoia to be a towntell. There's no way of knowing if your faking it or not. BTW, the jokey "Who's there?" bit at the beginning of this makes me less inclined to believe it.
E. Like I've said before, while I have a problem with your research, it's not what makes you scum to me. Its that you have been hiding behind the research in order to justify you not actually voting anyone in the game. You were using that research to post non-content things and appear useful to the town, your posts were all for appearances. I thought it looked scummy, I disproved the legitimacy of the research and I proceeded to explain my thought process and place my vote. I fail to see how that's predatory in any way, I made a case and made my vote. You OMGUS'd me, proceeded to skew my attack to be more about the research than anything else and have, at the time of this reading, suggested that I'm partnered with Lampdwellr just because we are both voting you, which has kept the terrible "noob-bashing" argument afloat.
F. I think this is the beginning of the ties you are trying to make between me and Lampdwellr. I did think I was first, but it turns out that you are right, he was. However, my vote reasoning and analysis are completely different. I'm already knee-deep in quotes so I really don't wanna go searching for it right now, but Lamp's reasons and my reasons have nothing to do with each other from what I remember. Secondly, you state later on that you believe Lamp and me to be in league, that we are both scum. Have you done any analysis on Lamp to show that he's had scummy actions on his own, or are you just tying him to me because we both voted you?
G) Once again, you are putting to much stock into how much stock I'm putting in the research, if that makes sense. The research argument was only a support to show that his justification for his non-content posts was flawed. So, my arguments were as such - Kank is posting non-content, which is scummy, and he says he can justify it, which is scummy too, because there's zero justification for posting non-content that I can think of. Regardless, his justification (the research) is flawed, so justified or not, his non-content is scummy! I said earlier, in an argument to Kank, that you can have a motive for someones crime, but you also need side evidence. The research argument is my side evidence for the larger "Kank is a no-content posting noob scum" argument I have been trying to make.
H) So apparently Lamp was on Kank too. However, twisting that into a "gang-up" seems like you are twisting the argument quite a bit. I have no fear of being coupled with Lamp, it's just that there's nothing to couple. The only thing we share is that we both voted Kank, for different reasons too. And I wasn't the one who brought ganging-up up. I can't remember who was attacking me at the time, I think it was PG, but I believe he mentioned that I was ganging up on Kank, which is why I brought it up. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I) So, players I'd like to hear from soon, because hey look, they've disappeared! Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it. Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
A) I never actually voted for an absent player (My RVS fake-vote on Iso doesn’t count). Please check the record: I THREATENED to vote for an absent player, a la “Last one in the pool is a rotten egg!” I, more than anything, wanted to bring attention to the players that hadn’t started playing yet. Hmmm…I wonder if anyone else ever points out players that aren’t playing? Hmmm…
First, my argument cares very little whether you did or didn't vote them, the fact that you threatened to vote the last player in is enough. Second, I see what you did there and I'll get to it later. Point is, you threatening to vote players that are lurking or OOG or generally not playing the game is a showy way of allowing yourself to not play the game.
D) Mass paranoia=towntell? News to me. If you said it, I certainly didn’t see it. Remind me to base all of my behavior on how you think a proper townie should act at all times.
Well, I said it when explaining why A Bear is obv town. Your condescending remarks not withstanding, I am here to help if you need it and I do have knowledge of how town and scum behave.
E) I make a casual, minor observation about what the early events were in previous games that were marked as “Normal” and that means I’m hiding behind a wall of non-content research fluff? I did it with the intent of people saying, “Oh, that’s interesting, next…”
The non-content is your vote history and refusal to add to what's actually happening in the game. Your Research is the justifications for your non-content actions and it's flawed, which is why your actions can be proven to be non-content. This argument has been confused long enough.
That seems to be what both you and LampDwellr seem to be fixated on is the fact that I shared a small sampling of day 1 results from a few past games. “Gallup Polling has determined that a townie will get lynched today.” Guess what? Gallup also said Mitt Romney was going to win the election. Is it a sure thing that we will lynch a townie today? Of course not.
Then why bring it up? You are now arguing that your own data is flawed, just as I have been arguing. Good day sir.
F) You seem to be very interested in my scumminess, and that makes it very hard for me to believe that you have completely skipped over other players that started putting the squeeze on me before you ever did. (Raging Levine is actually still trapped in RVS mode where he was voting on me because I was in the future.)
Reading through the thread, your posts jumped out at me for reasons that I've explained a million times now, and I went head-first into the wall-post pool and came out with a goldmine. I built my case and analysis and didn't really look into anything that wasn't written by you. You'll have to forgive me for not including the only other serious vote that was on you at the time. Would you rather I just /barn his vote? Probably not. I find it much better to post my own case, my own reasoning and analysis.
Also, I find it funny that people attack me for ganging up on you with Lamp and when I vehemently deny that, you attack me for NOT working with Lamp. There's no happy medium here is there?
How are we supposed to believe that you began your attacks on me before ever reading about another player that started doing that before you did, and now you even claim to not even be aware that he did.
Believe it or not, that's up to you. What you really need to focus on is how whatever you believe affects my alignment. I don't think me not including Lamp's arguments in my own says anything about my alignment whatsoever, let alone me being scummy for it, as you are trying to imply.
G) It sounds like someone is trapped in the past. How long are you going to stand on this “non-content posting” platform of yours now anyway? I can see that you’re desperately trying to hold a match up to me and see if I catch on fire. How many times are you going to try to light that same match again?
The match was, is and will continue to be lit. Your early posts contain several examples of you avoiding gameplay with OOG issues. I've proven that. The only thing that's changed since then is me calling you out on it and you OMGUSing me with that vote of yours, and then twisting arguments every which way to call me scum for attacking you.
H) Welcome to the game. Yes, you are not the first person to start investigating me. The fact that you were trying to pretend that you were operating inside of a bubble and completely ignoring the other players is what is really makes me suspicious of you. Oh, I’ve been watching LampDwellr too and he’s got my curiosity as well, but nowhere near as much as your behavior.
So I'm scum because I'm possibly tunnelvisioning on you? I'll admit, I've been slightly tunneled on you for a while, but you've grabbed my attention in a fierce way ever since you decided to OMGUS me. Still, I don't feel like I've gotten out of hand, I've been keeping an eye on PG and throwing my support for IB and A Bear. The only thing suggesting my tunnelvision is that I missed Lamp's vote on you. I wouldn't say that I'm ignoring other players, I'm very much receptive to what's going on in this game. At the time I cased you, maybe you had me a bit too distracted, but I wouldn't say that I'm "pretending" by any means. That's a smear and you know it. You may think I'm pretending to have missed something, but I'm beginning to think it's you with the tunnelvision, because you seem to be twisting history as you see fit.
I) Oh, so it’s scummy if I try to speculate guilt among the lurking/non-playing entities, but it’s completely townie behavior if you do the same thing?
Wrong. What I did and what you did are two completely different things. You threatened to vote for one of the two people who haven't checked in, and only shortly after the game began. That's scummy because you are attacking players who've yet to post, you are attacking low hanging fruit (a scum tactic), you are threatening to vote them (remember, we don't vote lurkers, we ask that they be replaced), and you are doing it all after the RVS ended, so you could have been commenting on things that were actually happening in the game.
I wasn't calling for a vote. I called out several lurkers after several days had passed. I did this in addition to playing the game at hand. I called out both the players that had yet to check in and the players that had checked in a disappeared. I also made the comment that it's highly likely that one of the 6 lurkers I called out is scum. I also have good reasoning for calling out a few individuals.
First, Seppel and Voxx are incredibly strong assets to have on the town side. They are very experienced. If they are town, I want them in this game, and since I have no reason to believe that they aren't, I'm calling the out of lurking. Second, Reya is a player that I believe would lurk as scum. I believe his meta proves this, making it a good reason to call him out.
Finally, I believe that if there is one scum in those 6 and you held a gun to my head and told me to pick the scummy one, I'd choose Reya. But by no means is that a very educated guess. Any one of those players could be scum. None of them could be scum. All of them could be scum. Fact is, we don't know till they start posting more content. While I may have implied that scum lie in that pool of lurkers, I'm not going to point a finger at any specific person because I have absolutely nothing to support that theory. I've got only one lead, the meta lead on Reya, and meta is a shaky thing to trust. Fact is, lurkers aren't meant to be voted, they're meant to be replaced.
