Open 148: Jungle Republic (Game over) before 800
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Right. My theory was that scum would be all paranoid about responding to something like that, in any way, for fear it would look scummy; I know I would feel wierd about blatently yelling "NOT TOWN!" as scum, whereas as town I might be more likely to just play along and have fun. So once it got going, my plan was to vote the first person who completly ignored the whole thing, on the theory that that was the most likely way for scum to respond to it; I'd expect town would either play along with it, or attack it, but scum would try to ignore it completly. And you were the first to not mention it at all.
(I have no idea if that's anything like a reliable scumtell, but who cares, it's better then a random vote.)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I'm a bit confused by this. Being willing to change your mind is a town tell, IMHO; town should try to be somewhat unpredictable. That being said, I don't think I have changed my mind about anything yet. I did a silly "touch your nose and say NOT SCUM" thing at the strart, because it seemed like it's be more fun then a random vote, and I was also hoping hte reactions to it would be more telling. Then based on the reaction and the mastin vote, I voted fallen angel. I actually haven't changed my mind about anything yet this game, as far as I know; could you clarify?Korejora wrote: His play seems town enough, but he appears to be changing his mind every post or other, which does not sit very well.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(nods) I agree with OGML.OhGodMyLife wrote:CJ, claiming was dumb, thats why you're getting yelled at.
Tarballs, voting him for the claim is dumber by several orders of magnitude.
Unprovoked power role claim=bad
Voting a claimed power role on day 1=usually badI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, tarballs is right that pro-town people usually don't need to declare themselves pro-town in the abstract case. In this case, though, especally in an early joking around way, it's completly harmless. Either playing along, or loudly refusing to play along, or attacking everyone who played along, are all rational pro-town responses to that; however, any one of those would kind of run counter to normal scum reactions, for different reasons.Korejora wrote: Yos, there's just one specific thing that weirded me out: after Tarballs posted, you declared that he was right about your minigambit, then directly after that, FA posted essentially the opposite opinion, and then you immediately declaredhewas right.
(On a side note; in the last mafia meet last summer, Pooky actually caught me with this in a live face-to-face game; he said something like this, everyone else said "not scum!", and I hesitated for a second because I couldn't quickly think of how to respond. They lynched me for hesitating, and I was scum, haha.)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
CJ's play errors aside; you do realize that you're trying to lynch a claimed cop (well, seer, same thing), on day 1, in an open game where we know we are 100% guarenteed to HAVE a seer role, and where there hasn't been a counterclaim?fallen angel wrote:In other words, blah blah blah, lynch CJ, blah blah blah, I'm a townie.
Note: If CJ is lying, I am *NOT* saying that the "real" seer should counterclaim today. If CJ is lying, then we'll find out at some point, when the real seer either claims or dies; in that case, CJ is basically already caught scum, and there's no need to out a seer just to lynch him.
I don't really think that's the most LIKELY scenerio, anyway, my hunch is that CJ is likely telling the truth; in any case, lynching someone who claimed to be the town's main power role, in a game when we KNOW that rule exists and is pro-town, without a counterclaim, on day 1, is a terrible, terrible idea. Unless you're scum, in which case, lynching the cop today would seem like a good idea for you.
(Let me also mention, quickly, that while FA is my main suspect at the moment, we're in no rush to hammer, despite what CJ said. )I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug)OhGodMyLife wrote:FA seems pretty much like caught scum. Tell me Yos, what exactly do you expect to gain by delaying the lynch?
Fair question. At the moment, if FA is scum, I don't really have any feeling yet for who his scum buddy(s) might be; plus, we really want to lynch a scum today, or the numbers can get ugly fast. I don't want to draw the game out unnecessarally or anything, but I don't think we're in THAT big of a rush, and I wouldn't mind talking out any doubts people might have here about the wagon first.
Eh. If he claimed in response to a "claim or die" situation, I could see a newbie scum claiming cop, or any scum in fact if they were desperate and/or if they wanted to out the real cop.Kore wrote: I'm feeling the werewolf on CJ, contrarily. An inexperienced town player is less likely to kneejerk claim because the immediate threat of the scum targeting power roles. An inexperienced scum, on the other hand, would have a lot more difficulty inferring that it's a terrible idea as a real cop, and only see the upside of dodging the lynch, knowing they don't have to worry about nightkills (in this case only applicable to the wolves). It's pretty irrelevant till tomorrow, but with him hopping the easy lynch and trying to play the gut card, that's the impression I get.
In this case, though; I personally see newbie town claiming ALL THE TIME in situations where they pretty clearly shouldn't. I don't really understand why that is, other then perhaps Jeep's old rule that "everyone secretly wants to tell you what their role is", but it seems to happen a lot. However, lying and claiming seer in a game where there IS a seer, when you're not even in any danger; that seems like such a horrible move for a scum, I can't really imagine any scum doing it, even a newbie scum.
(shrug) I donno. Lynching a claimed cop in this game is such a clearly anti-town idea, and would so clearly be in the scum's interest, I could have a much easier time seeing a scum do it then a town.While it doesn't make me feel any better about FA.. the suggestion to lynch CJ, in terms of policy, seems pretty innocent to me; in ordinary circumstances, you would lynch a player that pulled something that ridiculous, and FA might not be familiar with the reasons you wouldn't lynch a claimed cop. They seem kind of duhhh to us, but how many mafia games has he played?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Nope, not at all. Not even a little bit. Nor were my reasons at all "random", FYA.Khamisa wrote:OK, for one, let's consider the reasons for votes on the fallen angel lynch.
Yosarian2 - Random Vote.
OGML has a good question; who do you think is scum, Khamisa?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
My inital vote was based on the "not scum" thing and the Mastin vote; both of which seemed odd to me. Of course, at that point, it was just a "somewhat better then random" vote.Korejora wrote:
Yos, to be clear, was your reason for voting FA just the reaction to the NOT SCUM fun and for voting CJ?
I also had kind of a bad feeling about the tone of FA's posts in general. When FA was trying to push for an OMGUS lynch of CJ, in a situation where it was pretty obvious that CJ was in fact the most important pro-town power role in the game, that made my vote a lot more serious. Granted FA was town, but that was still an incredibly anti-town thing for him to suggest there.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No, but my impression from the scum quicktopic was that you were lurking because you were worried, as scum, that you might say the wrong thing, and that it's much harder for you to be active as scum then as town because of that. So when I see you lurking a lot, like you were for much of this game, I start to wonder.Mastin wrote:
THAT was NOT intentional. <_<Yos wrote:You know, last time I saw mastin as scum, he lurked like hell.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
What?Wulfy wrote: @Yos2: WTF is up with your weird post? I don't even know what your talking about unless you and Mastin are wolf together. (Even then it makes little sense, but I can find that working.)
I am suspicious of Mastin, because I have a meta on him that he acts like this as scum. In Lynch all Lurkers, a recently completed game, he lurked a lot as scum, and in the scum quicktopic of that game (which is publically avalable, if you care to see it), he made it clear that the reason he was lurking in that game was because he has more trouble posting as scum then as town.
How on earth does me being suspicious of Mastin for a good, logical reason based on meta make you think I'm linked to him, Wolfy? You need to explain this here.
I'm not really buying his explination here, either:
Mastin wrote: I can understand it, but I think this could be a subconscious thing: Because people expect me to lurk as scum and be active as town, as town, I will be motivated to lurk in order to garner suspicion onto me, at which point, I debate heavily with those suspicious of me in a great few walls of discussion, thereby contributing a great deal to the game and having the challenge of pressure on me.
Anyway, let me try and re-read Tar, because my gut is telling me he's likely to be a wolf here, but I'm not really sure why.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Tarballs: Can you explain why you were voting OGML on day 2? It looked kind of strange to me, and you didn't explain it; you just voted him on day 1 once it was pointed out to you that lynching the seer was a really bad idea, but with no actual reason for your OGML vote. Then you re-voted him on day 2, with no reason. Then, when asked, you just said:
Which basically says nothing at all. Ok, so WHY do you find him suspicious?Tarballs wrote: OGML seemed the most suspicious to me when I first voted him, was the most suspicious until the hammer, and remained the most suspicious when FA flipped. And thus far nothing has happened today that would change my mind about that.
