O) My vote is still on you at this point because you're pushing so aggressively that I said I was 100% sure the scum weren't 50/50 M/F, and you know that's not what I said, so you must be lying. Town don't have a habit of lying, and if that is your habit as town you should quit it. If you were lying about what someone else said I might also be voting you for that.
My initial vote was because of all that "I'm sure I'm gonna get nailed for this but" stuff you were spewing, which is a frequent noobscum gesture.
The bolded is the most nonsensical smear I've ever seen. Unless LD is a telepath, how can he know for sure whether we truly understand his meaning? Sure he's been trying to clarify himself, but shouldn't he have been clear the first time with so much experience? As far as I can see, LD is defending his slip to the extent of lying himself. He then contradicts himself in the next sentence that says that town don't have a habit of lying. So it's either a sloppy town statement, or it's scum trying to cover their tracks. Even after I told LD to be careful and to proofread before posting, he still comes up with this. Vote LampDwellr
I still don't like Maokun, something is up with LampDwellr, but I'll go ahead and unvote; vote stardust for being my best lead.
This whole sentence gives me scummy feelings towards infectiousbaloth. Especially 'something is up with LampDwellr', very meagre attempt at trying to convey your suspicions of LampDwellr.
I'm going to agree here about IB. Thanks to Arcadic's post coming right after, I noticed that moving his vote from me (who only had 2 votes including his -so I'm not at the moment a good bet) to Stardust, placed Stardust at 5 votes, 1 above to himself and now the person most likely to be lynched. I seriously have to wonder if it's not a desperate attempt to spare himself, specially taking in account that he has had very strong opinions against me for most of the game and almost none against Stardust to suddenly jump onto that bandwagon. I'm still unsure whether Stardust is scum or not, but IB may just be bussing on him to save his own hide.
Also, Seppel and infectiousbaloth are probably not scum together due to their interaction. Plus, I'm liking Seppel for town.
While Seppel has only been given townie vibes, he's also posted too little and too unsubstantially for me to truly have a lean, and I'm suspecting that's his playing style.
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.
1) Answering PG's question of (paraphrased) "What is Stardust doing? Is he doing this?" by saying "Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing."
2) Saying "please don't assume I know what I'm doing!"
While he uses some of the same words, upon careful reading (and even not-so-careful reading) it is clear that the two statements do not refer to the same thing. The first thing he does (which you quote second) is to say "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he does (which you quote first) is to say "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what best practices are!"
I can't see you misunderstanding this. The only trouble is I can't see why you would do this as scum, since it seems so obvious to me, but my current assumption is that you didn't think it was obvious.
I still don't like Maokun, something is up with LampDwellr, but I'll go ahead and unvote; vote stardust for being my best lead.
This whole sentence gives me scummy feelings towards infectiousbaloth. Especially 'something is up with LampDwellr', very meagre attempt at trying to convey your suspicions of LampDwellr.
I'm going to agree here about IB. Thanks to Arcadic's post coming right after, I noticed that moving his vote from me (who only had 2 votes including his -so I'm not at the moment a good bet) to Stardust, placed Stardust at 5 votes, 1 above to himself and now the person most likely to be lynched. I seriously have to wonder if it's not a desperate attempt to spare himself, specially taking in account that he has had very strong opinions against me for most of the game and almost none against Stardust to suddenly jump onto that bandwagon. I'm still unsure whether Stardust is scum or not, but IB may just be bussing on him to save his own hide.
Also, Seppel and infectiousbaloth are probably not scum together due to their interaction. Plus, I'm liking Seppel for town.
While Seppel has only been given townie vibes, he's also posted too little and too unsubstantially for me to truly have a lean, and I'm suspecting that's his playing style.
You seem very self conscious, and paying a bit too much attention to VCs. The reason I moved my vote off of you, in spite of my belief that you are scum, is that your wagon is nonexistent. So rather than push a lynch that will never happen, I'd rather support the lynch of my number two scumspect.
O) My vote is still on you at this point because you're pushing so aggressively that I said I was 100% sure the scum weren't 50/50 M/F, and you know that's not what I said, so you must be lying. Town don't have a habit of lying, and if that is your habit as town you should quit it. If you were lying about what someone else said I might also be voting you for that.
My initial vote was because of all that "I'm sure I'm gonna get nailed for this but" stuff you were spewing, which is a frequent noobscum gesture.
The bolded is the most nonsensical smear I've ever seen. Unless LD is a telepath, how can he know for sure whether we truly understand his meaning? Sure he's been trying to clarify himself, but shouldn't he have been clear the first time with so much experience? As far as I can see, LD is defending his slip to the extent of lying himself. He then contradicts himself in the next sentence that says that town don't have a habit of lying. So it's either a sloppy town statement, or it's scum trying to cover their tracks. Even after I told LD to be careful and to proofread before posting, he still comes up with this. Vote LampDwellr
None of this makes any sense.
I am not lying, you are wrong, and Kank is misrepresenting my original statement. He always was: he quoted it without the entire sentence to begin with. Kank's also now accusing me of "ranting and yelling" in a post that was shorter than his post I was responding to.
I didn't contradict myself by saying "townies don't lie." Townies don't lie. What am I lying about? I said to begin with that it was not the case that [we can be confident there are an even number of m/f scum].
The logic "shouldn't someone who has experience be able to write a sentence that I personally like" is actually a horrible reason for this vote. Just terrible.
And this "even after I told him to proofread" thing? Where the hell do you get off? You're not reading my posts very well. That's your fault.
Ah, I seem to be stuck in a neverending cycle of “he said/she said” with LampDwellr.
That is because you initially quoted me out of context and continue to insist that I said something I didn't. You started this.
I am making no connection between your observation that 100% of d1 lynches have been town and anything you said afterwards. Stop connecting these. This is one of many reasons why you are failing in this conversation.
Ah, I seem to be stuck in a neverending cycle of “he said/she said” with LampDwellr. In order to make this less messy, I have to use Word, which then screws up the quotes…
LampDwellr: H) Your assumption that there are 6 scum and 3 are male and 3 are female seems problematic for a number of reasons. Your reasoning from it also strikes me as spurious, because the order in which you kill people matters even if you do decide that it's 90% likely the scum are half-male and half-female - which is not the case. J) It is not the case that [it is 90% likely that the scum are half-and-half], is what I was saying. An awkward sentence, but not as awkward as saying "even if you do decide that it's 90% likely the scum are half-male and half female - which is not actually the confidence interval I would assign such a circumstance." L) I am not certain that it is not a 50/50 split. But that's not something I'd like to gamble heavy on, because I think it's more like...40% likely that it's 50/50. It could easily be an odd number of scum, especially if you have loner scums or neutrals, and if it is an even number of scum it may well not be 50/50.
Kankennon:
H) Okay, here I said that it made sense if the (most likely 6) bad guys were evenly split among the genders, half and half. A 50/50 split made perfect sense to me, and I would feel that it would be a logical assumption based on simply the fact that the game has a pre-laid out group of players that have been made aware of each other’s gender and instructed that it matters somehow. If the players are evenly split, then why wouldn’t you think that the good/bad roles are evenly split as well? They certainly don’t have to be and very well might not be, but doesn’t logic dictate that to be the most likely scenario? What is LampDwellr’s true point here?
J) LampDwellr’s restatement of what he meant by “which is not the case” is far more convoluted than it should possibly be. Notice how he made the sentence WAY more awkward instead of clarifying what he supposedly meant instead.
L) LampDwellr goes from completely certain that it is not 50/50, to agreeing that there might be a 40% chance of the 50/50 split.
LampDwellr: H) We were talking about possible options for the setup and I thought your reasoning was spurious. So I explained why rather than going "nope dumb"
J) I did clarify what I meant, in multiple iterations. I was restating the part in quotation marks to explain why I opted for the simplified wording in the first place. I can't believe you're actually still pushing this nonsense, frankly.
L) I REALLY CANNOT BELIEVE that you are pushing THIS more. I did not say that I was completely certain it was not the case. I said it was not the case that we can be confident scum are 50/50 M/F. That is all I ever said. Quit it.
O) My vote is still on you at this point because you're pushing so aggressively that I said I was 100% sure the scum weren't 50/50 M/F, and you know that's not what I said, so you must be lying. Town don't have a habit of lying, and if that is your habit as town you should quit it. If you were lying about what someone else said I might also be voting you for that.
My initial vote was because of all that "I'm sure I'm gonna get nailed for this but" stuff you were spewing, which is a frequent noobscum gesture.
Q) I am acknowledging that these statistics are made up, because they're all in HYPOTHETICAL CONVERSATIONS.
Curious. LampDwellr is the one yelling, ranting, and making up statistics and insisting that other people (mainly me) said them, yet I’m the one being aggressive here?
Oh by the way, I never stated that I was 100% certain about ANYTHING (or even 90% for that matter). Where did that originate? Oh yeah…
Stop being awful at reading comprehension if you're going to play mafia. Show me what bit of text of MINE this bolded part is responding to. I didn't ever say "Kank said he was 100% certain of a thing." You're responding to literal nothing.
Why are you doing this?
Are you scummy or an idiot? Your choice. Warning for flaming
Huh. Apparently all that was a bad idea! Funny that never mentioning Tom again probably wouldn't have gotten me nearly as much attention as coming clean. I'll have to remember that for future games. Anyway, my stated reasons are the truth, so I guess it's a take it or leave it thing here. Truth is, I didn't really see this as a gambit at all since I assumed coming clean would at least put me back to neutral for most people. I realised that it might not be a super effective tactic, but thought I'd give it a whirl to see what happens. Obviously I was wrong about a lot of this.
I guess I'll start by answering those comments that need attention...
I'm not liking Stardust. There are five reasons for that: His self-admitted false vote on Tom (lying as a dubious gambit), his overdone RVS play against pikachugundam (makes me think they're buddies), his quick dismissal of my list of reads (unnecessary to bring WIFOM into the game already), his 'please don't assume I know what I'm doing!', and his calling Wrath_of_Dog scum (without giving any good reasons for doing so).
Those first two are fair enough, as far as it goes, but I wanted to quickly comment on the last three.
1) I didn't really mean to dismiss your list (I did thank you for it after all). In fact, I think it was really helpful to keep the game moving! Like I said before, I was just trying to be helpful by pointing out that much of that was conjecture, so obviously they're not based on much fact quite yet. Maybe that was obvious.