Point is, what you did was scummy because of the way you did it. You weren't calling out lurkers. You were threatening non-active players (by non-active I mean hadn't even checked in, different from lurking) with a vote in the early stages of the game as a means to avoid in-game play. I called out the whole lot of lurkers, not with intention of vote but just to call them out, after multiple days, maybe a weeks worth of time so that there's no doubt they lurked while also focusing my attention to in game matters.
GrickyTimmick: How do you see LampDwellr’s behavior and reasoning?
I don't know. Lemme read him up real quick.
KK, back. Turns out he hasn't posted for pages, but from what I've read, his logic is sound. He called you out a while back for only quoting half his sentence and you trying to make him look bad for it. He also stayed fairly calm under that pressure, whereas the returned pressure on you didn't go so well. You said you weren't concerned by me and Lamp calling you a "baddie" and Lamp was quick to point out that he said nothing of the sort, just that he voted you. You seem to have overreacted to the pressure on you there.
Seppel, Reya, Raging Levine, Captain Eddie, Voxx, Macius and I think that's it.
Interesting story, that's 3 men and 3 women. Could it be our scumteam? Doubtful, but worth thinking about. Chances are good that there's at least one scum there.
Thank you! That is so helpful! I especially love that you're bringing up both scum as lurkers and the 3/3 split when the rookies here have been given flak for both those thoughts, often by you! Excellent.
Wonderful sarcasm. Now put it away, get out your analysis, think hard for a while, and realize that what I did and what Kank did have only one thing in common. We were both talking about players not playing the game. Aside from that, there are no similarities, because the manner with which Kank called out lurkers was incredibly scummy, as I've explained. Also, do the math. 6 lurkers in a game with 23 players, that's 26.08% of the playerbase. There are likely 5-6 scum in the game. That's 21.79% of the playerbase at least. The chances of the whole 6 lurkers being the scum team is low, but the chances of one of those lurkers being scum is very very high.
By all means, though, if your sarcasm hat is that comfy, then overlook my logic and continue to throw politically-fueled jokes around to twist my words. I assure you though, your flashy bit of sarcasm might fill you with some ego-boosting bravado, but it only serves to make you look foolish when you are wrong.
BTW, I've been up all night and am having a fairly annoying day, so if there's just a touch of 'bite me' in the tone of this post, you have my apologies.
These posts are so large that Kank and Gricky are town.
These posts are so large that Kank and Gricky are town.
My read is usually that scum care more.
What's your reasoning?
I take it that this is your first game with Seppel .This is vaguely normal for him. At some point he may come back and give us some reasoning for this.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
Wow, look at that totally unexpected twist, guys! IB accusing a noob of acting too much like a noob trying to imply it's clumsy fakery And just in time to jump on kahedron's bandwagon to seize the momentum. I had been considering the reasons others offered to vote for you and with this, you have basically continue that trend.
These posts are so large that Kank and Gricky are town.
My read is usually that scum care more.
What's your reasoning?
I take it that this is your first game with Seppel .This is vaguely normal for him. At some point he may come back and give us some reasoning for this.
No it's fine that he said that, I just want to hear more about it. I'm not mad the post was short or whatever.
I see GrickyTimmick and I in a Mexican standoff where we just seem to be going in a circle over the same data points, and even though it's against me, I'm seeing the chance of him being a scum player with his sights firmly set on a single novice (yet extremely attractive and sexy :kank:) player as unlikely.
Unvote
I have too much work to do today to go back and reread right now--I'll have to do that tonight.
Does anyone have a post number where RVS silliness/BS ended and the real official countergrilling game began?
Also, if anyone has a serious question towards me that I missed hidden in the walls of text above, please refresh my memory.
@Bolly: Thanks for the advice. I believe someone said that they were willing to help out if asked, so I asked.
And I know how the game works mechanically from all the reading I've done plus the live fire done-in-under-an-hour games I've played. Playing with friends is nicer than playing with strangers though...
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
All in due time, my friend. As it happens, that time is now!
I wanted to try something. Looking at this game, the only person I have experience playing with is you. As you may be aware, your town games are quite... unique in the way you play, so I thought pushing you might give some interesting insight into your alignment. In addition to that, I thought it might be interesting to completely fabricate an argument and see what evolved from there. As it is, everything I said about you in my original response to Wessel was a lie. You've been playing well as far as I'm concerned (sorry I had to be mean), and I thought it would be exceedingly obvious that my argument was terrible, especially after you inevitably pointed out that you were town in those previous games. In a nutshell, I told an obvious lie in an attempt to generate some content, not just on you, but those who interacted with you (or me) in response to this.
...Unvote.
I'm calling BS on this. Here's what really happened:
1) Stardust knows how easily I got killed in the other games I played in with him.
2) He makes a vote on me with a terrible meta post, reasoning that I'm not smart enough to fight back and will get myself lynched.
3) I point out his mistake, and he ignores it as long as possible.
4) I tell him to stop ignoring me.
5) He posts the only thing that could possibly get him out of the situation: "haha jk guys it was just a test".
Vote: Startdust
#2, Wrath_of_DoG: His responses to Tom were interesting, made moreso by the fact that he pushed it even after Tom reminded him that Stardust is awful. WoD should have called me out as well (or probably just instead). Why didn't he? I don't have an answer to this question.
Probably because he's your scumbuddy.
I should not have been allowed to get away with this.
Change this from past tense to present tense, and you sum up what I think quite nicely!
Tom
I'm liking you as Town, though I find your interactions with Eron...interesting, to say the least. I've got a question for you: do you think that point 3 in this post at all influenced WoD's answer to your question?
I think I can see Eron's post possibly affecting WoD's response. If myself and one other person were being interrogated by someone, suppose I was asked a question by the interrogator. Then the other person who is next to me starts squirming around like he knows the answer. Could that affect my answer? Yes... I don't know how much so, though.
@PG: Thank you very much for a polite and detailed answer. I don't know what others think, but I believe it's nice to be able to ask a simple question without it instigating a wave of hatred and mistrust. I can't tell yet whether you are scum or town, but at least I'll say that you are a decent human being.
@IB: I'm not sure if your misinterpretation of what I said is willful to derail my point or you just didn't understand me, but I'm leaning towards the former which lines up with the scummy behaviour that others and I have pointed in the past. But for clarification, I wasn't ignoring the fact that you were already voting for me. I just hadn't linked that fact with scummy behaviour because it occurred at a fairly early point in the game without any strong reasoning. It was your dogged and continuous "/barn on the latest noob-bashing trend for a chance at an easy lynch that several people will agree on" behaviour what finally made me decide that you're most likely scum.
Quote from Bolly »
Maokun
Originally, I passed you off as just a noob. Then you started posting more. Then you posted #243. You need to die for that. I don't think that anything in that post was correct, or even close to being correct, and even new players should realise that posting incorrect stuff is bad. You're also banding around Mafia terms to make it look like you know what you're talking about. So let me point a few things out to you.
-If you want to find out how power roles work in actual game terms, read some completed games. Don't go fishing, because that's what you were doing
-Don't game the mod. At all. Because that's what you were trying to do, big time.
-Kahedron has not started a bandwagon on you. He isn't even voting for you.
-IB has been voting for you pretty much all game. He cannot be jumping onto a bandwagon.
There comes a point at which the fact that you're a new player is cancelled out by bad play.
Man, should I really start making connections based in pointless, gratuitous aggressiveness? Let me start saying that I unfortunately cannot invest the fullness of my time in this game. I've read every single post in this thread and post regularly which is more than you can tell from other apparently less noob players. I also have read a few other threads, but not enough to make me an expert, so I thought that asking what seemed like a pretty harmless question (seriously, fishing? Who'd fall for such a ridiculous "trap" if it were one?) would provide an answer much quicker than randomly poking at different threads. Sometimes a noob is just a noob.
Second, you say that my post is "incorrect" which apparently is such a big sin to warrant execution regardless of alignment. Funnily enough, you fail to mention what makes the post so incorrect. You mention some random factoids from other posts that vary from real and serious (gaming the mod) to accusations of fishing that are frankly laughable but never said what was wrong with the post in question. You even accuse me of "banding Mafia terms"... so wait a second, do you want me to be informed on the game or not? Please do make your mind. And yet, the post in mention is apparently unforgivable and warranting of not only a vote but also baseless accusations of poor play.