Considering that I think OGML looks pretty town here, I find it odd you voted for him for two days consecutivly and never gave any kind of reason at all.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
True, but it does give me the right to roll my eyes at him.Sotty7 wrote:
Just because he got it wrong the last three times, doesn't mean he is wrong this time.Yosarian2 Post 244 wrote:OhGodMyLife wrote:Just popping in from my BlackBerry to mention that I am nearing 100% certainty on Yos2 being a bad guy of some flavor.
And, just like the last 3 times you said that, you're 100% wrong.
Anyway...I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Vote:Mastin
I really don't think he's scumhunting at all here. Even though he's been saying that we need to warewolf hunt, he has yet to actually say who his suspects for being a warewolf are this game. This, along with my meta on him that him being less active is a scumtell, makes me think he's probably scum.
My guess is wolf scum, especally with his "mafia should claim right now" gambit.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Eh, could be, but I don't buy it.Mastin wrote:
Based off of a reason that I proved to be false.I am suspicious of Mastin
Your assumption of me talking less as scum relies on me being more cautious with my wording.
That, however, relies on ONE VERY VITAL FACT:
.IT IS ONLY POSSIBLE IN GAMES WITH DAYTALKING SCUM
Based on what I saw in that game, I think that, when you are scum, you post less because as scum, you're paranoid about how anything you say might make you look bad. It's a common trait amoung scum, actually. I don't see how daytalking or not has anything to do with it.
Do you have a counter-example, of a game when you were scum and yet you were very active all game?
Well, that's part of it, sure.I was cautious with my wording as scum, and. If I can't daytalk,asked my partners about if what I wanted to say was alright?then what keeps me from posting it if Idon't have anyone to ask
I think this is also a part of why you're less active as scum then as town:
I think that that very problem, that fear that you might say something wrong as scum, inherently makes you post less when you're scum.Mastin, from the LAL scum quicktopic, said: wrote:
As for reasons, I'll likely give them when I catch up. I *am* behind...
GREATEST FEAR AS SCUM: Making a slip about knowing something I shouldn't know. That *really* seems to be a possible problem every time I post... (referring to my latest post)
Pfft.METAGAMING ME WON'T WORK!
(...In attack. Go ahead and defend me with Meta; I enjoy it and do it myself. Use it against me, and you will INSTANTLY earn my suspicion.)
You think you can just declare that metaing you won't work, and therefore that anyone who suspects you for meta reasons will "earn your suspicions"?
Everyone plays differently when they're scum from when they're town. Everyone has certain patterns of play. Some people are harder to meta then others, but I doubt there is anyone who is so perfect that metaing them is completly worthless.
Also, if there is a difference between your town meta and your scum meta, you are unlikely to be aware of it, so you claiming "METAING ME DOSN'T WORK" as a defence is complete crap.
Well, daytalking or not, scum always know too much, though; that's part of what makes them scum.I said that I was being more careful with my wording in order to prevent me from revealing I knew to much, SO I ASKED TAJO IF WHAT I PLANNED TO SAY WAS ALRIGHT.
There is nothing BS about my meta argument, and I have never "twisted your words" or "used bad logic" to my knowlege in this game.
Correction: Poor, misguided, terrible, up to the point of twisting my words bad logic, based off of a BS meta argument.How on earth does me being suspicious of Mastin for a good, logical reason based on meta
heh. Oh, I'm sure you're having fun. It's always fun to be fighting for your life. That's irrelevent, though.
Oh, really?I'm not really buying his explination here, either:
Well, I've got news for you:
I'm having FUN.
Right now, debating with you. I'm hungry, thirsty, a bit sleep deprived, and have other tasks I could be doing.
Doesn't matter.
I'm typing at a word per minute speed that's likely too frightening for me to even comprehend, in order to play this game. It's fun being under so much suspicion.
Also, your claim here (which was that you apparently on some level lurked BECAUSE you wanted to be attacked, because you know you have a meta of lurking as scum) seems to completly contradict your other claim that you do not have a meta of lurking as scum.
(nods) Yup. I thought you were town day 1.Also, what happened to your earlier opinion, Yos?
You thought I was town earlier on. You said that what I had been doing wasn't scummy day one. Maybe even day two, for that matter.
100% wrong.Sudden reversal of opinion on a player-->Scummy.
Town should always be willing to change their minds. There are a lot of reasons for that; the prime one being that, if people just keep going after the same suspects all game and trusting the same people all game, then it's very easy for the scum to manipulate the game by careful use of nightkills. Beyond that, changing your mind is much better at getting reactions and finding scum then never doing so. The scariest scumhunters are the people who think you're town, then suddenly flip on you and go after you based on some new piece of information; those are both the best at finding scum, and the best at screwing with scum's gameplans.
I've gone so far in the past as to declare that consistancy itself is a scumtell.
Possible, "Hey! Buddy! Come online because you'll get suspicion if you don't!" comment.On a side note, we have't heard from Iamasusername in a while.
Definite possible wolf connection, here.I have pretty good vibes from him, though.
Ok, I'm even happier about my vote on Mastin now.
Are you really calling it scummy that I think Iamusername looks town-ish, and saying I want to hear more from him? I declared that you looked town-ish earlier, and that OGML looked townish earlier, and you didn't have a problem with either of those. OGML also earlier said he thought Iamusername looked town, and you had no problem with that either
There's clearly nothing wrong with either one of those things; there's nothing wrong me thinking someone looks town. SO your attack does not appear to be honestly motivated here.
You look like a struggling scum here, Mastin, trying to fight back and claw your way out any way you can.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I'll look at some other games, Mastin.
However, you can get as angry as you want; you just saying over and over again "YOU CAN NOT META ME" is NOT a defense.
Also, I don't care what you think; town can, and should, suddenly and on a dime be willing to completly and 100% change their minds when new evidence warrents it. It's just better for the town. You repeated it like 4 times here:
But you never gave a *REASON* why a pro-town person changing their mind is bad for the town. I gave several reasons why I play this way as town, and why it is better for the town to do so; all you did was repeat over and over again your (incorrect) assertion that it's somehow scummy and/or anti-town, but you never gave a single reason WHY town shouldn't act like that.mastin wrote: Sudden changes?
Still scummiest thing one can do.
Again,Beyond that, changing your mind is much better at getting reactions and finding scum then never doing so.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CHANGING ONE'S OPINION. IT IS WITH A SUDDEN CHANGE WHERE THE PROBLEMS LIE.
More like the scummiest.
The scariest scumhunters are the people who think you're town, then suddenly flip on you and go after you based on some new piece of information;
Gradual change-->Not scummy, still throws scum off.
those are both the best at finding scum, and the best at screwing with scum's gameplans.
Sudden change-->Scummiest thing someone can do.
And THAT is an EXTREMELY anti-town opinion.I've gone so far in the past as to declare that consistancy itself is a scumtell.
Inconsistency is a SCUM TELL,
Consistency is a TOWN TELL.
My guess? You are scum and you decided not to nightkill me earlier in the game because I had earlier in the game said I thought you were town, and now you're pissed off I changed my mind. Which is exactally why pro-town people SHOULD be unpredictable, and should change their minds.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Agreed. We can wait until Thursday, I want to hear what he has to say.Tarballs wrote:First:Nobody should hammer Mastin before he gets to post his case. Don't even think about it.