2) I gave reasoning for this too. Seriously, please do call me on being stupid! PG should have. In fact, I wanted him too as part of the plan. We need to call people on stuff like that, not only to keep everyone honest but also to generate more content.
3) WoD may have been caught, is what I said. I'm not sure he's scum, though he's been a little scummy. Others were already voting for him when I said this, so I assumed I didn't need to go into great detail about why he might be scum.
I'd hardly say your name is clean, why did you think it was after such a gambit claim? And it does not knock out number 2, as you even say by pointing out that everyone else missed the extremely obvious issue with your argument. Another thing I don't like about your argument is how casually you asume that others would catch onto your argument, even before Tom revealed its flaw. How would we know it was backwards before then?
I don't think my name is clean at this point. I thought it might be after I explained everything, but obviously I was wrong. Are you asking "Why are you surprised Tom jumped on you?" Because the answer there is because that post from Tom was very very different to the play I've seen from her in the past.
But yeah, you're right that I was relying on Tom to come out with the fact that she was town in both games prior. I assumed that she would and was relying on that for all what I was saying about getting reactions from others.
This big long post ends in...nothing. Not one bit of that screams scum to you? Even after you said "We may have caught WoD in the trap"? You did not think there was something overtly scummy?
Sure I did. The agreeing with town for easy credit, putting out unfounded dirt on Tom and lack of contributions. Apparently that's business as usual, but I didn't know that. He was feeling a little scummy to me since he wasn't giving great answers to people, then stopped responding all together. Not sure what else you expect me to be thinking here, but I can't be sure of anything at this point, so why would I be sure about WoD?
Weren't you the first to vote for him anyway? Why are you grilling me for thinking he might be scum?
Now, as much for my own benefit as anyone elses, I'm going to make a list.
EtR - Likely town. Mostly that's a gut thing, but I've liked his reasoning throughout. Seppel - I'm going to assume he's town until I see otherwise, if only because Seppel as scum scares me too much. Ferro Man - Unsure. Putting in a bit of work looking for patterns, not posting too much though. Dork Knight - Probably town. Not a lot of content. Puts the second vote on Lamp Dwellr. Seems legit enough. GrickyTimmick - Unsure. Early in the game I had a gut feeling that he was scum, but that's probably due mostly to his posting style, which reminds me of someone's scum play (can't say who - ongoing). I didn't like the last part of this post or the last part of this post, but he's mostly been doing what seems like decent work otherwise. Raging Levine - Likely town. Not a lot of posts, but he's had some good thoughts which agree with my own reads. I'm liking Raging Levine so far. Reya - Unsure. Puts the fourth vote on InfectiousBaloth. Basically nothing else. Kahedron - Unsure. Defending IB somewhat (though questions him too), votes Lamp Dwellr for knowing the scum team... He's been involved, but that could easily go either way once we know a few alignments. Misting - Probably town. He attacks the right people for the right reasons and seems much more concerned with getting more content out than with building on a wagon. captaineddie - Nothing... Wrath of Dog - Leaning scum, as explained earlier. InfectiousBaloth - Leaning scum for generally suspicious behaviour. Odd choices of wording at times, defensive, abandoning wagons to jump on the wagon of the day.
Lamp Dwellr - Leaning scum. She seems too defensive, but I'm not sure what to make of that since I know she's experienced. She brings up good points at times, but my gut says scum. Kankennon - Probably town. Outside a few moments, I think Kank's been doing alright for a rookie. She needs to tighten up her play, but so far I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt based on my gut read. Tom - Probably scum. Her play is way too different (read: aggressive and sure) from what I've seen in the past, and a few of her posts have pretty clearly been trying to smear me rather than just calling me scum for the facts that are there.** Macius - Unsure. Seems to indicate that Maokun is acting scummy. No content otherwise. Bolly - Probably town. Good involvement, nice posting, nothing scummy that I've seen. A Bear - Unsure. Not very involved which is blamed on the average length of posts being quite large. Feeling town, but I'm not sure if the lack of involvement is for scummy reasons or real reasons. Wessel - Probably town. Moves the game along and votes with solid reasons rather than trying to fabricate a case. I like her as an analyzer at the very least. pikachugundam - Likely town. A bit of a rocky start in some ways, but her last few posts have been generally good and her answer to my RVS post worked well enough. Maokun - Likely scum. Misrepresenting the facts on IB like that wasn't great. This post is awful. Reiterates the wrong things too many times for me to blame it on being a rookie. Voxxicus - Nothing...
**I didn't want to get people too uppity right away, but I may as well come out swinging now. Vote: Tom.
Huh. Apparently all that was a bad idea! Funny that never mentioning Tom again probably wouldn't have gotten me nearly as much attention as coming clean.
I'll have to remember that for future games. Anyway, my stated reasons are the truth, so I guess it's a take it or leave it thing here. Truth is, I didn't really see this as a gambit at all since I assumed coming clean would at least put me back to neutral for most people.
It was the truth... but then you tell us the real truth?
I realised that it might not be a super effective tactic, but thought I'd give it a whirl to see what happens. Obviously I was wrong about a lot of this.
Tom - Probably scum. Her play is way too different (read: aggressive and sure) from what I've seen in the past, and a few of her posts have pretty clearly been trying to smear me rather than just calling me scum for the facts that are there. [...] Vote: Tom.
In other news, Tom, as per usual, is floundering. I don't see the solid scum hunting skills that Wessel was talking about, and frankly, Tom looks like the same sketchy player that got lynched in the two games of experience I have with her*. Vote: Tom.
O) My vote is still on you at this point because you're pushing so aggressively that I said I was 100% sure the scum weren't 50/50 M/F, and you know that's not what I said, so you must be lying. Town don't have a habit of lying, and if that is your habit as town you should quit it. If you were lying about what someone else said I might also be voting you for that.
My initial vote was because of all that "I'm sure I'm gonna get nailed for this but" stuff you were spewing, which is a frequent noobscum gesture.
The bolded is the most nonsensical smear I've ever seen. Unless LD is a telepath, how can he know for sure whether we truly understand his meaning? Sure he's been trying to clarify himself, but shouldn't he have been clear the first time with so much experience? As far as I can see, LD is defending his slip to the extent of lying himself. He then contradicts himself in the next sentence that says that town don't have a habit of lying. So it's either a sloppy town statement, or it's scum trying to cover their tracks. Even after I told LD to be careful and to proofread before posting, he still comes up with this. Vote LampDwellr
None of this makes any sense.
I am not lying, you are wrong, and Kank is misrepresenting my original statement. He always was: he quoted it without the entire sentence to begin with. Kank's also now accusing me of "ranting and yelling" in a post that was shorter than his post I was responding to.
I didn't contradict myself by saying "townies don't lie." Townies don't lie. What am I lying about? I said to begin with that it was not the case that [we can be confident there are an even number of m/f scum].
The logic "shouldn't someone who has experience be able to write a sentence that I personally like" is actually a horrible reason for this vote. Just terrible.
And this "even after I told him to proofread" thing? Where the hell do you get off? You're not reading my posts very well. That's your fault.
Have you ever thought to step outside your own shoes for a second to reread what you've written to make sure what you've written can be easily understood by people besides yourself? Just because I think you're wrong doesn't necessarily mean that you are wrong. On the flip side, just because you think I'm wrong doesn't mean that I am. We can simply agree to disagree at this point since I think you're ranting and yelling in this post.
And at the point where you say 'townies don't lie' is right after telling a lie. So that's either contradictory as town, or straight up telling us you're scum. As for what you're lying about, you said that Kank was lying. How do we know who is lying at this point? So unless you're telepathic and can read Kank's mind, we don't know who is telling the truth at this point. Though from content of posts, I'm reading Kank to be more genuine than you.
Also, please refrain from putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about personally having to like how you write. I did say that I believe you should be more clear in your writing as to convey what you really mean. This is a perfect example. As most teachers will tell you, if you didn't understand something, ask about it because you're likely not the only one who didn't understand it.
Well, I was hoping to come away from this no dirtier than before, but I made that comment just as an aside. Basically, something to remember for the future.
It was the truth... but then you tell us the real truth?
C'mon, that's a bit of a twist. I was replying to a different thought in that next sentece. The second "truth" was in response to my play being called a gambit. What I meant by that is that I didn't really see it as a gambit at the time.
Lamp Dwellr - Leaning scum. She seems too defensive, but I'm not sure what to make of that since I know she's experienced. She brings up good points at times, but my gut says scum.
.
I am defending myself once per time attacked, and I keep getting attacked for the same non-thing that I didn't post. So I'm annoyed about that. But just because people are nit-picking me should not be construed as overdefensiveness.
Unless you're planning to say that me choosing to respond here is also too defensive or something, which
Mod Note : Please make all VC/RL requests, replacement requests and otherwise important information exchanges about activity both by PM and by posting in the game thread. If will be a boon to all of us. Thanks.
Ok I know I should sort of be used to you and your lightning leaps of logic but could you run that one by me again.
A while back you were semi agreeing with Kank that Tom Vs Stardust wasn't a town vs town spat and wanted more votes on Dusty. Now you've unvoted with no clear indication of any new suspicions.
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
unvote InfectiousBaloth until I finish reading up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
http://forum.iwtso.com/index.php http://iwtso.com/
Join our forum and site to Watch Simpsons free, and discuss a whole lot of other things on our forum.
We are about to have a competition on our forum, join for a chance to win $75
I'm content with seeing what LampDwellr really is.
He is being way too aggressive to be a helpful townie right now.
Vote LampDwellr
I'm extremely annoyed that you keep misrepresenting me. I'm sure you can tell! Please explain how that annoyance is scummy. You're right that I haven't been helpful lately but that is a product of my rather strong frustration.
1) Answering PG's question of (paraphrased) "What is Stardust doing? Is he doing this?" by saying "Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing."
2) Saying "please don't assume I know what I'm doing!"
While he uses some of the same words, upon careful reading (and even not-so-careful reading) it is clear that the two statements do not refer to the same thing. The first thing he does (which you quote second) is to say "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he does (which you quote first) is to say "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what best practices are!"
I can't see you misunderstanding this. The only trouble is I can't see why you would do this as scum, since it seems so obvious to me, but my current assumption is that you didn't think it was obvious.
This doesn't make sense to me. "Yes, you are correct about my intention" is what he was trying to say the first time. We can agree on that.