Other answers to your tabulated points may be found in my response to IB above.
Vote for me as much as you want but if you are going to harshly judge my words with loaded accusations, I'll demand you to explain yourself with valid reasons. At the very least, think of it as educating this disgusting noob so he won't ruin your next game.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure what should I make of the fact that soon after I posted what I think is a thoughtful post on why noob-bashing is more likely to be town-tell, I'm aggressively attacked by two players that had no previous interaction with me, for no other apparent reason that my toxic noobness. As I indicated in my post, any noob shouldn't be surprised by being chosen as the first lynch sacrifice. What I find surprising and a bit baffling is the sudden and baseless aggressiveness. Even if I were truly noob scum trying to clumsily fish for clues, such attitude is unwarranted.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
I'm sorry but your apparently willful ignorance is now getting to the eye-bleedingly awful stage.
PG has linked to this post at least 3 times and some one else has done so making it the now 5th time it has been linked to in addition to the acronyms and terms it has the common roles used for both the town and the mafia.
Yes there are going to be Power-roles scattered amongst the 23 players and they are not going to reveal them selves until they absolutely have to so please stop the fishing trips. About the only thing you have done with your 11 posts is to convince me that you are new player with at worst a vanilla town role so can be safely lynched when the use of your vote becomes less useful than removing a potential distraction from the game.
Whoa, had a bad day? Yes I read that post after it was pointed to me twice (not 3 times or 5 or whatever other number you want to come up with) and no, the exact answer to my question wasn't in there.
Also how many times do you have to contradict yourself in a same post? Am I either the stupidest noob in the face of the Earth or am I "fishing trips" with my willfull, malevolent and feigned ignorance? You yourself seem to admit to yourself that I must be a noob town and go the extra mile to point my expendability (which I had just recently been reflecting about, but no, according to you I'm only capable of the most ignorant questions repeated time after time) so why the random accusation thrown in?
If I were to return your judgement I'd say that you at worst a completely despicable townie that would crucify a fellow member just because he got in his already frayed nerves regardless of the health of the game, or scum playing deftly that despicable townie card.
Maokun is playing the noob card too hard and doesn't look town at all to me.
Wow, look at that totally unexpected twist, guys! IB accusing a noob of acting too much like a noob trying to imply it's clumsy fakery And just in time to jump on kahedron's bandwagon to seize the momentum. I had been considering the reasons others offered to vote for you and with this, you have basically continue that trend.
Vote infectiousbaloth
I think you're mistaking what Kahedron was getting at Maokun (and Kahedron missed what you were asking for). Kahedron thought you were asking for power roles to speak up and tell you what they do (or at least that was my interpretation), which was clearly not the case since I answered your question about how night actions are revealed. Fishing is when you "use statements to elicit information from someone(s) in the game that they would normally keep to themselves. Typically used to determine town power roles." (taken from the acronym link) Similarly a fishing trip is exactly like the term implies... going on a trip/vacation/holiday to do fishing.
And Kahedron wasn't contradicting himself... he was just commenting on how bad it looks to be pointing you to the Acronym link again... Before attempting to answer your question...
@Bolly: Am I misunderstanding the term fishing myself? I don't understand how Maokun is fishing in that post. Would you care to explain what's so wrong with it?
@Kahedron: Was I right or wrong with my interpretation of your post?
@Maokun, PG, Kank: What do you think about the several different interactions that have been going on between myself, Stardust, Wrath_of_Dog, and Eron (as well as the few other people that have popped in and made a comment or question about the goings-on)? Of course, I'm not asking for you to go over every post, but what are your general thoughts and opinions on those matters?
Okay, looking back at it, my post probably wasn't all that clear...
I'll start by saying that I appreciate that you lowered your "tone of voice" for this post. Just because we are a band of paranoid townies/murderous thugs locked in a live-or-die game doesn't mean that we cannot be nice to each other.
Maokun Redux
The specific points that are incorrect:
Also how many times do you have to contradict yourself in a same post?
Either I'm missing this contradiction completely, or it's not there. I'd appreciate some clarification.
Kahedron spent a whole paragraph talking of how awful my noobness is and then suddenly said that I was fishing. You can either imply that I'm a painfully ignorant noob, or I'm a clever scum playing the noob card to try to trip someone. I can be either of them but not both. I felt the need to point the contradiction to show that his aggressive post at me was not because he had real suspicions about me being scum or town but simply because he needed to yell at me. We get elitist, noob-intolerant players in Werewolf too which is the reason why I didn't even bother to point him as a townie or scum in my rebuke. I was just calling him out in his poor sportsmanship.
And just in time to jump on kahedron's bandwagon to seize the momentum. I had been considering the reasons others offered to vote for you and with this, you have basically continue that trend.
"Jumping on a bandwagon" implies a couple of things. Firstly, that it's started by someone voting for someone else. Secondly, that other people add their votes to it afterwards. You stated that Kahedron started the bandwagon, which is incorrect because he isn't voting for you. You also stated that IB jumped on it, when he was voting for you beforehand. This is what I meant when I said you were banding terms around. But I could have said this in a nicer way...
I will ask for clarification here. Is "Jumping on a bandwagon" a mafia specific term with the meaning you describe or is it just your take on it? (note that it doesn't appear in the glossary, before someone feels the need to point it.)
I ask for clarification because I used the term informally, with the following meaning: "You are taking advantage that I'm being attacked by Kahedron to drive your usual point that a noob is acting too much like a noob and that it is a scum tell".
Players are allocated roles randomly. This is standard practise across the forum. So there's no reason why the scumteam couldn't be made up completely of "veteran players". The same goes for new players. I hope this information is of help.
See, I didn't know the roles were randomly allocated. Thanks for that.
Wow, look at that totally unexpected twist, guys! IB accusing a noob of acting too much like a noob trying to imply it's clumsy fakery
Is he?
He's done it before. I have to run now, but next time I post I'll try to find his posts that have basically only been "X is playing the noob card too hard" where X is the latest noob to be pointed a finger of suspicion at. That to me is extremely scummy behavior, trying to weakly fan the flame of suspicion on a player that won't be missed too much by town with the hopes that other people will latch onto it.
@PG: to be honest, I've kinda confused myself over that one. It looked to me like he was trying to gain information about power roles. That would technically make it fishing...though I'm not sure that was his intent.
To add a last layer of clarification: In Werewolf the existence of specialized roles is known from the beginning. I was simply trying to find out if it was the same here and whether the lack of announcement of specialized roles meant that there were none; I was not for a dossier of which and who were those roles. (PG ended answering that question in a completely uncompromising way, which is all what I expected.) As I said in my previous post, to use that as a fishing bait would be extremely disingenuous because it's just so visible.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
@Tom: being completely honest I'm not picking anything from any of you four that would make me even lean towards a judgement. I believe that you are just locked in a game of retaliative mistrust. Later, I'll go over your posts to see if I get a better idea by reading them together, but until now, whenever any of you have posted it has caused null impression on me.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
@Tom: The original misunderstanding between you and Eron was just a misunderstanding about how Eron presented his case, so that was kind of a null tell on both parts. I thought Stardust's vote on you was awkward, but being inexperienced, I assumed he knew what he was doing. Stardust seems to be gambiting (is that even a word?) on the players he knows. I don't know if he's not seen any other behaviour that strikes him or if he's just concentrating on people that he knows, so he can rule them out as targets maybe? I can't tell if he's being scummy or just trying to tread on familiar ground. WoD's posts about meta were kind of confusing, so I wasn't quite sure what to make of it. WoD's replacing also makes it hard to place him because if he's replacing out, he may not even give a hoot about making a decent response at this point.
FoS on LampDwellr because the more I read the post that Kank pointed out and the exchange that followed, the more it reads like a slip that LD's trying to cover up. Especially when I agree that LD is bad at quoting and should proofread more carefully so there won't be any more confusion, he responds that I'm 'needling' (whatever that means).
FoS on LampDwellr because the more I read the post that Kank pointed out and the exchange that followed, the more it reads like a slip that LD's trying to cover up. Especially when I agree that LD is bad at quoting and should proofread more carefully so there won't be any more confusion, he responds that I'm 'needling' (whatever that means).