Now, this is scummy. Why are you trying to direct people to lynch me? You're not voting me, and you really haven't attacked me at all; but it seems like you want other people to wagon me, and it looks like a scummy attempt to manipulate pro-town people into fighting each other. Am I missing something here?Secondly:Mastin and OGML are suspicious of Yos, yet both of them are voting for a person who they suspect to be Yos's scum partner. I think it would be more beneficial for both of you to lynch Yos instead, yet I'm getting the feeling that you seem to be afraid(?) to lynch him at this point. Why is this?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Mastin: Your absurdly long wall of text there made my eyes bleed just trying to read it, and I really have no idea what case, exactlaly, you are trying to make on me and/or Iamusername. I'm not going to go through and quote every single line and respond to it right now, because that would be totally unreadable, so let me just hit some key points.
What supposed "scum slip" are you talking about? You talked about it like 10 times in that post, and I have no idea what you're talking about at all.
You also seem to be attacking me because I have, and have had for years now, a mafia theory that town should quite freqently change their minds 180 degrees on a moment's notice. Again, I don't care if you disagree with me (nice taking this line out of context, btw), that is a mafia theory I have held, and followed as town, ever since playing with Baby Jesus back in 2006. If you think this is in any way scummy, you are simply wrong. I'm not sure what else I can say about that; I can continue to explain why I think it's good for the town and bad for the scum for town to be somewhat unpredictable, but you just don't seem to be listening, so I'm not going to bother. Suffice to say that it's something I always strive to do as town, and that I think every pro-town person SHOULD strive to do.
Honestly, the main reason I'm votign for you really isn't lurking anymore. It's that you seem so angry and hostile, you're really not making any sense to me, your attacks seem really unfounded and illogical, and your defense just looks scummy ("your meta on me is incorrect." is a valid defense. "I CAN NOT BE METAD, EVER, BY ANYONE!!!11!" is just scummy.) Anyway, I'm looking foward to hearing your "case".I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I agree with you that Iamusername hasn't posted much content. That is a perfectly reasonable reason to suspect him; I've mentioned myself that we need to hear more from him.
I will note that nothing in that summery is actually an attack against me. You seem to be trying to describe everything I've done in a way that assumes I am scum, but none of it actually explains why any of my posts woudl be more likely made by a scum then by a town.
I really did explain why it was scummy, you know:Mastin wrote: I asked a question about why Yos didn't think it was scummy; he didn't post an answer. (This doesn't count as an answer; it's a further accusation.)
Did you miss that explination?Yosarian2 wrote: Right. My theory was that scum would be all paranoid about responding to something like that, in any way, for fear it would look scummy; I know I would feel wierd about blatently yelling "NOT TOWN!" as scum, whereas as town I might be more likely to just play along and have fun. So once it got going, my plan was to vote the first person who completly ignored the whole thing, on the theory that that was the most likely way for scum to respond to it; I'd expect town would either play along with it, or attack it, but scum would try to ignore it completly. And you were the first to not mention it at all.
You didn't count, because you specifically responded to my post.
Anyway, it should have been clear that I was just trying to skip making a random vote, and instead went to a "slightly better then random vote". That is, if a random vote in this game would be 45% likely to hit scum, my vote was, I donno, 5% better then that or so. It was the second page; I figured it was pretty clear that my vote was not based on much, just a silly thing I did to get the game rolling and the fact that I wouldn't have voted for you the way FA did there.
I mean, I specifically said in that post that
Note that, while I voted FA for this reason, this was not the reason I kept my vote there as we started to get close to a lynch.Yosarian2 wrote: (I have no idea if that's anything like a reliable scumtell, but who cares, it's better then a random vote.)
Your logic on Kore is...weak. Yes, you are correct, I'm not mafia. That's hardly proof that I'm scum, it's just the opposte. Plus, you're "Kore made one comment about Yos being confusing so Yos killed kore for that" explination is really, really weak; it's hardly like Kore spent most of day 1 trying to lynch me. If anything, the most likely explination for the Kore kill is that the wolves knew that their biggest threat was the mafia, so they decided to try and kill a mafia member. Especally after the strong arguments OMGL made yesterday linking Kore to Khamisa, it seems pretty obvious why Kore was killed.
FA clearly didn't understand why lynching the claimed cop on day 1 was a bad idea. Well, either that, or FA was pretending not to in order to try to lynch a cop. The best way to find out which one of those was true was to explain it in some detail, and judge the reaction. The reaction did not impress me as pro-town, so I didn't remove my vote.Mastin wrote: His CJ explanation seemed totally unnecessary, stating a fact that we all pretty much knew already, but stating it generated wifom.
Not quite correct. I was asked what the case was on FA. I responded that the biggest anti-town thing FA did was vote for the cop.Mastin wrote: This was NOT the reason that Yos had voted for FA. Yet is the reason he gives for the vote day two.
Was that the reason I voted FA? No, but that wasn't what I was asked. It was the reason I kept my vote on FA when the bandwagon started getting serious, and I think it was the main reason FA was lynched. You're trying to make it sound like I was lying here, but no, I answered the question truthfully and correctly, it's just not the question you're claiming it was.
If by "selective scumhunting" you mean "selectivly hunting for people who are scum", then yes, i was doing that. Reasons are not always necessary, especally when you're right.Mastin wrote: Bandwagonning, no reason given. Seems like selective scum hunting to me
So, I'm scum because I didn't buy your "proof" that your lurking somehow wasn't a scumtell?Mastin wrote: The first lurking accusation from Yos2. Should have been the last, given my explanation in the game to that.
I've proven why this accusation Yos2 made against me was completely false in three different ways--
1: It requires for an experienced player (Of which, I ONLY count the three mods in this game that have modded my games) to be scum with me,
2: It also requires for daytalking scum abilities, something which I didn't think we had,
3: I posted the link to a game where I did this exact same thing as town. And gave as many examples as I could that exist about it.
Look; meta aside, lurking is *ALWAYS* a scumtell, ok? Scum lurk more then town, and lurking is also anti-town. In any case, the reason I especally suspected you for lurking dosn't have anything to do with daytalking, or experenced players, or anything like that, so all those arguments were completly irrelevent to my suspicions.
The way you exploded, and OMGUS voted me, when I didn't instantly buy your explinations? Now, THAT was scummy as hell.
Anyway, as I said earlier, absolutly none of that is a case against me. It's a lot of words that really means very little. If you are in fact town who mistakenly thinks I'm scum, Mastin, WHY do you think that? What, exactally, have I done that scum would be more likely to do then town, and why?
It seems the real reason you are mad at me is because I didn't buy your defense. Hint: that's not actually an argument against me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Then. Don't. Be. Scum.Mastin wrote:Then don't accuse me. I've stated this several times throughout my games; just. Don't. Accuse. Me.
Uh, I just asked you to clarify what you were talking about. So, what are you talking about?You made a huge slip. I called you out for it.
How would it be a pro-town thing to do to respond to an unreadable wall of words with another unreadable wall of words?]This would be pro-town to do (it gives a more solid view on your opinions for everyone, most importantly, me), but you're not pro-town, are you?
I want the rest of the town to get what I'm trying to say, and not just skim past it. So I responded to the relevent points in a short, succint, logical manner. Being clear and readable IS the pro-town thing to do, Mastin. Unreadable posts only are good for scum trying to smash their way out of a corner.
What the hell?This one, and JUST after stating your accusations of me and pointing this out, Iamausername DOES show up, and votes for me, and you bandwagon that shortly afterwards, with a minor distraction from OGML.
I was commenting that I wanted to hear more from Iamusername. In other words, I was complaining about his lurking. I also said that I did have a pro-town vibe from the posts he did make, which is true.
How the hell is that a "scum slip"? It's pretty much just a streightfoward statement of fact, an attempt of mine to prevent someone from lurking, while at the same time stating my current opinion on that person. Those are all important, pro-town things to do.
The fact that he posted after I complained that we needed to hear more from him is *EXACTALLY WHAT I WANT TO HAPPEN WHEN I DRAW ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT SOMEONE IS LURKING.* At least half the time, lurkers are still reading the game, they're just being quiet; usually if you point out that they're lurking, they show up. Which is why pointing out lurkers is a damn good thing for pro-town people to do.
