Newbie 1074(Game Over|Scum Win!!!)

[Silver1337]

Nachomamma8 seems suspicious since he/she was the last one to send in confirmation, if at all. However, I will wait to vote.

[Silver1337]

@Hoppster: 1 IRL, 1 completed game on another website (a gaming forum, it's one of the "forum games"), and one game which I have not completed on the same website.
And nice icon, lol.

[Silver1337]

To be honest I'm more used to games with more roles and more people (20-25), but I'm not used to this site yet.

[Silver1337]

@Kermit with a Gun:
1. No, I usually wait for suspicious behavior posts.
2. I don't know yet. Just wait and see

[Silver1337]

VOTE: Nachomamma8

Also @Hoppster: Well I'm not against it but I'm not exactly for it either, since you have a greater chance of lynching a town-aligned player.

@Verbs: I do "actively scumhunt", but probably in a different way than most people.

[Silver1337]

VOTE: Nachomamma8

J'accuse!

The advertised reason of my vote against Nachomamma was his mildly suspicious lack of confirmation, with the added benefit of provoking a potential lurker into action. While this action was entirely valid and reasonable, there was an ulterior motive to this action as well: to set a trap. Congratulations, Silver, you've fallen into it.

Prompting a lurker does not require multiple provocations to be effective, and thus the only well-reasoned purpose to adding a second vote to someone who has not had a chance to defend themselves is to arbitrarily get them lynched. And this, sir, is a very scummy thing to do, especially in light of the following:

Nachomamma8 seems suspicious since he/she was the last one to send in confirmation, if at all. However, I will wait to vote.

Why, then, did you change your vote? Perhaps it was because others in this thread prompted you not to hold back, and you followed their advice in order to blend in. But then again, you do not explain your sudden change of heart. In my experience and in my observation of more veteran players, rare is the Townie who votes without even a modicum of explanationYou say you've played in this format before, so I am not as willing to ascribe to inexperience what can be adequately explained by

malice

.

The case against you, sir, is far from airtight, but this kind of blunder most certainly deserves to be further investigated.

UNVOTE: Unvote
VOTE: Silver1337

T'was because others were voting and I felt like it was best to vote.
I can still change it, so why not vote earlier?

[Silver1337]

@Pine Tree: And... how would I know YOU'RE not scum?

[Silver1337]

Sorry, I was tired. I will explain more now.
So, everyone has figuratively said that "It's okay to vote now, besides, you can change your vote." That is why I have started voting. How I scumhunt is basically I inspect the posts to see if anything is awry. Examples of Mafia-aligned terminology and activity is the following:
- Using the word "lynching" excessively, except to place a vote on someone.
- Not paying attention to previous posts.
- Going ONLY with what others say.
- Posting too often
- Rarely posting
- Using too proper grammar or no proper grammar at all.
-

SPOUTING NONSENSE.

I agree that my methods are probably not the best, but they work for me. I wouldn't have won my game on another site if it wasn't for this.

Also, I'm keeping my eye on Pine and Nachomamma8.

[Silver1337]

UNVOTE: Unvote: Nachomamma8
VOTE: Vote: No Kill

I don't see suspicious behavior now, but that isn't to say that I won't change my mind!

[Silver1337]

Whoa, that was an error in my last post.

[Silver1337]

What I meant by the "proper grammar" thing is that it goes along with "spouting nonsense."

[Silver1337]

I mean that if a person who usually has bad grammar suddenly comes and posts with excellent grammar, wouldn't that be a bit suspicious? Same thing vice versa.

[Silver1337]

Because no one seems overly suspicious, and I can still change it.
UNVOTE: No Kill
VOTE: 1joe60
Why? Well, he always seems to counter everything I say. Although most of you are against me, he doesn't even take in consideration what I'm trying to say. Plus, he's been against me since pretty much my first post.

[Silver1337]

My first sentence in my previous post was directed at Verbs. Sorry.

[Silver1337]

@Robocopter: Your vote count needs editing, lol.

[Silver1337]

Pine's crazy gambitting and overly aggressive demeanor paints him as town.