Why are you FoSing rather than voting? Unless I missed something, you aren't currently voting for anyone.
Why are you especially concerned about LD saying you are 'needling', when you don't even know what the term means?
I'm not sure if my read is solid so I figured a FoS was an upgrade from leaning scum, but not quite vote worthy? I just thought it was odd that I recommended that he proofread more carefully for the sake of clarity and he accuses me of not posting seriously and needling. I think I would like LD to clarify what he meant before I vote for him.
Kankennon Describing you as erratic doesn't really do the word justice...I'm going to withhold my opinion of you, pending these questions: 1. You have at least double the posts of most of the other players. Would you consider yourself a Town leader? 2. Do you feel that you have been scumhunting in this game? Please point me to examples if you think you have. 3. Earlier, you directed an attack at LampDwellr based on a partial quote. Has your opinion of Lamp changed since then? Do you think he is Town or Scum? 4. Are you afraid of Seppel? Pre-emptive-EWP... 5: why should I not vote for you right now? 6: why should others not vote for you right now?
1) Most of those posts were me having fun back during the RVS stage, which evidently ended before I was completely aware of it, according to IB, around post #75. Just ask GrickyTimmick—most of my posts prior to that point and even shortly after were all non-content “fluff” posts. Now that every post takes an eternity in Kank time, I’ll definitely be making a lot less of them. I’d like to think that I can be helpful to the town, but I don’t think I’m the right candidate for that job just yet. I usually make a lot of misses before I ever start hitting bulls-eyes.
2) I feel like I’ve been more towndefending than scumhunting. Most of my energy lately has been spent with GrickyTimmick on a whole bunch of “Oh yeah? But what about…?”
3) I’ve left LampDwellr on my back-burner ever since. Once I have a chance to go back over everything with a magnifying glass, he’ll be at the top of my list of interests. Shakespeare and Klingons would say that retaliatory votes are best served cold. (In all actuality, I haven’t gotten a full read on him yet, so I’ll refrain from fully answering that last part of your question there just yet.)
4) Terrified. Whenever I hear a bump in the closet late at night, my first thought is that it must be Seppel out to get me!
5) Because I don’t want you to.
6) Because I might actually be useful to the town in the long run. Did you ever watch the movie Clue (1985)? I sometimes have those “Aha!” moments like Tim Curry did at the end of that movie. My early death does not help the town any.
@Maokun, PG, Kank: What do you think about the several different interactions that have been going on between myself, Stardust, Wrath_of_Dog, and Eron (as well as the few other people that have popped in and made a comment or question about the goings-on)? Of course, I'm not asking for you to go over every post, but what are your general thoughts and opinions on those matters?
I’ve spent so much of my mafia time and effort dueling with GrickyTimmick and answering questions, like Bolly’s above, that I don’t have a solid read on anyone yet. Right now I have a whole lot of gray in my head. The only person that really strikes me as town is PG simply because I’ve known him for so long. If somehow he ends up flipping scum, then I would be super impressed at his ability to masquerade as a noob town.
FoS on LampDwellr because the more I read the post that Kank pointed out and the exchange that followed, the more it reads like a slip that LD's trying to cover up. Especially when I agree that LD is bad at quoting and should proofread more carefully so there won't be any more confusion, he responds that I'm 'needling' (whatever that means).
It did strike me as odd wording at the time and I haven’t forgotten about it. When I have a chance to, like I said above, I will definitely be investigating LampDwellr with a fine-toothed comb.
Ferro_Man
The only post of yours that resembles content is #193. Your original call for a votecount seemed innocuous to me, but I'm glad that Eron picked it up. I don't follow your reasoning, and I don't even know why you bothered to bring RVS votes on someone who isn't in the game into it. I have no read on you.
my reasoning for the vote count at the end of RVS
1) showing where all the non-serious votes were.
we had Kank claiming that IB was jumping on his bandwagon, but IB had placed a vote on him before the bandwagon started.
2) see how many votes Iso had
As GrickyTimmick clarified in post 221, voting for players outside of the current game is scummy, and there were *multiple* votes on Iso. Wanted to see just who jumped on the Iso RVS bandwagon
3) see if there any interactions between people "randomly" voting for the same person
random voting is random voting, but with a group of inexperienced players, I could see new scum players all "randomly" voting for the same person in the random voting stage to get a bandwagon going without having to do much work for it. Wanted to see if that was the case in this particular game.
that was my reasoning. Since Iso didn't turn up in the vote count, and the vote count was done way past RVS ended. I'll compile it and post it here to see if there is anything useful
votes on Iso: kankennon, pikachugundam (but then he unvoted the next post), wrath of dog, Macius
End of RVS votecount
bolly: dork knight
Wrath of Dog: macius
wessel: misting
kankennon: raging levine
voxx: gricky
pikachugundam: stardust
dork knight: tom
captaineddie: ferro_man
eron: a bear
a bear: eron
maokun: bolly, IB
Point #1)
didn't really get much of anything from looking at the non-serious votes. Didn't take too much from the non serious votes by EtR or kahedron non-serious votes on groups of multiple people (the females and all the crafters)
point #2)
When I wanted a vote count to see who had voted for Iso, I thought that he had aquired more votes than 3 or 4.
Point #3)
the only person who aquired multiple votes was Iso. The only person called out for voting Iso was kankennon, but he was called out for his iso vote along side a bunch of other stuff.
going back and looking at the RVS seems like it didn't really turn up anything useful like I thought it would. Between work and preping for GP: Chicago, I haven't had as much time to put into this game as I would like. My posting will become more frequent after I get back
@IB: I'm not sure if your misinterpretation of what I said is willful to derail my point
Smear.
or you just didn't understand me, but I'm leaning towards the former which lines up with the scummy behaviour that others and I have pointed in the past.
So why say this? Just to smear me?
But for clarification, I wasn't ignoring the fact that you were already voting for me. I just hadn't linked that fact with scummy behaviour because it occurred at a fairly early point in the game without any strong reasoning.
Aside from your scummy "I'm going to vote whoever votes me."
It was your dogged and continuous "/barn on the latest noob-bashing trend for a chance at an easy lynch that several people will agree on" behaviour what finally made me decide that you're most likely scum.
Not quite. Let's have this conversation.
You are a noob. We all know this. You made it apparent. Then you harped on it. Then you used it as an excuse. Then you continued to say "sorry if I'm scummy guys, I'm just a noob." To me, that is a scumtell. I can find countless meta arguments where noob scum get off by saying "sorry, guys. I'm just a noob". You continuing to push the fact that you're a noob and attempting to paint me scummy for it just seals the deal.
If I were pushing a noob for noobishness, it would be Kank or PG, for the record. You're being pushed for harping on how much of a noob you are.
I'm calling BS on this. Here's what really happened:
1) Stardust knows how easily I got killed in the other games I played in with him.
2) He makes a vote on me with a terrible meta post, reasoning that I'm not smart enough to fight back and will get myself lynched.
3) I point out his mistake, and he ignores it as long as possible.
4) I tell him to stop ignoring me.
5) He posts the only thing that could possibly get him out of the situation: "haha jk guys it was just a test".
Vote: Startdust
Wow. That is not at all what I expected from you. Like... I'm just shocked.
You must be aware that your defense against my claim here was extremely obvious. Even if we take it for granted that you are playing terribly in this game (you're not), and even if I thought you were a complete idiot (I don't), I still would have expected you to come back in exactly the same way. My use of meta was not only terrible for being meta, it was terrible for coming to exactly the opposite conclusion that I should have (I should have concluded that you're town). I thought that would be obvious, especially to you (as it was).
So... Assuming you agree that it really was that obvious, that you had an easy and legit defense, that sort of knocks out number 2, and without that there's really nothing there. So where's the scum motivation? Assuming I thought lying so obviously was a good thing to try, you don't think I could have kept pushing? No one but Misting even realised that I'd lied, and he was busy with WoD.
Remember also that it wasn't just a simple test. It was trying to get some content out there from others as well. It worked to a point. This wasn't just about you.