Again, you seem to just be taking everything I say, and trying to put a scummy spin on it. Also, to misquote Princess Bride, you keep saying "scum slip". I don't think that phrase means what you think it means.
Why?
And I, personally, think it's a load of BS.You also seem to be attacking me because I have, and have had for years now, a mafia theory that town should quite freqently change their minds 180 degrees on a moment's notice.
Town SHOULD change their opinions, yes. But it should be done gradually. Not suddenly.
You keep saying that, but you don't seem to have a reason for it.
Everything you do in a mafia game, and everything you don't do, should have a reason behind it. I came to the conclusion that acting this way helps the town more then it hurts the town, partly because it makes it much, much harder for scum to manipulate the town with nightkills, and I did so years ago. I actually did so because when I was scum one game, Baby Jesus, one of the best mafia players of all time, kept flipping back and fourth on me, and it made it like 1000% harder for me to manipulate the town, and made him by far the biggest problem to me as scum. So, after that, I emulated the playstyle.
Anyway, if you can't actually come up with a reason why my playstyle is somehow anti-town or scummy, you need to re-think your position on it.
Well, you just saying over and over again "I disagree with you!" without a reason isn't actually an argument.3: I do disagree with you. So?
Putting that aside, you having a differening view on mafia theory then I do isn't a case against me, either. If you want, we'll argue about it in MD after this game is over.
Lol. Ok, but good luck getting a good feel for my meta as town, considering how many hundreds of games I've played on this site.
I will not believe it until I read up on your Meta as town, Yos.that is a mafia theory I have held, and followed as town, ever since playing with Baby Jesus back in 2006.
Ok, let me try this one more time.
I think it's one of the scummiest things a person can do. So, yes, I think it is scummy.If you think this is in any way scummy
WHY???
Things are only "scummy" if they either help the scum, or if scum are more likely to do them. In reality, scum are much more likely to do the opposite, to carefully make sure they appear consistant; plus, me doing this tends to help the town, for reasons I've explained over and over again. So, if it helps the town, and if you have no reason to think scum are more likely to do it, you can't just claim it's scummy and expect anyone to listen.
No. You are wrong, because I always do this as town, and I think town would win more often if more people also did it as town. Many good town players do. Therefore, if you think it is a scumtell, you are wrong. QED.
The "You're wrong!" defense...you are simply wrong.
Um...all my games as town? Lol.
You can save me the time of looking at your wiki and post all of your games as town, and at least one recent game of scum for comparison.I'm not sure what else I can say about that;
Also, I don't actually have a wiki.
I'll be glad to give you some links, at some later time when I have time.
What?
And, via my beliefs in psychology, tells (caution-->Scumtell is similar, for example), etc. can be stated over and over again to counter it.I can continue to explain why I think it's good for the town and bad for the scum for town to be somewhat unpredictable
No, that's foolish. Caution is scummy, yes. Consistant play is cautious play. Inconsistant, agressive, change-your-mind-in-a-second play is the exact opposte of cautious play, which should make it a town tell by your own logic there.
Hint: your fundimental beliefs are wrong here.
I cannot listen to something that conflicts with my fundamental beliefs.but you just don't seem to be listening
But if you're really just going to refuse to listen to be because I'm apparetnly questioning an article of your religious faith, then fine. Just accept that I feel this way and we'll move on.
And you still haven't given any reasons for claiming that...
And I think it's scummy, and something ONLY scum would do.Suffice to say that it's something I always strive to do as town, and that I think every pro-town person SHOULD strive to do.
Yes.2: Aggression is a town tell. It is a form of recklessness.
However, being agressive to someone BECAUSE THEY ARE ATTACKING YOU is a huge scum tell.
"If you vote me, then I will attack you brutally." Also, a HUGE freaking scumtell.5: This is my true playstyle, which I have now unleashed upon you thanks to your encouragement. Don't like it?
Then don't attack me.
Only scum should "unleash their true playstyle" on someone just because they're being attacked. Only scum get agressive only in self defense, only to undermine the person attacking them. Town go after people who they think are scum, not people who are attacking them.
The fact that you're making this a threat, "don't attack me or I will attack you with massive walls of words", is either good scum play, or bad town play. And, you sound like a pretty good player to me. Therefore, I think you are scum.
No, actually; I was agreeing here that your meta defense here WAS a valid, reasonable defense. Which is why, you may notice, I stopped attacking you on the grounds of "Mastin lurks when he's scum". Of course, since then, you've given me many better reasons to think you are scum, heh.
I then elaborated on WHY it is incorrect after saying this. You failed to mention THAT part, because you didn't want to make your argument look weaker."your meta on me is incorrect."
I still say this is bull. Everyone can be metaed, if you try hard enough. But, again, we're drifting more into an irrelevent mafia theory argument here.
In attack?"I CAN NOT BE METAD, EVER, BY ANYONE!!!11!"
Never.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug) Meta is one of the things in my toolkit that i pull out when it seems useful to do so. I don't focus on meta as much as some other people, but I do find it to be useful, especally in cases where I have a strong reason to think that a certain person acts a certain way as scum. I'm not really sure how often, but often enough. HJere is a recent game when we caught Ether as scum largely because of her meta, for example: viewtopic.php?t=11050&start=0Tarballs wrote: Your case against Yos is a lot better, but I'm not totally convinced by it either. But I'd like to know one thing:Yos, how often do you use meta as your reasoning?Because your case on Mastin was pretty much based on meta, and meta alone, until Mastin started his over-the-top self-defending.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Mastin: Any chance you could come out of "Debate mode" for a minute and actually think about what I'm saying, or try to understand what I'm talking about, or perhaps even admit that you may be wrong on certain points?
Right now, it feels like you're just trying to win an argument, not actually trying to figure out my alignment or anything, and it feels like the reason you're trying to win this argument is in order to avoid being lynched. That, actually, is the main reason I think you're scum now; I don't think you care about anything but not getting lynched, all your attacks and votes and posting seem to be based on that, and that's scummy, because scum only care about not being lynched, while the main concern of pro-town people is to find scum.
If you are town, then it would be in your best interests to convince me and the rest of us that you're town before we lynch you. Right now, you're not acting like town, you're acting like cornered scum. If you are town, I would remedy that if I were you. If you're scum, then just keep doing what you're doing, and I'm sure you'll be dead soon.
Eh?Mastin wrote:
But, somehow, YOU STILL HAD PRO-TOWN VIBES FROM HIM.That is a perfectly reasonable reason to suspect him;
I can't see anyone but a werewolf having slipped up so badly with that opinion.
He hasn't said that much, but I still think he's more likely town then not. There is no contradiction there. The fact that he hasn't said much is a strike against him, but I think he's town for other reasons.
ARe you really claiming that it's impossible for a town player to not have much content? Because, you know, at the point when I voted you before, you had not posted much content. You only started to post a lot after you were attacked for lurking.
Correct. Your point?This is NOT the same thing as an accusation.
Which totally ignored the explination for it I had already given. And in any case, it wasn't actually an attack against me, because, as I pointed out, you completly failed to give any reason for why that would be scummy, or for why a scum might be more likely to do that then a pro-town person.An attack against your "slightly better than random" vote.
Do you really think it's anti-town to do something weird in the first pages of the game, when we have no information, in order to get reactions? I have trouble beliving that, considering you started the game by declaring yourself scum, voting yourself, and demanding that you be lynched.
Eh. I thought of it, it seemed like fun, it seemed like it might get some information, I'd never done anything like that before, so I did it. What's your point?Tell me, Yos2: What made you use this tactic in this game, rather than an earlier game?
(shakes head)
So? So what?You seem to be trying to describe everything I've done in a way that assumes I am scum
It's called a case AGAINST you for a reason.
If you are town, your goal right now should be to try to figure out what my alignment is.
If you are scum, then your goal right now would be to try and make everything I say sound bad, without regards to my actual meaning, in the hopes of getting me lynched.