The second thing he said does not at all read as "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what best practices are!" It says "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what I'm doing!" This is where we disagree. "What best practices are" and "what I'm doing" are totally different, clearly, and saying as he literally said "what I'm doing" I think it's fair to assume that was what he meant.
The first thing he said was "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he said was "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" which is almost identical to "please don't assume I know what my intentions are!". (If you can interchange "intention" and "doing" for the first part, you can also do it for the second)
And there you see the contradiction. It doesn't make sense to be sure about your intention, or know exactly what you are doing, and then say "but don't assume I know what my intentions are!" or "don't assume I know exactly what I'm doing!"
I'm surprised this isn't obvious to you. It's certainly obvious to me.
I guess I'll start by answering those comments that need attention...
My questions/comments don't need attention?
Tom - Probably scum. Her play is way too different (read: aggressive and sure) from what I've seen in the past, and a few of her posts have pretty clearly been trying to smear me rather than just calling me scum for the facts that are there. Vote: Tom.
Please explain how I smear you, and how I don't call you scum for the facts that are there.
Also, why bring back meta into this? You yourself agreed meta was bad.
The first thing he said was "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he said was "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" which is almost identical to "please don't assume I know what my intentions are!". (If you can interchange "intention" and "doing" for the first part, you can also do it for the second)
And there you see the contradiction. It doesn't make sense to be sure about your intention, or know exactly what you are doing, and then say "but don't assume I know what my intentions are!" or "don't assume I know exactly what I'm doing!"
Words don't mean the same thing in every context. You know that. You're creating a contradiction where there isn't one.
Bolly said exactly the same words about that linked post. When I asked him to explain himself he found out that the "awful" accusation was perhaps too harsh, so I'm going to ask you now what is so awful about that post. Sure, it was an emotional response against a personal attack that -as I have to point time after time- was not an accusation of scumminess but of poor play. I've on the record apologized for the tone, but I still believe that given the tone of the attack, it was not unwarranted.
Reiterates the wrong things too many times for me to blame it on being a rookie.
See my italicised text above. I have to keep reiterating things because I keep being accused of the same old thing time after time, whenever a new person that suddenly takes an interest on me doesn't bother to read the full context. Trust me: I don't love repeating myself.
Misrepresenting the facts on IB like that wasn't great.
How am I misrepresenting him? I've been accusing him of exactly the same you pointed as scummy behaviour under his entry in your post. I seriously don't understand the necessity of saying this and it's actually the first truly eyebrow-raising thing you have said in the game from my perspective.
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.
You're reading "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" as "please don't assume I know what best practices are". Why? Those two things are not even close to the same. What someone is doing =/= best practices.
And without interpreting it that way, there is, in fact, a contradiction.
You are twisting words to mean something they don't, and ironically that is what you accuse me of...
Huh. Apparently all that was a bad idea! Funny that never mentioning Tom again probably wouldn't have gotten me nearly as much attention as coming clean. I'll have to remember that for future games. Anyway, my stated reasons are the truth, so I guess it's a take it or leave it thing here. Truth is, I didn't really see this as a gambit at all since I assumed coming clean would at least put me back to neutral for most people. I realised that it might not be a super effective tactic, but thought I'd give it a whirl to see what happens. Obviously I was wrong about a lot of this.
I had pretty much the same reaction as Seppel upon reading this. Attention at the fore, and I don't understand why you would make such an assumption as that, especially when you say you know it might not be effective. This has me even more convinced you are lying about your "gambit".
I'm not liking Stardust. There are five reasons for that: His self-admitted false vote on Tom (lying as a dubious gambit), his overdone RVS play against pikachugundam (makes me think they're buddies), his quick dismissal of my list of reads (unnecessary to bring WIFOM into the game already), his 'please don't assume I know what I'm doing!', and his calling Wrath_of_Dog scum (without giving any good reasons for doing so).
Those first two are fair enough, as far as it goes, but I wanted to quickly comment on the last three.
1) I didn't really mean to dismiss your list (I did thank you for it after all). In fact, I think it was really helpful to keep the game moving! Like I said before, I was just trying to be helpful by pointing out that much of that was conjecture, so obviously they're not based on much fact quite yet. Maybe that was obvious.
2) I gave reasoning for this too. Seriously, please do call me on being stupid! PG should have. In fact, I wanted him too as part of the plan. We need to call people on stuff like that, not only to keep everyone honest but also to generate more content.
3) WoD may have been caught, is what I said. I'm not sure he's scum, though he's been a little scummy. Others were already voting for him when I said this, so I assumed I didn't need to go into great detail about why he might be scum.
2) Part of the plan, eh? I have an even harder time believing that your "noob" statement was part of some plan to generate content by putting yourself as the target. In fact, how is that line of action consistent with your previous plan of "grand reveal makes me neutral"? You ha dalready made the reveal, and content was up, so why this much worse mini-gambit?
I'd hardly say your name is clean, why did you think it was after such a gambit claim? And it does not knock out number 2, as you even say by pointing out that everyone else missed the extremely obvious issue with your argument. Another thing I don't like about your argument is how casually you asume that others would catch onto your argument, even before Tom revealed its flaw. How would we know it was backwards before then?
I don't think my name is clean at this point. I thought it might be after I explained everything, but obviously I was wrong. Are you asking "Why are you surprised Tom jumped on you?" Because the answer there is because that post from Tom was very very different to the play I've seen from her in the past.
But yeah, you're right that I was relying on Tom to come out with the fact that she was town in both games prior. I assumed that she would and was relying on that for all what I was saying about getting reactions from others.
My point about (this) 2 was you were dismissing the rest of his argument based on faulty logic, and I wanted you to fix that.
This big long post ends in...nothing. Not one bit of that screams scum to you? Even after you said "We may have caught WoD in the trap"? You did not think there was something overtly scummy?
Sure I did. The agreeing with town for easy credit, putting out unfounded dirt on Tom and lack of contributions. Apparently that's business as usual, but I didn't know that. He was feeling a little scummy to me since he wasn't giving great answers to people, then stopped responding all together. Not sure what else you expect me to be thinking here, but I can't be sure of anything at this point, so why would I be sure about WoD?
Everything that you brought up in his summary was you saying it was scummy, and then you go and say it doesn't scream scum. After that big post mostly containing anti WoD stuff, I expected you to take a far more difinitive stance than that. And by difinitive I don't mean "clear scum/town", but I didn't like seeing the fence-sit you put there. Even a straight "I don't have enough to tell" or "I don't know" would have been better than what I consider a scummy fence-sit.
Now, as much for my own benefit as anyone elses, I'm going to make a list.
EtR - Likely town. Mostly that's a gut thing, but I've liked his reasoning throughout. Seppel - I'm going to assume he's town until I see otherwise, if only because Seppel as scum scares me too much. Ferro Man - Unsure. Putting in a bit of work looking for patterns, not posting too much though. Dork Knight - Probably town. Not a lot of content. Puts the second vote on Lamp Dwellr. Seems legit enough. GrickyTimmick - Unsure. Early in the game I had a gut feeling that he was scum, but that's probably due mostly to his posting style, which reminds me of someone's scum play (can't say who - ongoing). I didn't like the last part of this post or the last part of this post, but he's mostly been doing what seems like decent work otherwise. Raging Levine - Likely town. Not a lot of posts, but he's had some good thoughts which agree with my own reads. I'm liking Raging Levine so far. Reya - Unsure. Puts the fourth vote on InfectiousBaloth. Basically nothing else. Kahedron - Unsure. Defending IB somewhat (though questions him too), votes Lamp Dwellr for knowing the scum team... He's been involved, but that could easily go either way once we know a few alignments. Misting - Probably town. He attacks the right people for the right reasons and seems much more concerned with getting more content out than with building on a wagon. captaineddie - Nothing... Wrath of Dog - Leaning scum, as explained earlier. InfectiousBaloth - Leaning scum for generally suspicious behaviour. Odd choices of wording at times, defensive, abandoning wagons to jump on the wagon of the day.
Lamp Dwellr - Leaning scum. She seems too defensive, but I'm not sure what to make of that since I know she's experienced. She brings up good points at times, but my gut says scum. Kankennon - Probably town. Outside a few moments, I think Kank's been doing alright for a rookie. She needs to tighten up her play, but so far I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt based on my gut read. Tom - Probably scum. Her play is way too different (read: aggressive and sure) from what I've seen in the past, and a few of her posts have pretty clearly been trying to smear me rather than just calling me scum for the facts that are there.** Macius - Unsure. Seems to indicate that Maokun is acting scummy. No content otherwise. Bolly - Probably town. Good involvement, nice posting, nothing scummy that I've seen. A Bear - Unsure. Not very involved which is blamed on the average length of posts being quite large. Feeling town, but I'm not sure if the lack of involvement is for scummy reasons or real reasons. Wessel - Probably town. Moves the game along and votes with solid reasons rather than trying to fabricate a case. I like her as an analyzer at the very least. pikachugundam - Likely town. A bit of a rocky start in some ways, but her last few posts have been generally good and her answer to my RVS post worked well enough. Maokun - Likely scum. Misrepresenting the facts on IB like that wasn't great. This post is awful. Reiterates the wrong things too many times for me to blame it on being a rookie. Voxxicus - Nothing...
**I didn't want to get people too uppity right away, but I may as well come out swinging now. Vote: Tom.
And this vote will make people uppity? Why did you not want to ruffle some feathers?
You're reading "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" as "please don't assume I know what best practices are". Why? Those two things are not even close to the same. What someone is doing =/= best practices.
And without interpreting it that way, there is, in fact, a contradiction.
You are twisting words to mean something they don't, and ironically that is what you accuse me of...
Normally I would agree with RL on this one. "I don't know what I'm doing" typically refers to one not knowing what the best course is, but rather doing something blindly. However, since apparently Stardust would have us believe that particular statement was a set up anyway, this argument becomes moot.
I think you are taking the /barn to an extreme. Had he barned a vote and placed his own, I would have a problem with it. However he was simply barning an understanding of the gamestate, which I read as a harmless agreement.
Secondly, you aren't accounting for any of his other posts in the game. You are pointing at the barn and saying "look at this guy trying to post content like he's actually playing!" when he is, in fact, actually playing and posting things aside from the barn. You're attack onto IB for nothing more than the barn is defeated by the fact that IB is obviously posting more than you are accounting for.
I do believe that one errant post in enough to find scum. Do you disagree?