Silver, do you realize that you can simply unvote instead of voting No Lynch? Voting No Lynch is a vote for their to be no lynch during the day, Unvoting simply removes your vote from whoever you were voting before, and places it in a neutral zone that won't contribute to any lynch.

The way I learned it, once you vote, you have to either stick with your vote or vote someone else, not unvote. So yes, that was a misinterpretation. But I'm still sticking with my vote for Joe.

And yes, I agree with Nachos with the first statement.

[Silver1337]

UNVOTE: 1joe60
He no longer seems too suspicious, and Des has a good defending post about Joe.
Honestly, I'm not sure whether Pine is Mafia or Town. Not voting for him yet though, since he has some pretty good points and I wanna listen to what he says

[Silver1337]

Keeping my eye on Verbs, Des, and Joe, but not voting yet, since.

[Silver1337]

LOLOL fail last post.
Ignore the "since", lol.

[Silver1337]

You can never be too certain, yet you can never be too uncertain...

[Silver1337]

I'm being honest here, it's happened outside of Mafia games.
I THOUGHT I had a reason, but then I FORGOT.

[Silver1337]

@Nachos: That was meant to be my answer. If you don't get it, by that post I meant that I am not completely certain that they are Mafia, but I should still keep my eye on them because you never know.

[Silver1337]

Ohai Verbs.

[Silver1337]

I'll respond when I can, school gets in the way though.

[Silver1337]

What am I, an Insane Townie? XD
Anyway, I remembered the reasons why I am suspicious of the three I mentioned.
Verbs: Hasn't posted in awhile. Might be because someone got him panicking, although I'm not sure.
Des: I really don't know, but I have a hunch... don't trust it yet though, it's not always 100% correct.
Joe: Same reason as when I voted for him, but his posts have got more sensible now

[Silver1337]

You know what? Forget Des

[Silver1337]

@Verbs: Wait, that was a question to ME?

[Silver1337]

Stalling? What do you mean, "stalling"? I'm trying to help (and get better on this site, lol). I usually don't focus on particularly one person, usually several people at a time, if that seems confusing.

[Silver1337]

Verbs, you sometimes contradict yourself. Not always, but still...

[Silver1337]

Drew is getting more suspicious with his posts...
I really don't understand why he would vote Nacho. Nacho seems like a sensible player.

[Silver1337]

VOTE: Drewoftherushes
Just so much evidence... his "explanations" aren't very good either

[Silver1337]

I'm really used to 48-hour days...
Also, Drew, Verbs, and Joe are starting to act odd again...

[Silver1337]

Drew, you seem to only agree with what others say, at least recently. Joe has improved the length of his posts but is often redundant of what he previously said. As for Verbs... well, I guess I can't exactly elaborate on my response since he is gone for a while.

[Silver1337]

Good point everyone has... also putting Hazard at L-1.
VOTE: Hazard With a Glove
I probably would've changed votes earlier if I wasn't at school so don't ask!

[Silver1337]

List (from what I think is least scum to most scum):
Hoppster - Obvious townie. Supports with good and effective examples. I'll literally lol if he is scum.
Desiderata - Seems townie-ish. Sometimes seems a bit weird but has very good detail in posts.
Pine - Neutral/Town-aligned. Waaay too aggressive, but he probably does have some pretty good points.
Nachomamma8 - Neutral. Not much to say.
Drew - Slightly scummy. Examples make sense but can sometimes be awkward and suspicious.
Joe - Scummy. Posts are often short and very questionable.
Verbs - Very scummy. Posts are VERY questionable and details seem a little bit on the suspicious side... not quite as
suspicious as Hazard though.
Hazard - Scummiest of all. Very lurky, and he doesn't even provide decent explanations.

[Silver1337]

I'm suspecting a Hazard/Verbs team...

[Silver1337]

Question to anyone who knows about Verbs:
When he said "Until Sunday", did he mean March 13, or the following Sunday?

[Silver1337]

1. Happy B-day Des.
2. I explained in my next post. He's very lurky, and his explanations either change frequently or have little reason and/or detail.

[Silver1337]

Hazard, that was a really useless post...

[Silver1337]

Revised my list a little.