Everything you are doing looks like the second, Mastin. That's "so what".
More meta defense...I've done this COUNTLESS times in my games.
Um. I pointed out Iamsername hadn't posted for a while. *THIS IS A PRO-TOWN ACTION.*
Amongst others, there's that one VERY vital post from you:but none of it actually explains why any of my posts woudl be more likely made by a scum then by a town.
On that page, you and Iamausername slipped badly. You
-Started accusations on me,
-Immediately after that, stated how we hadn't heard from Iamausername in a while. SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE hadn't posted for a while; you chose Iamausername SPECIFICALLY.
-Iamausername then shows up IMMEDIATELY after that, and votes for me.
-Then you, in what I see as the first contentful post since your accusations against me, you vote me.
Iamusername then posted. *THIS IS WHAT I LIKE TO SEE HAPPEN WHEN I SAY I WANT TO HEAR MORE FROM SOMEONE.
Iamusername then voted for you. *THIS IS PROBABLY BECAUSE YOU LOOK SCUMMY AS HELL.* Note that almost half the rest of the town is voting for you too here; Iamusername voting for you isn't exactally a shock.
How is any of that a case against me? Or against Iamusername? When actions have a perfectly reasonable pro-town explination that you completly ignore, it adds to my convinction that you are scum trying to construct a case out of thin air, rather then a townie looking for scum.
They're not actually evidence for anything, you know. Not even slightly.Those four are perhaps the most condemning pieces of evidence in existence.
Becuase you didn't ignore it; you specifically continued on your own early game trying to get reactions gambit instead, and specifically refused to declare youself not scum. Again, the fact you were doing something like that was actually why I thought you were pro-town day 1, although it's certanly not a very strong reason and dosn't nearly match your scummy behavior today.That isn't an explanation. It still doesn't say why you didn't think MY response was scummy.
As I said, at the time, my thinking was that scum wouldn't particapate AND wouldn't refuse to participate, they would ignore it completly. You did not.
And, as I said, FA was the first person to do so.And, as I said, SEVERAL others ignored it.
Are you missing the part where I explisitly stated that what I was doing had probably no validity at all as a scum tell, and it was just better then a random vote? Again, you were voting for *yourself* at this point. Do you really think my vote at this point was worse then any one else's vote at this point?
Yes. I wouldn't expect a scum to do that; if I say "declare yourslf not-scum", I wouldn't normally expect a scum to say "No!", it's too risky a move. I would expect a pro-town person to play along, to refuse to play along, or to attack me for the whole concept. Any of those would be a standard pro-town way to respond. I would expect a scum's natural inclination to be to do none of those.I responded, alright, but I didn't participate in the activity--
Of course, all of this was really just a silly way to get the game stated, to try to do something more useful then a plain random vote would be. I didn't really expect anyone to take my attack and vote seriously, considering how weak I even said it was, and was a bit surprised when the wagon took off like that.
Right. I kept it on as FA became more scummy as the day went on, especally with her demands to lynch the cop. I explained this...Which you never removed...
(shrug) No reason. Why?And, again, why'd you use this tactic THIS game, instead of, oh, say, your last, or the one before that?
Of course they do. What they mean in this case is that there was nothing better to go on at this point.
Page numbers mean NOTHING.It was the second page;
Nope. I would not have kept in on FA up to the lynch if that was the only reason I was voting for him.Yet apparently was enough to keep it on, when at the time, the only thing against FA was the Meta case I had posted, essentially.
Eh. You were loudly voting yourself and demanding that you be lynched. Someone else had already voted you as well. I highly doubt FA's vote was truly "random".FA's vote was something which should've been obvious was random.
I don't need a defense against "you're not mafia, so you must be a warewolf" when I'm town, lol.
Lol. Nice defense. [/sarcasm]Your logic on Kore is...weak.
Your defense, or more specifically the way you're using your vote, walls of words, and threats to attack me if I don't back off, is exactally the reason I think you're scum, Mastin. Do you really not understand that?Your continued push against me, despite my solid defense
[qupte] you trying to switch reasonings behind voting me, when you realize your original reasoning is extremely flawed, is further proof of this.[/quote]
Eh? If I'm voting you, and you do something incredibly scummy while I'm voting you, then am I not supposed to point that out?
Right.If you're not a member of the Mafia, then you're either town, or a werewolf.
...uh, what?Which makes you more likely to be a Werewolf, from your attitude thusfar in the game. ESPECIALLY with Selective Scum Hunting in factor; selectively scum hunting the mafia is proof that you are a werewolf who wants the mafia dead.
I'm hunting people who look like scum. For example, right now I'm hunting you, and you're probably a warewolf.
Well, it's not really that strong, but I'm not going to argue with it, since you are correct that I'm not mafia.
1: This was actually TWO accusations: One, that of proof you're not mafia.Plus, you're "Kore made one comment about Yos being confusing so Yos killed kore for that" explination is really, really weak;
And if you're denying that and saying it's weak...No, it is not.
That would be reasonable, if Kore had ever attacked me. She never did, at all. This was pretty much all Kore said about me towards the end of the day:2: The other was that you might've night-killed those who suspected you.
And then, later:Kore wrote: Yos - worth noting that I have no comment. Plenty of content but I'm still unsure.
How on Earth would that make you think "Hey, Kore was attacking Yos, so Yos killed Kore!"Kore wrote: I think Yos has already said his reasons? (The Mastin vote, the general feel of the posts, and most of all returning CJ's vote.)
The person Kore was attacking before she died, actually, was Wolfy.
Mastin...you're really just making stuff up here at this point. You're inventing facts out of thin air. Do you really not get why I find you scummy right now?
Um...depends what I was trying to do, but almost certanly, if I was scum I would have killed OGML. He's clearly obvtown and basically unlynchable, and he's been convinced I'm scum all game, like he usually is, and he's a very strong player who's good at leading the town. Unlike Kore, OGML actually was attacking me.If you are saying you are disagreeing with it, who WOULD you kill as scum?
100% false.You were one of Kore's only suspects.
Quote me the post where Kore attacked me, or said she suspected me, or voted for me, or FOS"d me, or anything. Hint: it dosn't exist. The closest she ever came was the "confuses me" post you quoted, but if you quote the WHOLE post, instead of just one line out of context:
In that post, she actually said that my play "seems town enough". And then she never attacked me again, while she did attack someone else.Korejora wrote: Yosarian confuses me. His play seems town enough, but he appears to be changing his mind every post or other, which does not sit very well.
Need more from Caboose and Tarballs to form an opinion.
Pro-tip, Mastin: Lying about what people have said dosn't work in forum mafia. Next time you're scum, I would avoid it.
There's no way you could even assume this unless you were a member of the werewolves, Yos2.
When someone is obvscum, and they get killed by another scum group, it's usually because they were obvscum. Can you think of a different reason kore would have been killed?
Granted, I wouldn't have been trying to nightkill mafia at that point if I was a wolf; there were only two mafia left, they weren't THAT big of a threat; I would have tried to kill someone who looked unlynchable, personally. Still, I can't imagine any other reason someone might kill Kore.
Name one. Welll, let me clarify; name one that dosn't involve you lying and making stuff up like your last explination did.There are THOUSANDS of reasons that Kore could've been night-killed.
Also, I'm a little amused you're suddenly accusing me of being scum because I was speculating why they might have killed Kore. You were just doing that, like, two paragraphs ago.
(nods) Yup. So why'd you do it?
Poor play.so they decided to try and kill a mafia member.
(shrug) Well, I have to do that sometimes. If I have to go all the way to first principles to explain why something is anti-town, I'll gladly do it. Also, what WIFOM are you talking about? I mean, I did want to make sure that my explination didn't get anyone to counterclaim CJ, in the off chance CJ was lying, because that would have been bad for the town.