Second, what's wrong with my "educational diatribe" about the subtypes? More specifically, how does that make me scummy?
It doesn't make you scummy, but rather large posts regarding stuff that isn't really relevant to the game at hand can be quite overwhelming to newer folks to wade through.
Now that it's firmly established that he's new, take a look at the bolded statements. A newer player calling out /barning as a bad habit strikes me as townie because he's preaching something that's generally a well known fact. He goes on to explain why voicing your opinion, even if it's similar to someone else's, is better play. Even though he's spouting well known things to experience mafia players, newer players may not know about these things. So not only is he showing a townie mindset by learning these things early, where scum would rather take advantage of these things, he's also preaching it, which is an incredibly protown move for a player who doesn't know any better.
Top it off with his last section, the second bolded part. He shows mass-paranoia, which is typical of a newer town player. Scum don't show paranoia because they know who they can trust, they know their partners. Noob townies aren't very willing to trust anyone and they let that be known.
At face value, I'm thinking AB is easily town. Unless he's lying about his mafia experience, I'm doubtful that will change.
Now that you know that Bear is not a new player how does that change your opinion?
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?
This is a really good question and I'm looking forward to coming across the answer.
Second, I didn't say I was noob-smashing, but if everyone is going to claim that any attack on a newer player is a "smash" attempt, then there's no use in actually playing this game. There are far too many new or newer players that tip-toeing around them isn't going to get us anywhere. I don't think the way I was playing was "smashing", I even attempted to thwart that argument when I initially made my argument against Kank. I've kept the same level of aggression that I would show to anyone else and I don't believe my tactics to be twisted by any means. "GRICKY SMASH" just isn't a thing, and smashing in general is a rather poor argument anyway. At some point, a noob is going to need to be questioned about something. They aren't babies, they're just new mafia players. I've even seen plenty of newer players that stand up mightily against some of the experienced players we have. I see this "noob-smashing" argument as an excuse to coddle the newer players and a hinderence on anyone who actually wants to accomplish an interrogation in this game.
I agree with A) The fact that we can't tip toe around and
B) This is very similar to Gricky's play in Triskelion. Gricky was Town in that game. Here is the link for anyone that wants to do some research. He died night 2. Triskelion
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 like that Kah questions my vote here. +Town
I have comments on Kah in other sections that have me leaning scum at the moment for him.
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?
You have several posts like this where you are just looking for elaboration. Have you gained anything from the answers that you’ve gotten? If so, what?
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.
So you are saying that self-promotion is scummy? Wouldn't scum want to do the opposite and blend in?
Please explain, I don't understand what you mean.
1. You said that you think my post is scummy
2. You say that you don't understand the self promotion
Are you then saying that self promotion is scummy? Why would scum want to self promote? Doesn't it behoove them to attempt to blend in?
Wessel –
Wessel's post #143 is a pretty good summary of that point in the game and I agree with most of the reads. The one thing I don’t like is the 1 town point for voting the crafters, but it’s not really a tell either way and I don’t think it’s something to worry about. More random than anything else.
This is a very weak defence. Just because three quarters of a game would be newbies, it doesn't mean you should 'noob smash' (as PikachuGundam calls it). Furthermore, as others have already pointed out, why so over the top in your defence saying 'three quarters of the players are noobs'?
If you feel this way, then why didn't you call out Stardust for admittedly pouncing on a new player earlier in the game?
At the time I didn't realise you had actually played Mafia before (on other forums). I saw a chance to push a newb and took it, hoping to get a reaction of some kind. As it is, your reaction was acceptable. Unvote.
I really dislike this. Especially coupled with some posts later that I will get to. What exactly did you hope to gain by "pushing a newb"?
Glad to see you're working to get the game moving, Wessel, but that list is just loaded with WIFOM. Not that we have much else to go on at this point, but it's worth noting for the rookies that that reasoning won't fly later in the game.
So, as Kank said, Seppel and captaineddie are the only two who haven't posted. Hopefully they show up soon. The sideboard is the current post count, which I'll be referring back to later in the game, I'm sure.
@everyone, leave PG alone for that voting for lurkers thing. Lurkers might not be scum, you're right, but voting for them to get them to post isn't scummy either. This is helping no one.
Leave Britney alone!
Why feel the need to defend PG here? How does voting for someone help get them into the game?
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.
The scum motivation is getting a Town Tom mislynched based on a lie that you were perfectly content to push until you got called on it. That's about as scummy as it gets.
I was pretty self-aware when I was new to Mafia, and all of my early games were as town. Not necessarily a scumtell. b) I don't think self-aware is the right description here. I saw it as an attempt to be funny. c) I think that vote is an over-reaction. My own vote on Maokun was mostly non-serious, though I thought it would be interesting to see his reaction.
I can't tell if this is you just giving an opinion on new players or actually defending Maokun. Care to clarify?
I like Bolly’s opinion on my vote in #199 However I don’t like that he calls out PG for lurking and mentions nothing about Stardusts patented “Lurk-O-Graph” which Stardust claims to want to come back to from time to time.
Bolly – you’ve tunneled Maokun pretty hard. Where do you stand with some other folks? I’m not looking for everyone, just a handful.
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
Is this all that we can look forward to from you? Can you please provide any scum games you have played?
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
When was it determined that that was not the argument?
This is a great Post from Misting. I agree with the reasoning presented and the vote on Stardust.
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.
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?
<SNIP out judgment of Kah>
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
This is actually a pretty good post in my opinion. I think Kah did contradict himself a bit here. He goes from calling Maokun “noob noob” to some sort of noob mastermind. This is definitely a more aggressive Kah then I recall from Triskelion. (See GT’s section for the link)
@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.
So now I wonder what it's more likely for an apparently experienced player: To "lose his patience" and aggressively attack another town member; or to cleverly act that role to claim town. I'm pointing a FoS at you. Not upgrading it to a vote because you may just be elitist, thin-patienced town, but that's how I'm reading you.
Read Triskelion. You're the one being attacked, so maybe you can better tell if there is a difference in his playing style.
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 see we agree on Gricky. What is it that makes you say that WoD is getting pressure for no reason and what about PG’s play is awful?
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've been voting you all game. Are you on drugs?
Why again are you voting Maokun?
Lamp Dwellr –
During this reread adventure I am up to post #245 and the only thing I can say about Lamp Dwellr is that he uses a lot of exclamation points. I point this out because he isn’t standing out one way or the other. The only thing is exclamation points. If they were periods I wouldn’t have even noticed.
Seppel –
Just about everyone in this game has said they are getting town vibes from Seppel and yet no one has pointed to anything concrete. Anyone want a free town point and a cookie to point out what he has done to earn all these town vibes?
The rest:
Ferro Man
Raging Levine
Reya
captaineddie
Macius
pikachugundam
Voxxicus
I have nothing on. I addressed PG a lot earlier and nothing he has said has really stood out since. Voxx hasn’t made a real post yet, Macius is being replaced as is the Captain.
Reya, RL and FM don’t stand out at all.
Of all these folks I am going to Unvote; Vote: Stardust. Super scummy all game for reasons that I meantioned above and others have commented on.
Got back from Grand Prix Chicago with a cold (because waiting outside in the cold windy rain for a cab with no coat was a terrible idea). Need to read the game to see what I've missed. Have tomorrow off from work. so I should have some content to post tomorrow.
I do find it rather odd that his defense is coming from you rather than him, however...
I find it odd that you caved and unvoted based on one comment from Gricky. Was it not worth continuing the conversation?
This is what convinced me (not really "one comment"):
I think you are taking the /barn to an extreme. Had he barned a vote and placed his own, I would have a problem with it. However he was simply barning an understanding of the gamestate, which I read as a harmless agreement.
Secondly, you aren't accounting for any of his other posts in the game. You are pointing at the barn and saying "look at this guy trying to post content like he's actually playing!" when he is, in fact, actually playing and posting things aside from the barn. You're attack onto IB for nothing more than the barn is defeated by the fact that IB is obviously posting more than you are accounting for.
Lastly, if you have a problem with that barn and with barns in normal, then you are going to have a problem with me, with this game, with other players in the game and with the game in general. Barning, while it can sometimes be used to catch scum, is commonplace in mafia and is used by both town and scum equally. To catch a scum off of a barn is very situational, it depends on who's barning, how they are barning, who they are barning and what it is they are barning, among other things I'm sure. I know I barn a lot and I know plenty of other players who barn. It's a part of the game
As for what I believe IB was doing with his barn, I don't think it was a "Hey I'm a townie providing content!" post, it was more just a "Hey wessel's right guys" post. It let's the town know IB's mindset, that he too agrees that RVS is over.
The third paragraph I simply trusted as I know Gricky is quite experienced, whereas this is only my fourth game.
The rest of the paragraphs convinced me to view IB's post as a simple "Hey Wessel's right guys" which I don't find scummy enough to warrant a vote. It does have some self-promotion in it, but self-promotion isn't something I feel extremely strong about, as I can see the possibility of town doing it at times (such as this one).
Was it not worth continuing the conversation? I wouldn't say that, but I just didn't feel strong enough about it anymore to have my vote on IB.
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?
You have several posts like this where you are just looking for elaboration. Have you gained anything from the answers that you’ve gotten? If so, what?
Besides this example and the next one down, you'll have to point out any other posts in which I am just looking for elaboration, if you want me to respond to them.
As for this case, yes, I gained a whole lot. ***'s response was very very bad and it has led me to believe that he is scum. If my vote wasn't on Stardust, it would be on him.
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.
So you are saying that self-promotion is scummy? Wouldn't scum want to do the opposite and blend in?
Please explain, I don't understand what you mean.
1. You said that you think my post is scummy
2. You say that you don't understand the self promotion
Are you then saying that self promotion is scummy? Why would scum want to self promote? Doesn't it behoove them to attempt to blend in?
Yes, I believe that self-promotion is scummy. There are times, like up above, that I could see town doing it, but for the most part it is awkward and only serves the purpose to make the person look like town, which is something mostly scum are concerned with. It's not a concrete tell, however, and unless the example of it was inexplicably obvious that the person was acting as town, I don't think it would warrant my vote. Like I said earlier, I don't feel extremely strong about it.
The second question is pretty much answered in my answers to the other questions, so not much to say here.