I thought Stardust's vote on you was awkward, but being inexperienced, I assumed he knew what he was doing. Stardust seems to be gambiting (is that even a word?) on the players he knows. I don't know if he's not seen any other behaviour that strikes him or if he's just concentrating on people that he knows, so he can rule them out as targets maybe? I can't tell if he's being scummy or just trying to tread on familiar ground.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing. Until I can get a handle on how everyone else plays, I'm focusing more on those I know. That's why I pushed PG in the beginning too. My notes on other players are getting more detailed as we go, but I don't think I'll be ready to push on one of them for a while yet since I won't feel comfortable gauging their reaction until I'm used to them.
By the way, please don't assume I know what I'm doing! This is only my second game after all. All I know is that more content and more reactions are good for the town. One of the major things I learned my first game is that sometimes getting your name dragged through the mud can be a good thing for the team. Thought I'd take a chance and try my hand at it now that I am town. Turned out my name ended up staying clean somehow since no one focused on me, but c'est la vie.
You can either imply that I'm a painfully ignorant noob, or I'm a clever scum playing the noob card to try to trip someone. I can be either of them but not both.
I just wanted to point out that you can, in fact, be both. Never at the same time, maybe, but certainly within the same game. That was me in my first game. It worked out very well for me for the first couple Days.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oooh. Nice find! As you said, it might mean nothing but it's curious.
Also, at this point in the game I feel that the feeble reasons I had to vote for Misting are not enough anymore so for now, I'll unvote.
However, I'll keep my FoS raised at him after seeing him berate kank and PG for using the "noob" excuse when doing so is simply expected noob behavior and not really a scum tell (unless they were trying to use that excuse to try to fix an unmistakable scum tell they leaked before, which neither of them has, as far as I can tell.)
Also, I believe this is particularly useful information.
It occurs to me that noob-bashing is mostly town behavior. Scum gains little by targeting a noob town: he or she will likely be easily suggestionable or misplay and be mistaken by scum later in the game so he or she actually have possibilities of becoming an asset. On the other hand, town loses very little from noob-bashing early on: if they catch a noob scum, it's great, but if they accidentally lynch a noob town the loss is almost irrelevant in the long run while -in a game with so many noobs as this- risking to lynch one of the few veteran town is a loss that far outweighs the benefit of somehow catching a veteran scum early on. Specially since scum will most likely make a priority of nightkilling veteran towns.
Yes, I do. If you really only wanted to do the three things you said, I don't understand the purpose behind the underlying self-promotion.
Misting kinda beat me to it, but yeah I find this post hilarious. All this talk about meta being bad and yet it was in fact Stardust that brought the whole meta thing up, not me. I was pointing out the serious mistake in his reasoning.
Stardust: I asked you a question, and I want an answer. Why are you ignoring my question?
Right now Stardust feels really scummy for his strange, terribad meta vote, as well as ignoring my points / question about it. WoD also seems scummy, because it feels like he is working with Stardust (trying to get pressure on me while attempting to get pressure off of Stardust) and he is using awful logic.
Before I vote fore anyone, though, I really want to hear Stardust's response.
I unvoted for IB a while back.
Why is making a simple vote a "big decision" in your view?
Also: Bad news... I'm losing access to internet at work due to people being idiots, so I'm going to have to request replacement in this game, which is irritating.
I'm sorry guys, I was looking forward to playing in this game.
Perhaps you guys can have an Iso brought into this game at claim range
Working with Stardust?
I don't even know who he is. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your post, as I said, I took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rant about meta.
Several times in this post you say I have "bad play" or "poor play". Why do you think I'm playing badly or poorly?
What is the difference between attacking me and calling out something I said?
Where did you say in your post that "you don't know how it started"?
Why do you say "wut?" like I'm not making sense and then pretty much concede to my points later in the same post?
What do you mean by "I don't even know who he is"? You don't know him personally? You don't know him around the site? Seems like an awful way to claim that he is not your scum buddy.
Where did you say previously that "you took it at face value without understanding the context and went on a bit of a rand about meta"?
How did you not understand the context, when, in the original post (the first quoted post in this very post I'm typing) you quoted two posts made by me that pretty much explained the context?
(bolded and oranged for emphasis)
Please do that before you go.
------------------
Also, Eron, I'd like you to do something very similar. In the following post, you pretty much said that you had a response to my question. I'd like your response now.
You also claimed that the coming interaction between me and *** was most likely going to be important. I believe the interaction you were referring to has transpired, so what are your thoughts on it?
A) I never actually voted for an absent player (My RVS fake-vote on Iso doesn’t count). Please check the record: I THREATENED to vote for an absent player, a la “Last one in the pool is a rotten egg!” I, more than anything, wanted to bring attention to the players that hadn’t started playing yet. Hmmm…I wonder if anyone else ever points out players that aren’t playing? Hmmm…
D) Mass paranoia=towntell? News to me. If you said it, I certainly didn’t see it. Remind me to base all of my behavior on how you think a proper townie should act at all times.
E) I make a casual, minor observation about what the early events were in previous games that were marked as “Normal” and that means I’m hiding behind a wall of non-content research fluff? I did it with the intent of people saying, “Oh, that’s interesting, next…”
That seems to be what both you and LampDwellr seem to be fixated on is the fact that I shared a small sampling of day 1 results from a few past games. “Gallup Polling has determined that a townie will get lynched today.” Guess what? Gallup also said Mitt Romney was going to win the election. Is it a sure thing that we will lynch a townie today? Of course not.
F) You seem to be very interested in my scumminess, and that makes it very hard for me to believe that you have completely skipped over other players that started putting the squeeze on me before you ever did. (Raging Levine is actually still trapped in RVS mode where he was voting on me because I was in the future.)
How are we supposed to believe that you began your attacks on me before ever reading about another player that started doing that before you did, and now you even claim to not even be aware that he did.
Why would you not go back—what? A single page?--to see what else has been said and done in regards to this player’s recent activity?
I find that EXTREMELY hard to believe.
G) It sounds like someone is trapped in the past. How long are you going to stand on this “non-content posting” platform of yours now anyway? I can see that you’re desperately trying to hold a match up to me and see if I catch on fire. How many times are you going to try to light that same match again?
H) Welcome to the game. Yes, you are not the first person to start investigating me. The fact that you were trying to pretend that you were operating inside of a bubble and completely ignoring the other players is what is really makes me suspicious of you. Oh, I’ve been watching LampDwellr too and he’s got my curiosity as well, but nowhere near as much as your behavior.
I) Oh, so it’s scummy if I try to speculate guilt among the lurking/non-playing entities, but it’s completely townie behavior if you do the same thing?
I see this as being very thoughtful, and I thank you for sharing this insight.
Please don’t die and flip scum, okay?
What do we do with any potential veteran players on team scum?
I think there’s too good of a chance that the veteran scum players are just sitting back and laughing, as they watch the noob townsfolk kill each other off during the day as they then pick more of us off at night, while only posting enough not to get modkilled or replaced.
I’d like to think that GrickyTimmick is a veteran player on the town’s side, but I haven’t been satisfied with his behavior and justifications for his actions and statements.
Hence my vote firmly remains on him.
LampDwellr: How do you see GrickyTimmick’s behavior and reasoning?
GrickyTimmick: How do you see LampDwellr’s behavior and reasoning?
After some more thought, I started wondering (I know the following may be seen as gaming the mod but I think it's a necessary consideration for all of us to have): Going by GT's list we may presume there are around 10 truly "veteran" players and perhaps less. Would the mod seeing this would distribute them equally between town and mafia? Since scum is a much smaller group, it would mean that the concentration of veterans in scum is much higher than the one in town, which strikes me as desirable for the mod: Thanks to their sheer numbers, town has a decent chance of winning even with a high concentration of noob while a high concentration of noob in the scum team would lead to a quick, easy game for town as the inexperienced players are more likely to flail scum without realizing it. If I'm correct in having this consideration it would mean that a veteran is statistically more likely of flipping scum... not that helps too much, though, since we don't want to risk lynching one of our valuable few veterans mistakenly by "veteran-bashing."
That aside, I have a sort of technical question: Are they specialized roles in this game? Or will we only know for sure (as in besides claims) when/if they "activate"? (e.g. a doctor -or equivalent- successfully saves someone from a nightkill, or the morning turns out two corpses, indicating the presence of a third party assassin, etc.)
I'm sorry but your apparently willful ignorance is now getting to the eye-bleedingly awful stage.