List (Least scummy -> most scummy):
Hoppster - Obvious townie. Supports with good and effective examples. I'll lol if he is scum.

Holy scumtastic wagoning, you two.

UNVOTE: Hazard

I'm certain of his scum status, but this rush to L-1 smells really bad. I think someone's bussing, and I want to find

out who.

Oh. Hey Drew.

At this point, I'm suspecting a Hazard/Drew team.

Since he's down to L-3, I'll put that pressure right back on.
VOTE: Hazard

Why is it scum bussing when drew puts Hazard at L-2 but when you do it, it's just putting pressure on him?


I'm wary of an attitude I saw evidence for earlier which seems to have been "LET'S GIVE SILVER A FREE PASS". Only

drew seems to have expressed any suspicion of silver for his speedy L-1 vote.


Also - I'm in 2 games ongoing with Hazard, 1 finished... He is a lurker, it's his meta. (Just to warn you guys so you

don't expect any miracles.)

Now there's a good explanation. He's good at paying close attention to support and scumhunting.

Desiderata - Seems townie-ish. Sometimes seems a bit weird but has very good detail in posts.

My question, which maybe was not clear, was: why would you take what you think is a scumtell for Hoppster, and

not wait

at least

a couple of pages to see what he's doing, before announcing both the pattern and your

pseudo-conclusion that he's town? I'm not saying you shouldn't use it in your game, but you really should wait and

see. Instead, Hoppster is kind of our tourguide, so he was bound to be vocal in the first few pages, and you then

announce that he has a pattern, which he can now evade. Announcing it makes no sense, except to try and clear him

in advance. That's why I didn't like the idea to do that.

But more generally, hazard's posts have been absolutely free of content. I find that extremely suspicious.

And I must confess I thought I had already voted for hazard... Rereading the thread I find that I haven't.

His posts are very detailed, as you can see. He also defends with appropriate examples.

Nachomamma8 - Neutral/Town. There once wasn't much to say about him, but you can now see that he is defending

effectively and appropriately.

Alright, so I've been deliberately delaying my response to Drew's case, just so I could get

some input from desi, Verbs, or Hazard before putting anymore of my own in. But, it seems that I was naive in

thinking that they would show up within a reasonable time frame, so I'll give my response now:

I still think that Drew's scum. However, I do see that my main point was mostly based off of a misconception I had of

one of Drew's posts, meaning that he isn't quite as scummy as I thought he was. And, in my opinion, it's never a

good idea to lynch one of the more active players when the game starts to stall, so I'm willing to back off of him for

now and reanalyze his play in a few days or so. In the meantime, I'm sick of these lurkers.

What set me off in respect to Hazard was his latest post, #178, where he responds to Pine's post an hour later

(showing that he checks the forum regularly), votes Silver (deliberately ignoring the forming wagon on Drew), and

disappears for another two days.

This is a great example of a post with reason, logic, and scumhunting all into it. He sometimes "misinterprets" some

statements, though, which can be misleading in the wrong direction.

Pine - Neutral. His posts seem detailed and has effective examples, but sometimes can be misleading in both the

scum direction and the town direction.

And yes. Scum are indeed more inclined to answer when there are several votes on them, rather than

a single person. Pressure is the number one cure for lurking. The fact that Hazard ISN'T responding is either scummy

or Townie. I can't decide.

Since he's down to L-3, I'll put that pressure right back on.
VOTE: Hazard

As you can see, the beginning of his post starts with an example with great reason. However, I would say that "I

can't decide" isn't the best way to end a statement. Also, his last sentence doesn't make too much sense. "I'll put

that pressure right back on"? That's not a really effective reason.

Joe - Moderately scummy. Posts are often short and questionable, but at least he does give support.

Well I don't really know what to do with my vote at this point. I could keep my vote on Verbs but he

is AFK for the weekend and besides voting for him won't make much more progress than we already have with him. I

feel like I want to start a Hazard wagon, he seems incredibly suspicious to me but again I don't feel like that will

make too much progress at the moment. Silver is acting very strange again and I have contemplated re-voting him

but he won't give a decent reply to anything and voting him wont get us anywhere. The way I see it now there is

only 1 place to go with my vote and that is Drew. Voting for the other players seems like it will not make much

progress compared to voting for Drew. Yes I realize putting somebody at L-1 is suspicious, and yes I realize this vote

is completely based on speculation but it is only Day 1 and I doubt any new information will be revealed if I stall on

this inevitable vote.