Even after looking up "behoove" in the dictionary I'm having trouble understanding your last question. It sounds like you are asking if it benefits scum to blend in with the town, but I think the answer to that is pretty obvious. That's why it feels to me like self-promotion is scummy; the mafia might try to do it casually, or in a way that people don't call them on it, and in the long run they get people thinking that they are town, and they blend in. (If this doesn't answer your third question please feel free to rephrase it and ask again)
I messaged the mod, but it's important to let the players know too, I've requested replacement. Real life is really getting in the way. I have yet to find a job on top of the new stress of finding a way to pay bills and still try and help out my local game shop. I was looking forward to this game from a mechanics perspective and I've already held myself to a high standard of not replacing out of games, but I feel like my hand is forced here. I really need to focus all my attention elsewhere. Have fun everyone. Sorry I couldn't stay any longer. Hopefully I'll be back on the site sometime soon, once I've found a job and all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Who was that masked man anyway?
MTGSalvation: Now with more Drama than Season 5 of Supernatural!
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.
@The part of the Stardust issue: Let's take a look back at what we're arguing over guys... The first sentence reads to me 'Yes, I am trying to concentrate my game on people I know, so I can rule them as scum or town based on how I've interacted with them previously.' Or 'Yes, I am doing what PG says I'm doing as bolded.' The first sentence of the second paragraph reads to me as written 'Don't assume I know what I'm doing.'
So based on this, I'd say that Raging Levine is right to say that there is no contradiction.
OOG @ Raging Levine: I wondered why I hadn't seen you at SuperStars lately... Looks like you moved.
Sorry, I'm short on time right now. If you can direct me to those that don't just make something out of nothing, please do. Otherwise, I think everything you brought up was covered by others who I did address.
Please explain how I smear you, and how I don't call you scum for the facts that are there.
You start by calling me scum for good reasons (or at least reasonable ones), but then you continue trying to build a case against me with extremely weak links and what look to me like intentional misunderstandings. That's what I meant by smearing.
Also, why bring back meta into this? You yourself agreed meta was bad.
I don't recall doing that, though I haven't checked. I definitely think meta has it's uses. "He does this as town so he must be town" is bad, but "he doesn't do this as town, so he must be scum" is good.
Presumably because he's awesome at this game. I myself was surprised to see Seppel's post, but given that I am town, I'm mostly just impressed.
@Maokun: I know you've explained yourself before. That doesn't get you off the hook 100% though. That post will probably be brought up throughout the game, but only ever as one piece of evidence. The misrepresentation of IB I was talking about is that whole "jumping on Kahedron's bandwagon" thing, when IB had been voting you forever.
Part of the plan, eh? I have an even harder time believing that your "noob" statement was part of some plan to generate content by putting yourself as the target. In fact, how is that line of action consistent with your previous plan of "grand reveal makes me neutral"? You ha dalready made the reveal, and content was up, so why this much worse mini-gambit?
[and then later]
However, since apparently Stardust would have us believe that particular statement was a set up anyway, this argument becomes moot.
I think you're misunderstanding something here, because I never meant to portray that as being a gambit or lie or anything else. "Part of the plan" referred to wanting to get others involved in my attack on Tom, whether they were attacking/questioning me for my bad attack or joining me despite my bad attack. I would have liked PG to question me at the time. I'm not sure where you're seeing the "much worse mini-gambit", but all of that was the truth.
Everything that you brought up in his summary was you saying it was scummy, and then you go and say it doesn't scream scum. After that big post mostly containing anti WoD stuff, I expected you to take a far more difinitive stance than that. And by difinitive I don't mean "clear scum/town", but I didn't like seeing the fence-sit you put there. Even a straight "I don't have enough to tell" or "I don't know" would have been better than what I consider a scummy fence-sit.
I'd say "leaning scum" at this point, but I'm not going to vote for him until he's replaced.
I thought that was clear enough. I would have voted for him, but I didn't see much of a point since he's replacing out. I've got, what, three minor things pointing to his scumminess? How can you say that's enough to be 100% sure?
And this vote will make people uppity? Why did you not want to ruffle some feathers?
I didn't want people screaming OMGUS to get in the way of analyzing what I'd tried to do.
I think that's all the really important stuff. I guess I'll just finish off here saying that I'm surprised how stupid you guys seem to think I am. Can't really blame you since you never saw my scum game last time (it's a shame Iso's not here actually), but I can certainly do a hell of a lot better than lies if I'm trying to get someone killed.
You're reading "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" as "please don't assume I know what best practices are". Why? Those two things are not even close to the same. What someone is doing =/= best practices.
And without interpreting it that way, there is, in fact, a contradiction.
You are twisting words to mean something they don't, and ironically that is what you accuse me of...
Really?
Let's go hypothetical.
Someone is fixing your toilet. You see them do something you don't think is right. You protest, and they reply, "Yeah, this is only the second toilet I've fixed, I don't know what I'm doing.
What does that mean? It means they do not know how to fix the toilet. They are not aware of best practices for toilet repair. It does not mean they are unaware of what they are doing with their arms/hands/etc. I am interpreting Stardust the way a normal person would. You are interpreting him as saying "I don't know what my hands are doing!"
@IB: I didn't read any more into Moakon's post than you attempting to explain away your self-voting habit thats got you into a few problems recently.
Nice smear attempt.
I self-vote. I do it in virtually every game I'm in. It's gotten me into trouble exactly once. I vote for myself during RVS because it's an easy way of checking in.
Your defense of Maokun and attempt to smear me with his scummy actions make me question your alignment pretty strongly.
Just a random thought I had based on the gender thing. Like PG pointed out, it almost feels like we might be playing two separate games within one. Given the warning about the nightkills being different, I'm wondering if we'll see two dead townies tonight: one male, one female. Obviously the town still gets just one lynch, but would it be possible for there to be significantly fewer scum to balance this? Not sure if that's relevent to how we're going to play at this point, but thought I'd share anyway. I guess we'll find out tonight what we're dealing with, though I guess a serial killer screws it up too. Whatever.
I think that's all the really important stuff. I guess I'll just finish off here saying that I'm surprised how stupid you guys seem to think I am. Can't really blame you since you never saw my scum game last time (it's a shame Iso's not here actually), but I can certainly do a hell of a lot better than lies if I'm trying to get someone killed.
Glad to see my "stuff" doesn't qualify as important. I guess my vote can stay on you.
Glad to see my "stuff" doesn't qualify as important. I guess my vote can stay on you.
Shoot, I thought I forgot something! I did say I was in a rush, and actually still haven't read through your whole post. I'll respond to the stuff about me at least though.
At the time I didn't realise you had actually played Mafia before (on other forums). I saw a chance to push a newb and took it, hoping to get a reaction of some kind. As it is, your reaction was acceptable. Unvote.
I really dislike this. Especially coupled with some posts later that I will get to. What exactly did you hope to gain by "pushing a newb"?
A reaction. In my (limited) experience, new players are a little worse at concealing their emotion. I know PG, and I thought I'd stand a reasonable chance at correctly guessing what she was thinking from her reaction to my push.
...scum would rather be on the safe side and just not vote him at that point... I think scum wouldn't white knight someone in this way... takes a certain bravado not often seen in scum... I feel it takes a certain courage to vote this way... the way in which you laid out your views without apprehension speak to me as being townie...
Talk like that, basically. For what it's worth, I'm sorry I brought it up. I didn't mean it as coming down on Wessel for giving his thoughts, just as a warning for the future.
So, as Kank said, Seppel and captaineddie are the only two who haven't posted. Hopefully they show up soon. The sideboard is the current post count, which I'll be referring back to later in the game, I'm sure.
Why?
I think post count could be a good gauge for how seriously someone takes the game, and how they want to be perceived. It's a tool that I want to try to refine a bit as I continue playing, so I will be looking at it, even if I don't draw attention to it in this game. My theory is (and I may be completely wrong) that scum should tend to be either in the middle of the pack or far to the extremes. It's exciting to be scum, right, so they want to be involved, but not too involved that it draws attention. The exceptions would be the scum who knows this and tries to stay posting more or lead the town and the scum who wants to lurk and stay uninvolved to avoid drawing attention.
I also wanted to make that comment specifically to see if Kank would reply to it, being the far-and-away leader at that point. He didn't as far as I saw.
Why feel the need to defend PG here? How does voting for someone help get them into the game?
I wasn't defending PG so much as trying to get the game moving in a constructive direction. Voting for lurkers might not help catch scum, but voting for people because they voted for lurkers doesn't help either. It was painful for me to watch all that since nothing useful was coming out of it as far as I could tell. We were just wasting energy and posting more for no reason.
The scum motivation is getting a Town Tom mislynched based on a lie that you were perfectly content to push until you got called on it. That's about as scummy as it gets.
Is it really? I find it hard to believe that even a beginner would make such a terrible play as scum. Like, I can't even imagine anyone thinking it would be a good idea, let alone someone who has played as scum before (fairly successfully if I do say so myself).
Also, I would contend that I did not continue pushing. I made the comment and then ignored it all the way until I came clean (without additional pressure for me to do so, I might add).
Everyone: Please imagine that I'm scum. Now put yourself in my shoes for a sec. It's near the beginning of the game and you're looking around and really really itching to get a wagon going. Waiting is just not your style, baby! Gotta get someone lynched! Problem is, no one is really acting super scummy yet... well that sucks. I mean, you could pick on Gricky's odd posting style, you could pick on IB for the same barn everyone else is harping on, or join Lamp in picking on Kank... maybe you could pick on Maokun for her terrible posting, or hell, pick on Tom for acting a bit differently than you've seen in the past! Or wait! No! Let's pick on Tom for acting the same as she's acted in the past, even though she's playing differently! I mean, it's a lie that's extremely obvious and easy to disprove, but that might be more fun, so let's do it!
No. That would be stupid.
(Now that Gricky's gone I don't have to worry about being sarcastic, right?)
Stardust, this is what I want you to do: Ask each player a different question about their in-game related play.
Ugh, work. This makes me feel like you're going to kill me, but I owe it to the town to give as much information as I can before I die, so I'll play along anyway. Hopefully you'll find my questions as revealing as their answers.
I've only got a few minutes, but I'll get started and finish the list when I get the chance. It'll be difficult to think of a question for everyone, but I'll do my best.
EtR - In your list in 360, the only comment you make on Kahedron is that he gets plus town points, yet you still list him as "leaning scum". Why is that?
Seppel - Do you feel like you're currently a leader in this game?