PG has linked to this post at least 3 times and some one else has done so making it the now 5th time it has been linked to in addition to the acronyms and terms it has the common roles used for both the town and the mafia.
Yes there are going to be Power-roles scattered amongst the 23 players and they are not going to reveal them selves until they absolutely have to so please stop the fishing trips. About the only thing you have done with your 11 posts is to convince me that you are new player with at worst a vanilla town role so can be safely lynched when the use of your vote becomes less useful than removing a potential distraction from the game.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
All in due time, my friend. As it happens, that time is now!
I wanted to try something. Looking at this game, the only person I have experience playing with is you. As you may be aware, your town games are quite... unique in the way you play, so I thought pushing you might give some interesting insight into your alignment. In addition to that, I thought it might be interesting to completely fabricate an argument and see what evolved from there. As it is, everything I said about you in my original response to Wessel was a lie. You've been playing well as far as I'm concerned (sorry I had to be mean), and I thought it would be exceedingly obvious that my argument was terrible, especially after you inevitably pointed out that you were town in those previous games. In a nutshell, I told an obvious lie in an attempt to generate some content, not just on you, but those who interacted with you (or me) in response to this.
As you can see, responding to your question any earlier would have kind of nulled some of my goals here. We did get some interesting stuff, but perhaps not quite as conclusive as I'd been hoping. The people involved:
#1, Tom: You reacted differently than in previous games, but not differently enough to make me feel comfortable calling you scum. Very likely you're just learning to be a better player. Good work, but you're not cleared yet. Something about you feels different, but that's just meta talking. In any case, Unvote.
#2, Wrath_of_DoG: His responses to Tom were interesting, made moreso by the fact that he pushed it even after Tom reminded him that Stardust is awful. WoD should have called me out as well (or probably just instead). Why didn't he? I don't have an answer to this question.
#3, Mistings: The only person to actually call my claim out as being terrible. Not sure what to make of that, if anything, but I get the feeling he may be on the right track voting for WoD.
#4, Eron: Seems to want to shoot Tom down in the same way that WoD did, but holds his tongue to let WoD do it instead. I get the impression that he wouldn't have mentioned me either, and that I don't like. I'll be looking forward to his next response to Tom.
#5, Kank: 196, making the comment that Tom might be replicating past behaviour to make us believe he's town. The only interesting thing here is that my terrible case is now being built up into something it's not. It's all just more meta, but now Tom's terrible play is being taken as a granted, just because I happened to say it.
I suppose that's really the most interesting thing to come out of all this. I tell a lie, no one calls me on it (except Mistings), and a case starts building based on that lie. To my fellow townies, please be more vigilant in the future. I should not have been allowed to get away with this.
I also have a hard time believing that you wouldn't have realised there were a small number of games since you must have done a search of some kind. The results would have shown just those four games. I feel misled. Town don't mislead. At least, not for no reason.
Also, because I feel like I have to,
Thank you! That is so helpful! I especially love that you're bringing up both scum as lurkers and the 3/3 split when the rookies here have been given flak for both those thoughts, often by you! Excellent.
One sec.
And you manage to make it sound like you just missed your alarm.
Looking forward to seeing some more of your usual content.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
Hi Seppel
Maokun is playing the noob card too hard and doesn't look town at all to me.
WoD is getting pressure for no reason.
PikachuGundam looks awful.
Everyone on the LampDwellr wagon looks poor to me.
GrickyTimmick is definitely town. (See Triskelion mafia for why my gut screams this at me)
HI INFECTIOUSBALOTH
I NOW TRUST YOU TWO IMPLICITLY
WHO SHOULD I VOTE FOR?
Whoa, had a bad day? Yes I read that post after it was pointed to me twice (not 3 times or 5 or whatever other number you want to come up with) and no, the exact answer to my question wasn't in there.
Also how many times do you have to contradict yourself in a same post? Am I either the stupidest noob in the face of the Earth or am I "fishing trips" with my willfull, malevolent and feigned ignorance? You yourself seem to admit to yourself that I must be a noob town and go the extra mile to point my expendability (which I had just recently been reflecting about, but no, according to you I'm only capable of the most ignorant questions repeated time after time) so why the random accusation thrown in?
If I were to return your judgement I'd say that you at worst a completely despicable townie that would crucify a fellow member just because he got in his already frayed nerves regardless of the health of the game, or scum playing deftly that despicable townie card.
Wow, look at that totally unexpected twist, guys! IB accusing a noob of acting too much like a noob trying to imply it's clumsy fakery And just in time to jump on kahedron's bandwagon to seize the momentum. I had been considering the reasons others offered to vote for you and with this, you have basically continue that trend.
Vote infectiousbaloth
First, my argument cares very little whether you did or didn't vote them, the fact that you threatened to vote the last player in is enough. Second, I see what you did there and I'll get to it later. Point is, you threatening to vote players that are lurking or OOG or generally not playing the game is a showy way of allowing yourself to not play the game.
Well, I said it when explaining why A Bear is obv town. Your condescending remarks not withstanding, I am here to help if you need it and I do have knowledge of how town and scum behave.
The non-content is your vote history and refusal to add to what's actually happening in the game. Your Research is the justifications for your non-content actions and it's flawed, which is why your actions can be proven to be non-content. This argument has been confused long enough.
Then why bring it up? You are now arguing that your own data is flawed, just as I have been arguing. Good day sir.
Reading through the thread, your posts jumped out at me for reasons that I've explained a million times now, and I went head-first into the wall-post pool and came out with a goldmine. I built my case and analysis and didn't really look into anything that wasn't written by you. You'll have to forgive me for not including the only other serious vote that was on you at the time. Would you rather I just /barn his vote? Probably not. I find it much better to post my own case, my own reasoning and analysis.
Also, I find it funny that people attack me for ganging up on you with Lamp and when I vehemently deny that, you attack me for NOT working with Lamp. There's no happy medium here is there?
Believe it or not, that's up to you. What you really need to focus on is how whatever you believe affects my alignment. I don't think me not including Lamp's arguments in my own says anything about my alignment whatsoever, let alone me being scummy for it, as you are trying to imply.
Like I said, I've got my own arguments and reasoning. I don't need another players, I don't need to repost their arguments into my own.
The match was, is and will continue to be lit. Your early posts contain several examples of you avoiding gameplay with OOG issues. I've proven that. The only thing that's changed since then is me calling you out on it and you OMGUSing me with that vote of yours, and then twisting arguments every which way to call me scum for attacking you.
So I'm scum because I'm possibly tunnelvisioning on you? I'll admit, I've been slightly tunneled on you for a while, but you've grabbed my attention in a fierce way ever since you decided to OMGUS me. Still, I don't feel like I've gotten out of hand, I've been keeping an eye on PG and throwing my support for IB and A Bear. The only thing suggesting my tunnelvision is that I missed Lamp's vote on you. I wouldn't say that I'm ignoring other players, I'm very much receptive to what's going on in this game. At the time I cased you, maybe you had me a bit too distracted, but I wouldn't say that I'm "pretending" by any means. That's a smear and you know it. You may think I'm pretending to have missed something, but I'm beginning to think it's you with the tunnelvision, because you seem to be twisting history as you see fit.
Wrong. What I did and what you did are two completely different things. You threatened to vote for one of the two people who haven't checked in, and only shortly after the game began. That's scummy because you are attacking players who've yet to post, you are attacking low hanging fruit (a scum tactic), you are threatening to vote them (remember, we don't vote lurkers, we ask that they be replaced), and you are doing it all after the RVS ended, so you could have been commenting on things that were actually happening in the game.
I wasn't calling for a vote. I called out several lurkers after several days had passed. I did this in addition to playing the game at hand. I called out both the players that had yet to check in and the players that had checked in a disappeared. I also made the comment that it's highly likely that one of the 6 lurkers I called out is scum. I also have good reasoning for calling out a few individuals.
First, Seppel and Voxx are incredibly strong assets to have on the town side. They are very experienced. If they are town, I want them in this game, and since I have no reason to believe that they aren't, I'm calling the out of lurking. Second, Reya is a player that I believe would lurk as scum. I believe his meta proves this, making it a good reason to call him out.