I wouldn't say that. To be honest, I was ignoring his attacks against CJ. Instead, I was focusing on his Meta and rolefishing instead. So I didn't exactly see the whole conversation that well. But this explanation sticked out like a sore thumb. You were explaining to him a concept which I think that he should've already known, and you also threw in some wifom where it wasn't needed.FA clearly didn't understand why lynching the claimed cop on day 1 was a bad idea.
You're casting doubt...on a player who is NOW CONFIRMED TOWN.
No, I'm explaining why FA trying to lynch our cop was scummy looking to me. I shouldn't HAVE to explain that to you, but like I just said, sometimes you have to go all the way back to first principles.
Eh?
This did NOT seem like what you were doing AT ALL.The best way to find out which one of those was true was to explain it in some detail, and judge the reaction.
I didn't "not remove it for the reaction". I set up a situation where I might have been willing to remove it if FA had reacted in a pro-town way, because I was still trying to figure out FA's alignment. FA did not.
I agree, in that FA wasn't particularly Pro-town...but to not remove it from the reaction? I definitely am not buying it.The reaction did not impress me as pro-town, so I didn't remove my vote.
Um, but that's not what those words mean.
It is to me. When people ask what the case against a player is, to me, that means what was YOUR reason for voting that player.Was that the reason I voted FA? No, but that wasn't what I was asked.
Hint: You're lynch -1 here.
And what's the problem with that? I think you are, I think you're caught werewolf DESPERATELY trying to fight back, pushing for my lynch with WHATEVER you can get a hold of.You're trying to make it sound like I was lying here,
Have you ever heard of the psycological term of "projection"? That's where you accuse others of doing what you yourself are doing, often as a form of denial. In this case, I think you're projecting, Mastin. You are clearly the only one here who is a "caught warewolf despretly trying to fight back".
Don't tell me you seriously didn't know what I was talking about, Yos2. You've been playing for years, correct?[/quote]If by "selective scumhunting" you mean "selectivly hunting for people who are scum", then yes, i was doing that.
Um, I was playing for years before Tar ever heard of mafia, Mastin. And no, I never heard of that one.
For the ten thousanth time, "Yes they are" is not an argument.
1: Yes. Yes, they are. Reasons are ALWAYS necessary for a vote.Reasons are not always necessary
Um...no, I was looking for scum. Where do you get "selectice scum hunting" from, anyway?
Oh, yes. The bandwagon was correct. It landed on scum, a Member of the Mafia.especally when you're right.
But no.
It wasn't pro-town.
Selective Scum Hunting is hunting for a specific faction. In your case, you were hunting Mafia members, but not Werewolves. Why?
Because you are one, of course.
From your source, this is what Tar said:
I wasn't doing either of those. I was voting for someone because they looked scummy. It didn't have anything to do with what scum group they were a memeber of; they just looked scummy. And I was right.1) a player builds a case that is predicated around a player being part of a less-significant scum faction (especially a case built around a specific player being SK and not Mafia), or 2) a player all-but-ignores a specific scum faction or factions when scumhunting.
Good pro-town players use their gut to find scum sometimes, Mastin.
I'm voting for you BECAUSE YOU ARE ACTING LIKE CAUGHT SCUM. You are acting like scum acts when they get attacked.
Yes.So, I'm scum because I didn't buy your "proof" that your lurking somehow wasn't a scumtell?
A pro-town player would admit defeat on the points they were making.
Not you.
You switched to other, even WORSE reasoning upon learning that I had defended too well against your accusations.
I also notice that, despite quoting every single bloody line I wrote (even if it's just to say "No, you're wrong" with no reasoning, like you seem to like to do), you've not responded to my actual arguments against you. Sooo scummy...
Do you know what scumtell means?
No. It is NOT.Look; meta aside, lurking is *ALWAYS* a scumtell, ok?
-I lurked in 735. I was waiting for enough responses for me to throw together a long post, and wanted extra feedback before posting my own. I had waited until Kieraen had given himself up as the last scum, before claiming cop, for example.
-I lurked in 742. Pretty much the same. I was building a case against AceMarksman (although, really, the main thing against him was Chainsaw Defense against someone who I knew was guilty), but still, wasn't posting in that time. When Jeff voted me, I claimed.
-I lurked in 760. Tried building opinions, and failed miserably several times. I wasn't contributing my all to the game.
-I lurked in 763. I fell six pages behind. It was originally due to laziness and not wanting to log into the game. It later became serious and I fell behind due to it.
-I lurked in 141. Because of it, I fell one page behind, and from then on, was ALWAYS behind and never caught up.
-I lurked in Inventor Mafia rather some bit. And even active lurked.
Guess what?
I WAS TOWN IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.
It dosn't mean "something that only scum does".
It means "something that scum does more then town".
Even people who always lurk generally tend to lurk worse as scum.
So, no; no amount of meta-ing defense you try to do is going to make it
ok for you to lurk. It's not a huge scumtell, because town do lurk sometimes, but it always is a scumtell.
Ah, but there's more town then scum in those games.
Not in my experience. I've seen town lurk more than scum in my dozen or so games.Scum lurk more then town,
If you see 2 town lurk and 1 scum lurk in a game, that's STILL actually a sign that it's a scumtell, since there are likely 4x as many town as scum in that game.
Wrong, wrong, and wrong.
I agree. It IS anti-town. Butand lurking is also anti-town.
-ANTI-TOWN IS NOT SCUMMY,
-NOR IS ANTI-TOWN A SCUM-TELL,
-NOR IS IT ANY KIND OF SIGN OF SCUM.
Assume people are playing towards their win condition, as they're required to do under site rules. Then, if they act in a way that is likely to help the town win, their win condition is more likely town. If they act in a way that is likely to help the scum win, their win condtion is more likely scum.
People who act in a way that hurts the town are more likely to be scum then those who don't. Period.
Now, there are SOME CASES where something is anti-town but is STILL not actually scummy, but those are very special cases. For the most part, anti-town=scummy.
Um...you can't tell me why I suspected you, Mastin. That's not how it works...
Yes. Yes, it does.In any case, the reason I especally suspected you for lurking dosn't have anything to do with daytalking, or experenced players
Not necessarally, no. Scum slip because they know things town don't. Most scum worry about slipping. Experenced partners is irrelevent.Your reason for suspecting me for lurking was BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT I FEAR SLIPPING UP AS SCUM, which IS RELATED TO DAYTALKING AND EXPERIENCED PLAYERS.
Let me check that.
SPECIFICALLY Iamausername, though. THERE WERE MANY OTHERS WHO HAD NOT CONTRIBUTED A GREAT DEAL,I was commenting that I wanted to hear more from Iamusername.AT THE TIME OF THAT POST.ESPECIALLY
You singled out a SPECIFIC player and said that it'd be nice to hear more from them.
I made my post on:Saturday, June 13, 8:03 PM.
At that point, Iamusername had last posted on June 4th.
You had posted on the 12'th...
Caboose had posted that day
Sotty had posted that day
OGML had posted on the 12th.
Wolfy had posted that day.
Tarballs has posted that day.
So, no. You are either wrong, or are again lying. At the point when I mentioned that we hadn't heard from Iamusername for a while, we had not heard from Iamusername for a while, and THAT WAS NOT TRUE OF ANYONE ELSE IN THE GAME.
You're trying to make it sound like I "randomally" named one lurker out of a bunch of lurkers, and that's completly not true. At that point in time, he was the only person who had not posted, so I specifcally made a point of pointing that out. I had a post specifically devoted to pointing out that he hadn't posted for a while.
It wasn't an *attack* on him, but still, if I had a partner who was lurkerscum, why would I point out he was lurking? Being a lurkerscum actually can be a good scum tactic (which is why it's an inherent scumtell), but only if no one notices it.
Again, Mastin; you clearly aren't actually interested in looking for facts, you're just making up facts out of thin air to try to make me sound like scum.
Well, sure. Again, you look scummy, I'm not surpised he voted you, or anyone else for that matter.