Ferro Man - So far the only work you've done is to look for voting patterns in the RVS. In your opinion, are patterns more important than reactions for gauging who is scum?
Dork Knight - Have you ever seen scum slip-up and reveal something that townies wouldn't have access to?
GrickyTimmick - Skipping due to replacement.
Raging Levine - Are you defending my wording because you think Tom is scum or because you believe inaccuracies should always be corrected?
Reya - If someone said you were hopping on IB's wagon back in the beginning (putting the fourth vote on him here), what would you say to them?
Kahedron - Have you ever seen scum slip-up and reveal something that townies wouldn't have access to?
Misting - Do you think new evidence is required to add a vote to an already existing wagon?
I am so crazy busy this week.
I have plenty that I want to say and do in regards to this game, but I might not have the time to do any of that until this weekend. (I'm finishing up a massive multi-month project this week and barely have time for sleep let alone anything else.)
I'll get to everyone's who/what/when/where/why/how tidbits directed at me once I have breathing room again!
Just a random thought I had based on the gender thing. Like PG pointed out, it almost feels like we might be playing two separate games within one. Given the warning about the nightkills being different, I'm wondering if we'll see two dead townies tonight: one male, one female. Obviously the town still gets just one lynch, but would it be possible for there to be significantly fewer scum to balance this? Not sure if that's relevent to how we're going to play at this point, but thought I'd share anyway. I guess we'll find out tonight what we're dealing with, though I guess a serial killer screws it up too. Whatever.
Since we only get 1 lynch, it'd be pretty broken if they got 2 NKs. With 2 NKs, I'd guess the scum team would go from 5-6 to 3-4... If the mafia only gets 1 NK, I'd say a SK is more likely to fit the bill given the size of the game, but if 2 people do die tonight, we won't know which is the case... To maintain gender balance, it's possible that if we lynch a male, then the scum can only NK a female and vice versa? More thought candy I suppose...
Ferro Man - So far the only work you've done is to look for voting patterns in the RVS. In your opinion, are patterns more important than reactions for gauging who is scum?
As far as I know, there are 5 ways to scumhunt. Investigation,accusing people of poor play in the form of a case, seeing how they react to the case on them, voting patters, and gambitting. I would say that voting patterns are as important as reactions to cases (And neither are as important as investigations or building cases). Going through voting patterns will help more once people start flipping.
That's simply because the default font here at MTGS is Verdana and the default font on my Word program is Calibri.
I'm not sure why they change size. I don't manually adjust or select the fonts to change their sizes or font styles. I just copy & paste.
If editing posts in Mafia was allowed, I'd try to make them look cleaner/more uniform than they end up turning out.
If I tried to multi-quote some of these massive posts, that would look much, much worse.
The bolded is the most nonsensical smear I've ever seen. Unless LD is a telepath, how can he know for sure whether we truly understand his meaning? Sure he's been trying to clarify himself, but shouldn't he have been clear the first time with so much experience? As far as I can see, LD is defending his slip to the extent of lying himself. He then contradicts himself in the next sentence that says that town don't have a habit of lying. So it's either a sloppy town statement, or it's scum trying to cover their tracks. Even after I told LD to be careful and to proofread before posting, he still comes up with this. Vote LampDwellr
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 probably won't be able to post properly until wednesday, but
is there a way to filter posts by user on this forum? i'm probably going to need it
You can also go to this Who Posted? page:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/misc.php?do=whoposted&t=459770
Then you can click on the number next to each person's name and it will bring up a list of just that person's posts inside the thread.
I'm going to agree here about IB. Thanks to Arcadic's post coming right after, I noticed that moving his vote from me (who only had 2 votes including his -so I'm not at the moment a good bet) to Stardust, placed Stardust at 5 votes, 1 above to himself and now the person most likely to be lynched. I seriously have to wonder if it's not a desperate attempt to spare himself, specially taking in account that he has had very strong opinions against me for most of the game and almost none against Stardust to suddenly jump onto that bandwagon. I'm still unsure whether Stardust is scum or not, but IB may just be bussing on him to save his own hide.
While Seppel has only been given townie vibes, he's also posted too little and too unsubstantially for me to truly have a lean, and I'm suspecting that's his playing style.
You quote Stardust in 273 doing two things:
1) Answering PG's question of (paraphrased) "What is Stardust doing? Is he doing this?" by saying "Yes, this is exactly what I'm doing."
2) Saying "please don't assume I know what I'm doing!"
While he uses some of the same words, upon careful reading (and even not-so-careful reading) it is clear that the two statements do not refer to the same thing. The first thing he does (which you quote second) is to say "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he does (which you quote first) is to say "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what best practices are!"
I can't see you misunderstanding this. The only trouble is I can't see why you would do this as scum, since it seems so obvious to me, but my current assumption is that you didn't think it was obvious.
You seem very self conscious, and paying a bit too much attention to VCs. The reason I moved my vote off of you, in spite of my belief that you are scum, is that your wagon is nonexistent. So rather than push a lynch that will never happen, I'd rather support the lynch of my number two scumspect.
Your tunneling is silly, Maokun.
None of this makes any sense.
I am not lying, you are wrong, and Kank is misrepresenting my original statement. He always was: he quoted it without the entire sentence to begin with. Kank's also now accusing me of "ranting and yelling" in a post that was shorter than his post I was responding to.
I didn't contradict myself by saying "townies don't lie." Townies don't lie. What am I lying about? I said to begin with that it was not the case that [we can be confident there are an even number of m/f scum].
The logic "shouldn't someone who has experience be able to write a sentence that I personally like" is actually a horrible reason for this vote. Just terrible.
And this "even after I told him to proofread" thing? Where the hell do you get off? You're not reading my posts very well. That's your fault.
That is because you initially quoted me out of context and continue to insist that I said something I didn't. You started this.
I am making no connection between your observation that 100% of d1 lynches have been town and anything you said afterwards. Stop connecting these. This is one of many reasons why you are failing in this conversation.
Stop being awful at reading comprehension if you're going to play mafia. Show me what bit of text of MINE this bolded part is responding to. I didn't ever say "Kank said he was 100% certain of a thing." You're responding to literal nothing.
Why are you doing this?
Are you scummy or an idiot? Your choice.
Warning for flaming
I guess I'll start by answering those comments that need attention...
Those first two are fair enough, as far as it goes, but I wanted to quickly comment on the last three.
1) I didn't really mean to dismiss your list (I did thank you for it after all). In fact, I think it was really helpful to keep the game moving! Like I said before, I was just trying to be helpful by pointing out that much of that was conjecture, so obviously they're not based on much fact quite yet. Maybe that was obvious.
2) I gave reasoning for this too. Seriously, please do call me on being stupid! PG should have. In fact, I wanted him too as part of the plan. We need to call people on stuff like that, not only to keep everyone honest but also to generate more content.
3) WoD may have been caught, is what I said. I'm not sure he's scum, though he's been a little scummy. Others were already voting for him when I said this, so I assumed I didn't need to go into great detail about why he might be scum.
I don't think my name is clean at this point. I thought it might be after I explained everything, but obviously I was wrong. Are you asking "Why are you surprised Tom jumped on you?" Because the answer there is because that post from Tom was very very different to the play I've seen from her in the past.
But yeah, you're right that I was relying on Tom to come out with the fact that she was town in both games prior. I assumed that she would and was relying on that for all what I was saying about getting reactions from others.
Sure I did. The agreeing with town for easy credit, putting out unfounded dirt on Tom and lack of contributions. Apparently that's business as usual, but I didn't know that. He was feeling a little scummy to me since he wasn't giving great answers to people, then stopped responding all together. Not sure what else you expect me to be thinking here, but I can't be sure of anything at this point, so why would I be sure about WoD?
Weren't you the first to vote for him anyway? Why are you grilling me for thinking he might be scum?
Now, as much for my own benefit as anyone elses, I'm going to make a list.
EtR - Likely town. Mostly that's a gut thing, but I've liked his reasoning throughout.
Seppel - I'm going to assume he's town until I see otherwise, if only because Seppel as scum scares me too much.
Ferro Man - Unsure. Putting in a bit of work looking for patterns, not posting too much though.
Dork Knight - Probably town. Not a lot of content. Puts the second vote on Lamp Dwellr. Seems legit enough.
GrickyTimmick - Unsure. Early in the game I had a gut feeling that he was scum, but that's probably due mostly to his posting style, which reminds me of someone's scum play (can't say who - ongoing). I didn't like the last part of this post or the last part of this post, but he's mostly been doing what seems like decent work otherwise.
Raging Levine - Likely town. Not a lot of posts, but he's had some good thoughts which agree with my own reads. I'm liking Raging Levine so far.
Reya - Unsure. Puts the fourth vote on InfectiousBaloth. Basically nothing else.
Kahedron - Unsure. Defending IB somewhat (though questions him too), votes Lamp Dwellr for knowing the scum team... He's been involved, but that could easily go either way once we know a few alignments.
Misting - Probably town. He attacks the right people for the right reasons and seems much more concerned with getting more content out than with building on a wagon.
captaineddie - Nothing...
Wrath of Dog - Leaning scum, as explained earlier.
InfectiousBaloth - Leaning scum for generally suspicious behaviour. Odd choices of wording at times, defensive, abandoning wagons to jump on the wagon of the day.
Lamp Dwellr - Leaning scum. She seems too defensive, but I'm not sure what to make of that since I know she's experienced. She brings up good points at times, but my gut says scum.
Kankennon - Probably town. Outside a few moments, I think Kank's been doing alright for a rookie. She needs to tighten up her play, but so far I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt based on my gut read.
Tom - Probably scum. Her play is way too different (read: aggressive and sure) from what I've seen in the past, and a few of her posts have pretty clearly been trying to smear me rather than just calling me scum for the facts that are there.**
Macius - Unsure. Seems to indicate that Maokun is acting scummy. No content otherwise.
Bolly - Probably town. Good involvement, nice posting, nothing scummy that I've seen.
A Bear - Unsure. Not very involved which is blamed on the average length of posts being quite large. Feeling town, but I'm not sure if the lack of involvement is for scummy reasons or real reasons.
Wessel - Probably town. Moves the game along and votes with solid reasons rather than trying to fabricate a case. I like her as an analyzer at the very least.
pikachugundam - Likely town. A bit of a rocky start in some ways, but her last few posts have been generally good and her answer to my RVS post worked well enough.