Finally, I believe that if there is one scum in those 6 and you held a gun to my head and told me to pick the scummy one, I'd choose Reya. But by no means is that a very educated guess. Any one of those players could be scum. None of them could be scum. All of them could be scum. Fact is, we don't know till they start posting more content. While I may have implied that scum lie in that pool of lurkers, I'm not going to point a finger at any specific person because I have absolutely nothing to support that theory. I've got only one lead, the meta lead on Reya, and meta is a shaky thing to trust. Fact is, lurkers aren't meant to be voted, they're meant to be replaced.
Point is, what you did was scummy because of the way you did it. You weren't calling out lurkers. You were threatening non-active players (by non-active I mean hadn't even checked in, different from lurking) with a vote in the early stages of the game as a means to avoid in-game play. I called out the whole lot of lurkers, not with intention of vote but just to call them out, after multiple days, maybe a weeks worth of time so that there's no doubt they lurked while also focusing my attention to in game matters.
I don't know. Lemme read him up real quick.
KK, back. Turns out he hasn't posted for pages, but from what I've read, his logic is sound. He called you out a while back for only quoting half his sentence and you trying to make him look bad for it. He also stayed fairly calm under that pressure, whereas the returned pressure on you didn't go so well. You said you weren't concerned by me and Lamp calling you a "baddie" and Lamp was quick to point out that he said nothing of the sort, just that he voted you. You seem to have overreacted to the pressure on you there.
Wonderful sarcasm. Now put it away, get out your analysis, think hard for a while, and realize that what I did and what Kank did have only one thing in common. We were both talking about players not playing the game. Aside from that, there are no similarities, because the manner with which Kank called out lurkers was incredibly scummy, as I've explained. Also, do the math. 6 lurkers in a game with 23 players, that's 26.08% of the playerbase. There are likely 5-6 scum in the game. That's 21.79% of the playerbase at least. The chances of the whole 6 lurkers being the scum team is low, but the chances of one of those lurkers being scum is very very high.
By all means, though, if your sarcasm hat is that comfy, then overlook my logic and continue to throw politically-fueled jokes around to twist my words. I assure you though, your flashy bit of sarcasm might fill you with some ego-boosting bravado, but it only serves to make you look foolish when you are wrong.
BTW, I've been up all night and am having a fairly annoying day, so if there's just a touch of 'bite me' in the tone of this post, you have my apologies.
Romney. He needs the support in these supposed "dark times". Also, he apparently only wrote a victory speech, that's what he told the media. So you know he needs a friend. He didn't even consider a loss.
I was actually thinking about this post where you called pikachugundam scummy, not Kankennon at all.
Also, "politically-fueled jokes"? What party are you affiliated with again?
They're both wrong, though. I don't know anything about the setup, didn't say I did, and I did say we shouldn't assume things about the setup. Good heavens.
Also: I'd really like to see you not make spurious claims, but we can't always get what we want. You think there is a linkage because we both voted you at roughly the same time for a decent reason; in fact we did so because of the decent reason.
All I was ever saying - read the whole original post - was that strategy speculations based on 3 fem and 3 male scum are not accurate. That is the theme of the entire post. I don't think it's 90% likely that half the scum are male and half are female, and that is because of reasons I already posted. I didn't say, ever, "scum definitely aren't half male and half female." This is a pretty bad vote rationale, man. Almost like, distractingly facile.
@Maokun: Night actions are usually not explained. It's up to us (the town) to determine whether certain night actions have occurred from what clues the mod gives us and what the rest of the town does. (E.G. There was no one killed at night. This can be explained by 1) the doctor did his job and protected the person scum tried to kill, 2) the person scum tried to kill is bullet proof, 3) scum elected to take no night kill for some sort of benefit, 4) scum were confused and didn't know what they were doing, etc.)
So... in the interest of all the noobs (however many of us there are), do the veterans have any free advice that they'd like to share with the lot of us on how to not look scummy? Cuz I see Kank trying and I tried to post content, but then we get slapped in the face for being scummy, so a few pointers would help.
This may be seen as a 'fluff' post, but I'd rather ask for help than be continually slammed for trying to play and doing it wrong.
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
These posts are so large that Kank and Gricky are town.
My read is usually that scum care more.
What's your reasoning?
I take it that this is your first game with Seppel .This is vaguely normal for him. At some point he may come back and give us some reasoning for this.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
Maokun.
I've been voting you all game. Are you on drugs?
No it's fine that he said that, I just want to hear more about it. I'm not mad the post was short or whatever.
Unvote
I have too much work to do today to go back and reread right now--I'll have to do that tonight.
Does anyone have a post number where RVS silliness/BS ended and the real official countergrilling game began?
Also, if anyone has a serious question towards me that I missed hidden in the walls of text above, please refresh my memory.
And I know how the game works mechanically from all the reading I've done plus the live fire done-in-under-an-hour games I've played. Playing with friends is nicer than playing with strangers though...
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
I'm calling BS on this. Here's what really happened:
1) Stardust knows how easily I got killed in the other games I played in with him.
2) He makes a vote on me with a terrible meta post, reasoning that I'm not smart enough to fight back and will get myself lynched.
3) I point out his mistake, and he ignores it as long as possible.
4) I tell him to stop ignoring me.
5) He posts the only thing that could possibly get him out of the situation: "haha jk guys it was just a test".
Vote: Startdust
Probably because he's your scumbuddy.
Change this from past tense to present tense, and you sum up what I think quite nicely!
I think I can see Eron's post possibly affecting WoD's response. If myself and one other person were being interrogated by someone, suppose I was asked a question by the interrogator. Then the other person who is next to me starts squirming around like he knows the answer. Could that affect my answer? Yes... I don't know how much so, though.
@IB: I'm not sure if your misinterpretation of what I said is willful to derail my point or you just didn't understand me, but I'm leaning towards the former which lines up with the scummy behaviour that others and I have pointed in the past. But for clarification, I wasn't ignoring the fact that you were already voting for me. I just hadn't linked that fact with scummy behaviour because it occurred at a fairly early point in the game without any strong reasoning. It was your dogged and continuous "/barn on the latest noob-bashing trend for a chance at an easy lynch that several people will agree on" behaviour what finally made me decide that you're most likely scum.
Man, should I really start making connections based in pointless, gratuitous aggressiveness? Let me start saying that I unfortunately cannot invest the fullness of my time in this game. I've read every single post in this thread and post regularly which is more than you can tell from other apparently less noob players. I also have read a few other threads, but not enough to make me an expert, so I thought that asking what seemed like a pretty harmless question (seriously, fishing? Who'd fall for such a ridiculous "trap" if it were one?) would provide an answer much quicker than randomly poking at different threads. Sometimes a noob is just a noob.
Second, you say that my post is "incorrect" which apparently is such a big sin to warrant execution regardless of alignment. Funnily enough, you fail to mention what makes the post so incorrect. You mention some random factoids from other posts that vary from real and serious (gaming the mod) to accusations of fishing that are frankly laughable but never said what was wrong with the post in question. You even accuse me of "banding Mafia terms"... so wait a second, do you want me to be informed on the game or not? Please do make your mind. And yet, the post in mention is apparently unforgivable and warranting of not only a vote but also baseless accusations of poor play.
Other answers to your tabulated points may be found in my response to IB above.
Vote for me as much as you want but if you are going to harshly judge my words with loaded accusations, I'll demand you to explain yourself with valid reasons. At the very least, think of it as educating this disgusting noob so he won't ruin your next game.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure what should I make of the fact that soon after I posted what I think is a thoughtful post on why noob-bashing is more likely to be town-tell, I'm aggressively attacked by two players that had no previous interaction with me, for no other apparent reason that my toxic noobness. As I indicated in my post, any noob shouldn't be surprised by being chosen as the first lynch sacrifice. What I find surprising and a bit baffling is the sudden and baseless aggressiveness. Even if I were truly noob scum trying to clumsily fish for clues, such attitude is unwarranted.
I think you're mistaking what Kahedron was getting at Maokun (and Kahedron missed what you were asking for). Kahedron thought you were asking for power roles to speak up and tell you what they do (or at least that was my interpretation), which was clearly not the case since I answered your question about how night actions are revealed. Fishing is when you "use statements to elicit information from someone(s) in the game that they would normally keep to themselves. Typically used to determine town power roles." (taken from the acronym link) Similarly a fishing trip is exactly like the term implies... going on a trip/vacation/holiday to do fishing.