Again, same thing that happened with Pine. "I don't know what to do with my vote" is unacceptable. He is at least

provinding some reason, such as "It is only Day 1 and I doubt any new information will be revealed if I stall".

However, this also contradicts his first sentence, which is suspicious. (And before you ask, this is one of his longer

posts.)

Drew - Scummy. Posts are often questionable, though support is

sometimes

provided.

I'm really used to 48-hour days...
Also, Drew, Verbs, and Joe are starting to act odd again...

Would you point out how me, Verbs and Joe are acting odd, Silver?

@Hoppster - Not really. He had a very good chance to hammer me and didn't do it. I think he could have done it and

still survived a lynch the next day, but he didn't. I don't really have a place to move my vote right now, but I will

when the chance comes up.

Why are you assuming possibilities, Drew? And why are you agreeing with everyone? This definitely needs to be

inspected.

Verbs - Very scummy. Posts are VERY questionable and details seem a little bit on the suspicious side... not quite as
suspicious as Hazard though.

Stalling? What do you mean, "stalling"? I'm trying to help (and get better on this

site, lol). I usually don't focus on particularly one person, usually several people at a time, if that seems confusing.

Sorry I forgot to address this in my last post.

I hope you dont take my post here in a condescending way:

You can't really scum hunt multiple people at once. In order to actually have a good case for someones scuminess

you have to have evidence. You do this by focusing on what one person said and if you find anything you think is

scummy you bring it up and question them about it.

When I brought up things about your play that stroke me as scummy, I questioned you about it and you didn't really

say anything to defend yourself. Thats what I meant by stalling.

Responding to my post is good, and I do see your point, but I disagree that "You can't really scum hunt multiple

people at once" is true. Why not? You can have evidence on multiple people, can't you?

Hazard - Scummiest of all. Very lurky, and he doesn't even provide decent explanations.

Ohey. A Hazard wagon.

Just posting now so I don't get prodded. I was busy yesterday, FYI.

Seriously? This has no value as a post, and he says "A Hazard wagon" without doing anything about it. Makes

absolutely no sense and very, very scummy, at least to me.

I know I'm not the best scumhunter, but here are some explanations for proof that I actually did think about what I

say.

[Silver1337]

Finally, Hazard makes a good point (against me ofc xD).
Definitely not unvoting him though.
Also @Hazard: Have you seen my most recent post (besides this one)? It's not the reason I originally voted but this states yet another reason why you definitely seem scummy.

[Silver1337]

Before that happens, I'd at least like a Verbs replacement. We still have a good chunk of time before deadline, but if it's going to be spent like this, then we might as well get a hammer on Hazard now. I am curious as to why silver finds Hazard's point a good one, however...

It's not the best reason ever, and yes it is questionable, but at least he has evidence and proof instead of saying "Oh this post just sucks for no reason at all so I'll vote for him."
I'm keeping my vote on Hazard however...

[Silver1337]

I am not scum. Cop should investigate Night 1 if I'm not already dead. That is, if there is a cop.
What I meant was that at least he has evidence, though wrong, so at least that post isn't without reason, though poor.
You need to look at it from my point of view to get it. I did not use the excuse just so no one would ask. I would have voted him earlier if I had the chance to, so I didn't vote JUST to put him at L-1.

[Silver1337]

^Sets up a target for the Mafia Roleblocker to make cop ineffective.

First of all, no. I did not mean it to be like that.
Second of all, how do I know there is a Mafia Roleblocker... or if it is you or not?
Third of all, they also don't know who the heck the cop is.
Fourth of all, you're making unnecessary assumptions.

[Silver1337]

I just want this day to be over -__-
Who hasn't voted for Hazard yet?