Maokun - Likely scum. Misrepresenting the facts on IB like that wasn't great. This post is awful. Reiterates the wrong things too many times for me to blame it on being a rookie.
Voxxicus - Nothing...
**I didn't want to get people too uppity right away, but I may as well come out swinging now. Vote: Tom.
Why are you concerned about garnering attention?
It was the truth... but then you tell us the real truth?
What were you hoping to gain?
Isn't that the exact opposite of what you said before?
Yes, it is:
Have you ever thought to step outside your own shoes for a second to reread what you've written to make sure what you've written can be easily understood by people besides yourself? Just because I think you're wrong doesn't necessarily mean that you are wrong. On the flip side, just because you think I'm wrong doesn't mean that I am. We can simply agree to disagree at this point since I think you're ranting and yelling in this post.
And at the point where you say 'townies don't lie' is right after telling a lie. So that's either contradictory as town, or straight up telling us you're scum. As for what you're lying about, you said that Kank was lying. How do we know who is lying at this point? So unless you're telepathic and can read Kank's mind, we don't know who is telling the truth at this point. Though from content of posts, I'm reading Kank to be more genuine than you.
Also, please refrain from putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about personally having to like how you write. I did say that I believe you should be more clear in your writing as to convey what you really mean. This is a perfect example. As most teachers will tell you, if you didn't understand something, ask about it because you're likely not the only one who didn't understand it.
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].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
C'mon, that's a bit of a twist. I was replying to a different thought in that next sentece. The second "truth" was in response to my play being called a gambit. What I meant by that is that I didn't really see it as a gambit at the time.
Content in general and a read on Tom.
Yes, it is. You've already called me on this and I already gave you an answer. Asking again won't change that.
I am defending myself once per time attacked, and I keep getting attacked for the same non-thing that I didn't post. So I'm annoyed about that. But just because people are nit-picking me should not be construed as overdefensiveness.
Unless you're planning to say that me choosing to respond here is also too defensive or something, which
bahahahaha
Kank quoted a quarter of a sentence I wrote, and is now still attacking me for that quarter-sentence.
Genuine. Right.
I'm satisfied.
Lots of prods sent out.
My wife was on MTV with this video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUutIZg2EpU
Ok I know I should sort of be used to you and your lightning leaps of logic but could you run that one by me again.
A while back you were semi agreeing with Kank that Tom Vs Stardust wasn't a town vs town spat and wanted more votes on Dusty. Now you've unvoted with no clear indication of any new suspicions.
- 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
My wife was on MTV with this video.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUutIZg2EpU
Yes!
http://forum.iwtso.com/index.php
http://iwtso.com/
Join our forum and site to Watch Simpsons free, and discuss a whole lot of other things on our forum.
We are about to have a competition on our forum, join for a chance to win $75
wwab is the best mafia player ever
Want to trade with me?
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=294434
He is being way too aggressive to be a helpful townie right now.
Vote LampDwellr
I'm extremely annoyed that you keep misrepresenting me. I'm sure you can tell! Please explain how that annoyance is scummy. You're right that I haven't been helpful lately but that is a product of my rather strong frustration.
This doesn't make sense to me. "Yes, you are correct about my intention" is what he was trying to say the first time. We can agree on that.
The second thing he said does not at all read as "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what best practices are!" It says "I am inexperienced, so do not assume I know what I'm doing!" This is where we disagree. "What best practices are" and "what I'm doing" are totally different, clearly, and saying as he literally said "what I'm doing" I think it's fair to assume that was what he meant.
The first thing he said was "Yes, you are correct about my intention." The second thing he said was "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" which is almost identical to "please don't assume I know what my intentions are!". (If you can interchange "intention" and "doing" for the first part, you can also do it for the second)
And there you see the contradiction. It doesn't make sense to be sure about your intention, or know exactly what you are doing, and then say "but don't assume I know what my intentions are!" or "don't assume I know exactly what I'm doing!"
I'm surprised this isn't obvious to you. It's certainly obvious to me.
My questions/comments don't need attention?
Please explain how I smear you, and how I don't call you scum for the facts that are there.
Also, why bring back meta into this? You yourself agreed meta was bad.
Why?
Words don't mean the same thing in every context. You know that. You're creating a contradiction where there isn't one.
Bolly said exactly the same words about that linked post. When I asked him to explain himself he found out that the "awful" accusation was perhaps too harsh, so I'm going to ask you now what is so awful about that post. Sure, it was an emotional response against a personal attack that -as I have to point time after time- was not an accusation of scumminess but of poor play. I've on the record apologized for the tone, but I still believe that given the tone of the attack, it was not unwarranted.
See my italicised text above. I have to keep reiterating things because I keep being accused of the same old thing time after time, whenever a new person that suddenly takes an interest on me doesn't bother to read the full context. Trust me: I don't love repeating myself.
How am I misrepresenting him? I've been accusing him of exactly the same you pointed as scummy behaviour under his entry in your post. I seriously don't understand the necessity of saying this and it's actually the first truly eyebrow-raising thing you have said in the game from my perspective.
You're reading "please don't assume I know what I'm doing" as "please don't assume I know what best practices are". Why? Those two things are not even close to the same. What someone is doing =/= best practices.
And without interpreting it that way, there is, in fact, a contradiction.
You are twisting words to mean something they don't, and ironically that is what you accuse me of...
Really, because I'm not.
I had pretty much the same reaction as Seppel upon reading this. Attention at the fore, and I don't understand why you would make such an assumption as that, especially when you say you know it might not be effective. This has me even more convinced you are lying about your "gambit".
2) Part of the plan, eh? I have an even harder time believing that your "noob" statement was part of some plan to generate content by putting yourself as the target. In fact, how is that line of action consistent with your previous plan of "grand reveal makes me neutral"? You ha dalready made the reveal, and content was up, so why this much worse mini-gambit?
My point about (this) 2 was you were dismissing the rest of his argument based on faulty logic, and I wanted you to fix that.
Everything that you brought up in his summary was you saying it was scummy, and then you go and say it doesn't scream scum. After that big post mostly containing anti WoD stuff, I expected you to take a far more difinitive stance than that. And by difinitive I don't mean "clear scum/town", but I didn't like seeing the fence-sit you put there. Even a straight "I don't have enough to tell" or "I don't know" would have been better than what I consider a scummy fence-sit.
See above, it's the other way around.
And this vote will make people uppity? Why did you not want to ruffle some feathers?
Normally I would agree with RL on this one. "I don't know what I'm doing" typically refers to one not knowing what the best course is, but rather doing something blindly. However, since apparently Stardust would have us believe that particular statement was a set up anyway, this argument becomes moot.
I do believe that one errant post in enough to find scum. Do you disagree?
Another good post from Gricky. I want to see if this was followed up on.
It doesn't make you scummy, but rather large posts regarding stuff that isn't really relevant to the game at hand can be quite overwhelming to newer folks to wade through.
Now that you know that Bear is not a new player how does that change your opinion?
This is a really good question and I'm looking forward to coming across the answer.
I agree with A) The fact that we can't tip toe around and
B) This is very similar to Gricky's play in Triskelion. Gricky was Town in that game. Here is the link for anyone that wants to do some research. He died night 2. Triskelion
Kank –
Why did you answer this question that was directed at Macius?
How does voting for Gricky help you learn a little more about him, in your opinion?
Why are you so certain that it's not?
Sometimes. In this case I did.
I don't like this post, not one bit. You put all that effort in to end up with nothing? How is that even possible?
Kahedron –
I like that Kah questions my vote here. +Town
I have comments on Kah in other sections that have me leaning scum at the moment for him.
Tom –
I find it odd that you caved and unvoted based on one comment from Gricky. Was it not worth continuing the conversation?
You have several posts like this where you are just looking for elaboration. Have you gained anything from the answers that you’ve gotten? If so, what?
1. You said that you think my post is scummy
2. You say that you don't understand the self promotion
Are you then saying that self promotion is scummy? Why would scum want to self promote? Doesn't it behoove them to attempt to blend in?
Wessel –
Wessel's post #143 is a pretty good summary of that point in the game and I agree with most of the reads. The one thing I don’t like is the 1 town point for voting the crafters, but it’s not really a tell either way and I don’t think it’s something to worry about. More random than anything else.
If you feel this way, then why didn't you call out Stardust for admittedly pouncing on a new player earlier in the game?
Stardust –
I really dislike this. Especially coupled with some posts later that I will get to. What exactly did you hope to gain by "pushing a newb"?
Please describe what was WIFOM in Wessel's post.
Why?
Leave Britney alone!
Why feel the need to defend PG here? How does voting for someone help get them into the game?
The scum motivation is getting a Town Tom mislynched based on a lie that you were perfectly content to push until you got called on it. That's about as scummy as it gets.
Bolly –
I can't tell if this is you just giving an opinion on new players or actually defending Maokun. Care to clarify?
I like Bolly’s opinion on my vote in #199 However I don’t like that he calls out PG for lurking and mentions nothing about Stardusts patented “Lurk-O-Graph” which Stardust claims to want to come back to from time to time.
Bolly – you’ve tunneled Maokun pretty hard. Where do you stand with some other folks? I’m not looking for everyone, just a handful.
Wrath of Dog –
A Bear –
No - what is it?
Do you believe that is what PG was trying to do? Do you think he is experienced enough to throw a derailment.
Dork Knight –
Is this all that we can look forward to from you? Can you please provide any scum games you have played?
Misting –
When was it determined that that was not the argument?
This is a great Post
from Misting. I agree with the reasoning presented and the vote on Stardust.
Also post #359 is super as well.
Maokun –
No, it's not. Please don't go down this road.
This is actually a pretty good post in my opinion. I think Kah did contradict himself a bit here. He goes from calling Maokun “noob noob” to some sort of noob mastermind. This is definitely a more aggressive Kah then I recall from Triskelion. (See GT’s section for the link)
Have you done so? I’m interested in your take.
Read Triskelion. You're the one being attacked, so maybe you can better tell if there is a difference in his playing style.
InfectiousBaloth -
I see we agree on Gricky. What is it that makes you say that WoD is getting pressure for no reason and what about PG’s play is awful?
Why again are you voting Maokun?
Lamp Dwellr –
During this reread adventure I am up to post #245 and the only thing I can say about Lamp Dwellr is that he uses a lot of exclamation points. I point this out because he isn’t standing out one way or the other. The only thing is exclamation points. If they were periods I wouldn’t have even noticed.