Even more condemning, SHORTLY AFTER THAT, Iamausername DOES show up, and basically votes for YOUR "suspect" at the time, Me.
dude, don't hurt yourself there, lol.
This. Is. Utter.I also said that I did have a pro-town vibe from the posts he did make, which is true.. You've EVEN ON THIS PAGEBSTHAT YOU HAVE SUSPICIONS OF Iamausername.STATED
Want the quote? I'll give it to you if necessary. You're TOTALLY contradicting yourself, Yos2. You. Are. Caught. Scum.
I think he's probably pro-town, depsite his lurking. As I said, lurking is a scum tell, but it's a weak one on it's own.
You can rant and rave as much as you want, but you're not going to prevent me from stating my opinions, Mastin...
Because he was the ONLY ONE NOT POSTING!
On a SINGLE SPECIFIC player. You could've said that about MANY other players at the time. You chose Iamausername...why?It's pretty much just a streightfoward statement of fact
Do you actually check facts before you throw around accusations, Mastin?
Nope.
This, ITSELF, EVEN ALONE, contradicts your supposed town read on Iamausername. BY YOUR OWN ADMITION, YOU ARE SAYING LURKING IS A SCUM TELL. Whichan attempt of mine to prevent someone from lurkingCONTRADICTS WITH A TOWN READ.FUNDAMENTALLY
Let me review again:
Scum tell: something scum are at least slightly more likely to do then town.
So, if someone is lurking, it does not mean they MUST be scum. It increases their ODDS of being scum a little. However, if I have other reasons to think that person is town, then I still may have a town read on someone, despite that.
It's like:
"Ah, he missed that foul shot."
"I thought you said he was a good basketball player!"
"Yeah, he is."
"But you've also said that good basketball players don't usually miss foul shots!!!"
"True."
"Contradiction!!!!!11!"
No, it's not. Pro-town players *shouldn't* lurk, but they sometimes do anyway.
Anyway, you repeat your same bad argument a few more times here, let me just deleate that.
No, I want a PLAYER IN THE GAME to post after I notice he is not, because it's better for the town if everyone is posting.
AKA, wants your partner to post after you notice he has not...The fact that he posted after I complained that we needed to hear more from him is *EXACTALLY WHAT I WANT TO HAPPEN WHEN I DRAW ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT SOMEONE IS LURKING.*
ARe you really having *that* hard a time understanding why a pro-town person might want to say "Hey, we haven't heard from X in a while" in order to get him to post, even if that person isn't especally suspicious of X?
How was his case against you weak? It made sense to me.
And Iamausername proved this by posting a weak case against me. You seriously didn't have suspicions over that?At least half the time, lurkers are still reading the game, they're just being quiet;
Dosn't how many times you repeat the lie, Mastin, it's still a lie. There was only one person in the game who had not posted in a while.
1: Many others had been contributing about the same amount at the time as Iamausername (read: not very much at all). You chose Iamausername out of all those options.usually if you point out that they're lurking, they show up.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
So, to summerise (again, I don't know if everyone in the game is reading these mega-posts):
-Mastin was trying to claim that "Yos killed Kore before Kore was attacking me." This is completly untrue; Kore really wasn't attacking me. Go back and look at her posts for yourself.
-Mastin was also trying to claim that I picked Iamusername out of the blue to mention that he hasn't posted for a while, when "lots of other people were just as bad". Again, this is false; at the time I posted that, Iamusername was the only person who hadn't posted for a while, so I asked for him to post more. He then claims that somehow this, or the fact that Iamusername agrees with me that Matin is scummy, proves there's a link between me and Iamusername, which is just absurd.
Frankly, I honestly doubt even Mastin believes these arguments.
Also, despite that whole huge wall of text where he kept repeating the same two wrong things over and and over again, he completly failed to respond to some key points for why I thought he was scummy (I guess he knew he was wrong and I was right there?) Specifically, the whole way he was threatening to attack me "if I attacked him", the way he was trying to claim that "you can't use meta to attack me", and some other comments like this one:
Basically, he's trying to punish people for attacking him. He's trying to make it seem like attacking him is somehow fundimentally off-limits, and that if anyone does attack him, he'll go after them, attack them with his "true playstyle" to punish them.5: This is my true playstyle, which I have now unleashed upon you thanks to your encouragement. Don't like it?
Then don't attack me.
The whole thing is just incredibly scummy. He didn't attack anyone all game, and basically is mostly inactive for most of the game. Then when attacked for lurking, he suddenly goes hyper-active, attacking only the people who are attacking him. He even makes clear that he's attacking people just because they're attacking him, and that he wouldn't be playing like this if he wasn't being attacked.
Mastin is either scum, or he's playing a really, really poor game as town. I think he's scum.
The only thing that gives me any doubt is that I think Mastin really didn't know scum could daytalk; then again, looking at the scum role PM's in the second post, none of them say the scum could daytalk; in fact, they specfically say you can talk to your partner at night, so the scum probably didn't know they could daytalk either.
Actually...now that I notice that, Mastin's whole reaction, where he kept asking the mod "CAN SCUM DAYTALK?", trying to prove me wrong, and then was stunned to find out they could, actually makes sense coming from a scum.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
OGML's "strong argument" for a link between Khamisa and Kore was actually in response to that post of mine, Sotty.Sotty7 wrote:
Strong arguments? If I remember right you weren't buying the idea Kore was scum yesterday.Yosarian2 Post 290 wrote:Especally after the strong arguments OMGL made yesterday linking Kore to Khamisa, it seems pretty obvious why Kore was killed.
Yosarian2 Post 190 wrote:OGML, why is is that you ALWAYS think I'm scum?
Anyway, I agree with you about Khamisa and tarballs are both looking scummy, and I'd be willing to go along with a lynch on either one. Kore, I don't really see the case on her.
I don't usually follow up on possible links like that until I know the alignment of one of the people involved, but I think that it's a pretty strong argument against Kore once you know Kham's alignmennt, and if Kore had been alive today I had been intending to follow up on it.OGML post 191 wrote: Anyway, Kore is mostly on the list for defending Kham by way of attacking Wulfy, which is the classic and very useful Chainsaw Defense. I would not be willing to lynch Kore before Kham is dead and confirmed as some flavor of scum.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Three problems with this.Mastin wrote:<--Still busy.
Just something I have to say, if someone drops the hammer:
The fact that I've been at L-1 for DAYS proves that BOTH the werewolves already voted me, meaning of
Yos2
OGML,
and Iamausername,
Two are werewolves. (Wulfy doesn't count; Wulfy's the mafia member.)
1. Iamusername and OGML both look town.
2. That would only make sense if we were in lynch or lose, which we're not.
3. That would only make sense if you were town, which you're probably not.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You can post all the links you want, dude. I just proved your entire argument wrong, like, 3 posts ago. I asked Iamusername to post, because he was the only person in the entire game who had not posted recerntly. Your claim otherwise was completly untrue.Mastin wrote:By the way, Yos2, a few links for convenience:
Even some of the best players on this site slip.
Of course, newbies do it just as often.
Which is why I DEFINITELY think this was a slip from you, Yos2.
Also, for like the ten billionth time, you apparently don't know what the word "slip" means in a mafia context.
I really don't get why you seem complelty incapable of seeing the truth here, Mastin.
Say, hypothetically, you are town, there is a player in a game you are playing, and you think he's town, but he hasn't posted in a while. Everyone else in the game has. Wouldn't you make a post like this?
What I said, in that post, was exactally the right thing for me, as a pro-town person, to say in that point in time. I didn't suspect Iamusername, and therefore didn't want to attack him or start a bandwagon on him or anything, but I did want to hear more from him.Yosarian2 wrote:On a side note, we have't heard from Iamasusername in a while. I have pretty good vibes from him, though.
Again, you seem unwilling to consider the simplest, obvious, and true answer, and instead invent elaborate conspiricy theories based on nothing (and you actually had to invent untrue facts in order to support them) just becuase you want to claim I'm scum, and you want to claim I'm scum just because I'm attacking you. That's either a pretty standard scum ploy, or really piss-poor town play. So, again, I have to wonder if you're scum, or if you're just a really bad player.