And Kahedron wasn't contradicting himself... he was just commenting on how bad it looks to be pointing you to the Acronym link again... Before attempting to answer your question...
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
@Kahedron: Was I right or wrong with my interpretation of your post?
Thanks for your patience guys.
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
I'll start by saying that I appreciate that you lowered your "tone of voice" for this post. Just because we are a band of paranoid townies/murderous thugs locked in a live-or-die game doesn't mean that we cannot be nice to each other.
Kahedron spent a whole paragraph talking of how awful my noobness is and then suddenly said that I was fishing. You can either imply that I'm a painfully ignorant noob, or I'm a clever scum playing the noob card to try to trip someone. I can be either of them but not both. I felt the need to point the contradiction to show that his aggressive post at me was not because he had real suspicions about me being scum or town but simply because he needed to yell at me. We get elitist, noob-intolerant players in Werewolf too which is the reason why I didn't even bother to point him as a townie or scum in my rebuke. I was just calling him out in his poor sportsmanship.
I will ask for clarification here. Is "Jumping on a bandwagon" a mafia specific term with the meaning you describe or is it just your take on it? (note that it doesn't appear in the glossary, before someone feels the need to point it.)
I ask for clarification because I used the term informally, with the following meaning: "You are taking advantage that I'm being attacked by Kahedron to drive your usual point that a noob is acting too much like a noob and that it is a scum tell".
See, I didn't know the roles were randomly allocated. Thanks for that.
He's done it before. I have to run now, but next time I post I'll try to find his posts that have basically only been "X is playing the noob card too hard" where X is the latest noob to be pointed a finger of suspicion at. That to me is extremely scummy behavior, trying to weakly fan the flame of suspicion on a player that won't be missed too much by town with the hopes that other people will latch onto it.
To add a last layer of clarification: In Werewolf the existence of specialized roles is known from the beginning. I was simply trying to find out if it was the same here and whether the lack of announcement of specialized roles meant that there were none; I was not for a dossier of which and who were those roles. (PG ended answering that question in a completely uncompromising way, which is all what I expected.) As I said in my previous post, to use that as a fishing bait would be extremely disingenuous because it's just so visible.
FoS on LampDwellr because the more I read the post that Kank pointed out and the exchange that followed, the more it reads like a slip that LD's trying to cover up. Especially when I agree that LD is bad at quoting and should proofread more carefully so there won't be any more confusion, he responds that I'm 'needling' (whatever that means).
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Why are you FoSing rather than voting? Unless I missed something, you aren't currently voting for anyone.
Why are you especially concerned about LD saying you are 'needling', when you don't even know what the term means?
Signature done by perv90210
My Trade Thread | Random Buy List
Pikachudansen | Pika Pika Yukai
Wahaha... | MyAnimeList
Iso is Batman | Tamiyo lulz
Official Anime Enthusiast of [TheCrafters].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
1) Most of those posts were me having fun back during the RVS stage, which evidently ended before I was completely aware of it, according to IB, around post #75. Just ask GrickyTimmick—most of my posts prior to that point and even shortly after were all non-content “fluff” posts. Now that every post takes an eternity in Kank time, I’ll definitely be making a lot less of them. I’d like to think that I can be helpful to the town, but I don’t think I’m the right candidate for that job just yet. I usually make a lot of misses before I ever start hitting bulls-eyes.
2) I feel like I’ve been more towndefending than scumhunting. Most of my energy lately has been spent with GrickyTimmick on a whole bunch of “Oh yeah? But what about…?”
3) I’ve left LampDwellr on my back-burner ever since. Once I have a chance to go back over everything with a magnifying glass, he’ll be at the top of my list of interests. Shakespeare and Klingons would say that retaliatory votes are best served cold. (In all actuality, I haven’t gotten a full read on him yet, so I’ll refrain from fully answering that last part of your question there just yet.)
4) Terrified. Whenever I hear a bump in the closet late at night, my first thought is that it must be Seppel out to get me!
5) Because I don’t want you to.
6) Because I might actually be useful to the town in the long run. Did you ever watch the movie Clue (1985)? I sometimes have those “Aha!” moments like Tim Curry did at the end of that movie. My early death does not help the town any.
I’ve spent so much of my mafia time and effort dueling with GrickyTimmick and answering questions, like Bolly’s above, that I don’t have a solid read on anyone yet. Right now I have a whole lot of gray in my head. The only person that really strikes me as town is PG simply because I’ve known him for so long. If somehow he ends up flipping scum, then I would be super impressed at his ability to masquerade as a noob town.
It did strike me as odd wording at the time and I haven’t forgotten about it. When I have a chance to, like I said above, I will definitely be investigating LampDwellr with a fine-toothed comb.
my reasoning for the vote count at the end of RVS
1) showing where all the non-serious votes were.
2) see how many votes Iso had
3) see if there any interactions between people "randomly" voting for the same person
that was my reasoning. Since Iso didn't turn up in the vote count, and the vote count was done way past RVS ended. I'll compile it and post it here to see if there is anything useful
votes on Iso: kankennon, pikachugundam (but then he unvoted the next post), wrath of dog, Macius
End of RVS votecount
bolly: dork knight
Wrath of Dog: macius
wessel: misting
kankennon: raging levine
voxx: gricky
pikachugundam: stardust
dork knight: tom
captaineddie: ferro_man
eron: a bear
a bear: eron
maokun: bolly, IB
Point #1)
didn't really get much of anything from looking at the non-serious votes. Didn't take too much from the non serious votes by EtR or kahedron non-serious votes on groups of multiple people (the females and all the crafters)
point #2)
When I wanted a vote count to see who had voted for Iso, I thought that he had aquired more votes than 3 or 4.
Point #3)
the only person who aquired multiple votes was Iso. The only person called out for voting Iso was kankennon, but he was called out for his iso vote along side a bunch of other stuff.
going back and looking at the RVS seems like it didn't really turn up anything useful like I thought it would. Between work and preping for GP: Chicago, I haven't had as much time to put into this game as I would like. My posting will become more frequent after I get back
V/LA until Monday
Smear.
So why say this? Just to smear me?
Aside from your scummy "I'm going to vote whoever votes me."
Not quite. Let's have this conversation.
You are a noob. We all know this. You made it apparent. Then you harped on it. Then you used it as an excuse. Then you continued to say "sorry if I'm scummy guys, I'm just a noob." To me, that is a scumtell. I can find countless meta arguments where noob scum get off by saying "sorry, guys. I'm just a noob". You continuing to push the fact that you're a noob and attempting to paint me scummy for it just seals the deal.
If I were pushing a noob for noobishness, it would be Kank or PG, for the record. You're being pushed for harping on how much of a noob you are.
Wow. That is not at all what I expected from you. Like... I'm just shocked.
You must be aware that your defense against my claim here was extremely obvious. Even if we take it for granted that you are playing terribly in this game (you're not), and even if I thought you were a complete idiot (I don't), I still would have expected you to come back in exactly the same way. My use of meta was not only terrible for being meta, it was terrible for coming to exactly the opposite conclusion that I should have (I should have concluded that you're town). I thought that would be obvious, especially to you (as it was).
So... Assuming you agree that it really was that obvious, that you had an easy and legit defense, that sort of knocks out number 2, and without that there's really nothing there. So where's the scum motivation? Assuming I thought lying so obviously was a good thing to try, you don't think I could have kept pushing? No one but Misting even realised that I'd lied, and he was busy with WoD.
Remember also that it wasn't just a simple test. It was trying to get some content out there from others as well. It worked to a point. This wasn't just about you.
Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing. Until I can get a handle on how everyone else plays, I'm focusing more on those I know. That's why I pushed PG in the beginning too. My notes on other players are getting more detailed as we go, but I don't think I'll be ready to push on one of them for a while yet since I won't feel comfortable gauging their reaction until I'm used to them.
By the way, please don't assume I know what I'm doing! This is only my second game after all. All I know is that more content and more reactions are good for the town. One of the major things I learned my first game is that sometimes getting your name dragged through the mud can be a good thing for the team. Thought I'd take a chance and try my hand at it now that I am town. Turned out my name ended up staying clean somehow since no one focused on me, but c'est la vie.
I just wanted to point out that you can, in fact, be both. Never at the same time, maybe, but certainly within the same game. That was me in my first game. It worked out very well for me for the first couple Days.