Seppel –
Just about everyone in this game has said they are getting town vibes from Seppel and yet no one has pointed to anything concrete. Anyone want a free town point and a cookie to point out what he has done to earn all these town vibes?
The rest:
Ferro Man
Raging Levine
Reya
captaineddie
Macius
pikachugundam
Voxxicus
I have nothing on. I addressed PG a lot earlier and nothing he has said has really stood out since. Voxx hasn’t made a real post yet, Macius is being replaced as is the Captain.
Reya, RL and FM don’t stand out at all.
This is what convinced me (not really "one comment"):
The third paragraph I simply trusted as I know Gricky is quite experienced, whereas this is only my fourth game.
The rest of the paragraphs convinced me to view IB's post as a simple "Hey Wessel's right guys" which I don't find scummy enough to warrant a vote. It does have some self-promotion in it, but self-promotion isn't something I feel extremely strong about, as I can see the possibility of town doing it at times (such as this one).
Was it not worth continuing the conversation? I wouldn't say that, but I just didn't feel strong enough about it anymore to have my vote on IB.
Besides this example and the next one down, you'll have to point out any other posts in which I am just looking for elaboration, if you want me to respond to them.
As for this case, yes, I gained a whole lot. ***'s response was very very bad and it has led me to believe that he is scum. If my vote wasn't on Stardust, it would be on him.
Yes, I believe that self-promotion is scummy. There are times, like up above, that I could see town doing it, but for the most part it is awkward and only serves the purpose to make the person look like town, which is something mostly scum are concerned with. It's not a concrete tell, however, and unless the example of it was inexplicably obvious that the person was acting as town, I don't think it would warrant my vote. Like I said earlier, I don't feel extremely strong about it.
The second question is pretty much answered in my answers to the other questions, so not much to say here.
Even after looking up "behoove" in the dictionary I'm having trouble understanding your last question. It sounds like you are asking if it benefits scum to blend in with the town, but I think the answer to that is pretty obvious. That's why it feels to me like self-promotion is scummy; the mafia might try to do it casually, or in a way that people don't call them on it, and in the long run they get people thinking that they are town, and they blend in. (If this doesn't answer your third question please feel free to rephrase it and ask again)
@The part of the Stardust issue: Let's take a look back at what we're arguing over guys... The first sentence reads to me 'Yes, I am trying to concentrate my game on people I know, so I can rule them as scum or town based on how I've interacted with them previously.' Or 'Yes, I am doing what PG says I'm doing as bolded.' The first sentence of the second paragraph reads to me as written 'Don't assume I know what I'm doing.'
So based on this, I'd say that Raging Levine is right to say that there is no contradiction.
OOG @ Raging Levine: I wondered why I hadn't seen you at SuperStars lately... Looks like you moved.
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].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
Sorry, I'm short on time right now. If you can direct me to those that don't just make something out of nothing, please do. Otherwise, I think everything you brought up was covered by others who I did address.
You start by calling me scum for good reasons (or at least reasonable ones), but then you continue trying to build a case against me with extremely weak links and what look to me like intentional misunderstandings. That's what I meant by smearing.
I don't recall doing that, though I haven't checked. I definitely think meta has it's uses. "He does this as town so he must be town" is bad, but "he doesn't do this as town, so he must be scum" is good.
Presumably because he's awesome at this game. I myself was surprised to see Seppel's post, but given that I am town, I'm mostly just impressed.
@Maokun: I know you've explained yourself before. That doesn't get you off the hook 100% though. That post will probably be brought up throughout the game, but only ever as one piece of evidence. The misrepresentation of IB I was talking about is that whole "jumping on Kahedron's bandwagon" thing, when IB had been voting you forever.
I think you're misunderstanding something here, because I never meant to portray that as being a gambit or lie or anything else. "Part of the plan" referred to wanting to get others involved in my attack on Tom, whether they were attacking/questioning me for my bad attack or joining me despite my bad attack. I would have liked PG to question me at the time. I'm not sure where you're seeing the "much worse mini-gambit", but all of that was the truth.
I thought that was clear enough. I would have voted for him, but I didn't see much of a point since he's replacing out. I've got, what, three minor things pointing to his scumminess? How can you say that's enough to be 100% sure?
I didn't want people screaming OMGUS to get in the way of analyzing what I'd tried to do.
I think that's all the really important stuff. I guess I'll just finish off here saying that I'm surprised how stupid you guys seem to think I am. Can't really blame you since you never saw my scum game last time (it's a shame Iso's not here actually), but I can certainly do a hell of a lot better than lies if I'm trying to get someone killed.
Really?
Let's go hypothetical.
Someone is fixing your toilet. You see them do something you don't think is right. You protest, and they reply, "Yeah, this is only the second toilet I've fixed, I don't know what I'm doing.
What does that mean? It means they do not know how to fix the toilet. They are not aware of best practices for toilet repair. It does not mean they are unaware of what they are doing with their arms/hands/etc. I am interpreting Stardust the way a normal person would. You are interpreting him as saying "I don't know what my hands are doing!"
Yep, moved for grad school. Shoot me a PM so I can find out who you are and talk about it further without disrupting the game <3
You're not yourself.
Vote infectiousbaloth
Glad to see my "stuff" doesn't qualify as important. I guess my vote can stay on you.
What do you hope to gain?
Insight on Star's thought process.
Shoot, I thought I forgot something! I did say I was in a rush, and actually still haven't read through your whole post. I'll respond to the stuff about me at least though.
A reaction. In my (limited) experience, new players are a little worse at concealing their emotion. I know PG, and I thought I'd stand a reasonable chance at correctly guessing what she was thinking from her reaction to my push.
Talk like that, basically. For what it's worth, I'm sorry I brought it up. I didn't mean it as coming down on Wessel for giving his thoughts, just as a warning for the future.
I think post count could be a good gauge for how seriously someone takes the game, and how they want to be perceived. It's a tool that I want to try to refine a bit as I continue playing, so I will be looking at it, even if I don't draw attention to it in this game. My theory is (and I may be completely wrong) that scum should tend to be either in the middle of the pack or far to the extremes. It's exciting to be scum, right, so they want to be involved, but not too involved that it draws attention. The exceptions would be the scum who knows this and tries to stay posting more or lead the town and the scum who wants to lurk and stay uninvolved to avoid drawing attention.
I also wanted to make that comment specifically to see if Kank would reply to it, being the far-and-away leader at that point. He didn't as far as I saw.
I wasn't defending PG so much as trying to get the game moving in a constructive direction. Voting for lurkers might not help catch scum, but voting for people because they voted for lurkers doesn't help either. It was painful for me to watch all that since nothing useful was coming out of it as far as I could tell. We were just wasting energy and posting more for no reason.
Is it really? I find it hard to believe that even a beginner would make such a terrible play as scum. Like, I can't even imagine anyone thinking it would be a good idea, let alone someone who has played as scum before (fairly successfully if I do say so myself).
Also, I would contend that I did not continue pushing. I made the comment and then ignored it all the way until I came clean (without additional pressure for me to do so, I might add).
Everyone: Please imagine that I'm scum. Now put yourself in my shoes for a sec. It's near the beginning of the game and you're looking around and really really itching to get a wagon going. Waiting is just not your style, baby! Gotta get someone lynched! Problem is, no one is really acting super scummy yet... well that sucks. I mean, you could pick on Gricky's odd posting style, you could pick on IB for the same barn everyone else is harping on, or join Lamp in picking on Kank... maybe you could pick on Maokun for her terrible posting, or hell, pick on Tom for acting a bit differently than you've seen in the past! Or wait! No! Let's pick on Tom for acting the same as she's acted in the past, even though she's playing differently! I mean, it's a lie that's extremely obvious and easy to disprove, but that might be more fun, so let's do it!
No. That would be stupid.
(Now that Gricky's gone I don't have to worry about being sarcastic, right?)
Ugh, work. This makes me feel like you're going to kill me, but I owe it to the town to give as much information as I can before I die, so I'll play along anyway. Hopefully you'll find my questions as revealing as their answers.
I've only got a few minutes, but I'll get started and finish the list when I get the chance. It'll be difficult to think of a question for everyone, but I'll do my best.
EtR - In your list in 360, the only comment you make on Kahedron is that he gets plus town points, yet you still list him as "leaning scum". Why is that?
Seppel - Do you feel like you're currently a leader in this game?
Ferro Man - So far the only work you've done is to look for voting patterns in the RVS. In your opinion, are patterns more important than reactions for gauging who is scum?
Dork Knight - Have you ever seen scum slip-up and reveal something that townies wouldn't have access to?
GrickyTimmick - Skipping due to replacement.
Raging Levine - Are you defending my wording because you think Tom is scum or because you believe inaccuracies should always be corrected?
Reya - If someone said you were hopping on IB's wagon back in the beginning (putting the fourth vote on him here), what would you say to them?
Kahedron - Have you ever seen scum slip-up and reveal something that townies wouldn't have access to?
Misting - Do you think new evidence is required to add a vote to an already existing wagon?
captaineddie - Replacing...
Wrath of Dog - Replacing...
InfectiousBaloth - You stated that you added your vote to my wagon because you would "rather support the lynch of my number two scumspect [than] push a lynch that will never happen". Would you support putting the hammer down on me at this time? Why or why not?
That's all for now. I should be able to get to the females tomorrow.
I have plenty that I want to say and do in regards to this game, but I might not have the time to do any of that until this weekend. (I'm finishing up a massive multi-month project this week and barely have time for sleep let alone anything else.)
I'll get to everyone's who/what/when/where/why/how tidbits directed at me once I have breathing room again!
Since we only get 1 lynch, it'd be pretty broken if they got 2 NKs. With 2 NKs, I'd guess the scum team would go from 5-6 to 3-4... If the mafia only gets 1 NK, I'd say a SK is more likely to fit the bill given the size of the game, but if 2 people do die tonight, we won't know which is the case... To maintain gender balance, it's possible that if we lynch a male, then the scum can only NK a female and vice versa? More thought candy I suppose...
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].
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
As far as I know, there are 5 ways to scumhunt. Investigation,accusing people of poor play in the form of a case, seeing how they react to the case on them, voting patters, and gambitting. I would say that voting patterns are as important as reactions to cases (And neither are as important as investigations or building cases). Going through voting patterns will help more once people start flipping.