[Silver1337]

My suspicion is still with Verbs from last day.
VOTE: Verbs (kr0n)

[Silver1337]

I meant kr0b, lol... I fail

[Silver1337]

@kr0b: The suspicion is carried over from yesterday.
Verbs has been saying a lot of things, and mostly without reason. He also sometimes tends to go with what others are saying, though not to the same extent as Hazard before he got lynched, or Drew.

[Silver1337]

If you haven't seen, my votes were random near the beginning of the day but more stable near the end, since I have seen more from everyone and can determine more.

[Silver1337]

@Drew: I agree that Pine has gotten a bit suspicious in his accusations and defenses. However I'm not ready to say that he is scum.
And please do state more in-depth why you think I'm mafia. I do understand what you are thinking, though, but you should take into consideration that it was Day 1 and it's mostly educated guessing.

Mafia leans:
kr0b (Verbs)
Joe (but not to the same extent as Verbs)
Pine??? (Slightly scummy, but still not completely sure.)

Neutral people:
Pine???
Drew

Town leans:
Des
Hoppster

[Silver1337]

@kr0b: To answer the first sentence, it's because Verbs was suspicious on Day 1 before he left, and why give a clean slate?

[Silver1337]

@kr0b:

You can't really scum hunt multiple people at once. In order to actually have a good case for someones scuminess you have to have evidence. You do this by focusing on what one person said and if you find anything you think is scummy you bring it up and question them about it.

When I brought up things about your play that stroke me as scummy, I questioned you about it and you didn't really say anything to defend yourself. Thats what I meant by stalling.

Yes, Verbs did not post a lot. But I find error with his later posts,

particularly

this one.
In this one, he states he says "You can't really scum hunt multiple people at once". How is this true? If you go on to the next day, would you still focus on the same person if he/she is still alive? If not, how would you "focus on one person" all over again? You do focus on one person, but you also need to make plans. Also, I think everyone knows "you have to have evidence", so he's just blatantly stating the obvious. Seems like his defense to me, which isn't working well...

Des is also rising on my scum list.

[Silver1337]

@Robo: Why is Des appearing to vote for himself but also listed under "not voting"?
LOL I love correcting people. Don't take this offensive though XD

lol Pine is voting deisderata, not herself.

One day you'll be a mod and you'll understand how easy it is to make mistakes ROFL

[Silver1337]

Simply put, I think that Drew has to elaborate on why he thinks I am scum. He has been focusing mainly on Pine. Maybe he's trying to draw attention to or away from Pine, I don't know.

[Silver1337]

UNVOTE: kr0b
My suspicion for him has recently become less and less...
While Pine and Des have been rising on their scuminess.

[Silver1337]

@Pine: I'm not sure whether to vote for Des or for you. Hoppster, as always, has a town lean, and kr0b/Joe are much lower on scumminess now.

[Silver1337]

Des is extremely inconsistent with her posts, sometimes it screams "mafia" and sometimes "town".
As for Pine... he's gotten waaay too aggressive with his posting.

[Silver1337]

This game needs a cop.

[Silver1337]

*Sigh* Fine then.
VOTE: Desiderata
I say, give Pine another day. (That rhymes, lol)

[Silver1337]

Main suspicion is still Des. Looks like she is trying to cover up her role.
2nd suspicion is still Pine.
3rd suspicion is Drew. Also too aggressive, but at least he has a point.

I think at least one of these three are scum, gogo and lynch one of them

[Silver1337]

Is that the lynch?

[Silver1337]

LOL @Hazard.
Sorry I haven't posted for awhile, but life>internet.
Anyway, I've two things to say:
1. Pine's new icon is epic.
2. GG's. And WTF @Hoppster being mafia.

[Silver1337]

Many people in other sites don't know my playing style, I guess I'll say it right here.
I don't like to be completely different in my views of everyone else, but I also want to make a point across.
And to be honest, I actually do try to rise on the "suspicion" list when I'm both town and mafia, usually so people will actually read what I say and take it seriously, instead of basically ignoring it (although I'm guilty of ignoring others as well, lol).

[Silver1337]

TBH I've always been better if I'm mafia (according to other games on other sites).
Oh well. Congrats Hoppster and kr0b.