Actually, I already helped lynch a mafia, and I'm pretty sure you're a warewolf, so once I lynch you I'm in good shape.True purpose of this post is to explain to you your status:
Screwed.
You're screwed if you lynch me, screwed if you don't.
Dude, I've already proven that nothing you've said is legit. If you are town, you should have realized that by now, unless you're so caught up in your own arguments you've stopped caring about facts.If you lynch me, I flip town. People will realize EVERYTHING I said was legit.
Um...I don't believe I've ever attacked anyone for agressive play in a mafia game, and I certanly never attacked you for being agressvie (or "agressive explosive" or whatever you're talking about). Again, you're still just blatently making stuff up. Which, at least, is consistant.You pushing for my lynch based off of BS reasons (A meta I shot full of holes, "aggressive explosive play", etc.)
Well, I tell you, if you pulled a stunt like that in a game I was modding, delibratly breaking the rules and stating your intent to do so before hand, I would blacklist you from all my games for life. Just saying.(If I am lynched, then I will break the rules of the Bah posts if anyone but Yos2 is lynched. It'll be one, four-letter word which I will make in a large font size, perhaps bolded, italicized, and underlined. Take a guess at which. )I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I'm back from V/LA.
Anyway, Iamusername makes a good argument there. I've seen scum fail to get in nightkills for no good reason before even when they're around, but I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the two wolves was away last night. I could see lynching either Caboose or Tarballs today.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hmm...interesting.Tarballs wrote:For the record: I didn't post on this site during last night phase, but was recieving and sending PMs regarding a game I was about to mod. And I visited the site every day.
Makes sense, a game of his in the mini theme queau did just fill up. Unfortunatly, I wasn't able to actually confirm that he was around at night because of this, because his last post in the queau forum was back on the 19th. Tarballs made no posts anywhere on this site between June 25th and June 30th. So we really have no way of knowing if that's true.
For the record, I was also on briefly a few times during the bash, on Ether's laptop which she brought, and I would have been able to send in a nightkill if I had been scum. I didn't post anything while I got on, though, so I can't prove tat either.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the wolves did screw up. I'm not as confident as you that that proves they weren't around; I've seen scum teams just fail to get in kills while they were around, it just happened in the lynch all lurkers game I modded for example and both of the scum posted in the scum quicktopic that night. That being said, it does dramatically increase the odds of Caboose being scum, and I'm perfectly willing to vote there today.I believe that the wolves did indeed screw up last night, because we pretty likely would've had the exact same suspects for this day, had they killed someone and made it a lylo. So this can't be a WIFOM trap "for stupid townies to jump on". That makes me believe that Yos has to be one of the wolves, and the other one is most likely Caboose, who seems to have forgotten about this game entirely. Really can't see how anyone else but those two could've failed to send a kill.
Vote:CabooseI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I just sent the mod a question about this, and got the answer.
If I had been scum, knowing I would be away, I would have asked the mod if I could have sent the night choice in early, even before night started. I just sent the mod a PM asking him in the hypothetical if he would have accepted that, and he would have.
So the theory that I am a warewolf who didn't get the nightchoice in is incorrect; if I had been a warewolf, I would have been able to get the nightchoice in early, and I definatly would have, since I've know for months I would be away.
I'm pretty happy with my Caboose vote. He wasn't around at all, so if he's a wolf it could partially explain their lack of a night choice.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
How is it suspicious that I didn't suggest lynching myself? That's absurd. After all, I know I'm town. It dosn't mean the theory is invalid, only that from my point of view, I know it dosn't apply to me.Hero764 wrote: Thirdly, about the no kill last night. Caboose(me) still would have a partner who could send the night kill in, and if he was online to set up his game surely he could send in a simple night kill. Tarballs, according to IAAUU, posted 5 hours before, so I don't see why he couldn't send in a night kill at that time. Yos is the only one that fully fits this "theory". He gets even more suspicious w/ this post:
He completely ignores the fact that his name was also mentioned in Iamausername's post, possible buddying up to avoid further scrutiny from UN(yes I'm going to write your name differently every time )? And the whole 'at least one of two wolves' is completely faulty, since only one were partner would need to be present anyways to send in a night kill.Anyway, Iamusername makes a good argument there. I've seen scum fail to get in nightkills for no good reason before even when they're around, but I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of the two wolves was away last night. I could see lynching either Caboose or Tarballs today.
In my experence, scum groups usually get used to one person sending in the kill every night. If that person is not around, and the partner does not realize this, then it's not uncommon for the scum group to fail to get an action in. It also sometimes happens that all of the scum group is around and they just screw up and miss the deadline anyway. But, despite this, this is a reason to be more suspicious of the people who were not around then of those who were around, and I am saying this despite the fact that I was not around and am town anyway.
\
Which is it? Inactivity or just failed to get a kill in?Yeah, I'm pretty sure the wolves did screw up. I'm not as confident as you that that proves they weren't around; I've seen scum teams just fail to get in kills while they were around, it just happened in the lynch all lurkers game I modded for example and both of the scum posted in the scum quicktopic that night. That being said, it does dramatically increase the odds of Caboose being scum, and I'm perfectly willing to vote there today.
Well, obviously, I don't know; the only people who actualy know if they just failed to get a kill in or if they were inactive, or some combination of the two, are the wolves themselves. It does increase your odds of being scum, though.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Eh? IAAU made an argument that makes both me, Tarballs, and you look bad. I actually agreed that the argument was logical, as I made clear, although I obviously know it dosn't apply to me. What more do you expect me to say about it?Hero764 wrote:
Misrep much? When in that entire post did I suggest you lynching yourself? My point is that you completely neglected defending yourself, and instead attempted to get IAAU to forget about you and focus only on Tarballs and I.How is it suspicious that I didn't suggest lynching myself? That's absurd. After all, I know I'm town. It dosn't mean the theory is invalid, only that from my point of view, I know it dosn't apply to me.
I actually did defend myself later, if you notice, in post 355. Nonetheless, Iam made an arguemnt in the form of "people who do X are more likely to be scum", and I agree with the arguemnt, even though I did X and I am town.
No, my logic is not. Of course it increses my chances of being scum; it certanly dosn't increase them to 100%, and I am, in fact, town, but that dosn't actually invalidate the argument.
If it increases my chance it increases your as well, and I'm pretty sure you aren't saying that you are scum. Your logic is faulty.Well, obviously, I don't know; the only people who actualy know if they just failed to get a kill in or if they were inactive, or some combination of the two, are the wolves themselves. It does increase your odds of being scum, though.
If "People who do X are more likely to be scum then people who do not do X", that argument may very well be correct even though I did X and am town. You're trying to find a contradiction where none exists.
I also find it interesting you're defending Tarballs here and attacking me. Your defense of Tarballs seems to be "He could have gotten the night choice in; after all, he was around 5 hours before night started." Well, sure, since the mod apparenlty accepts night choices sent in before night starts if you know you'll be away, he could have, if he knew he was going to be gone for the entire night. I did know I was going to be away for a week, so therefore I also could have sent it in beforehand; in fact, I would have had far more reason to do so then either you or tarballs. So why are you attacking me for this and defending him? Is it just because I'm voting you?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
But they do, more or less. In fact, that's part of the reason I think you're scum.Hero764 wrote:
Maybe show how IAAU's statements didn't really work?Yosarian2 wrote:Eh? IAAU made an argument that makes both me, Tarballs, and you look bad. I actually agreed that the argument was logical, as I made clear, although I obviously know it dosn't apply to me. What more do you expect me to say about it?
Sure, I can prove it. If you don't believe me, ask the mod the same hypothetical question yourself. And I can also certanly prove that I knew I was going to be away for the entire time; there's a whole thread on GD about it, in fact. What part of it, exactally, are you saying I can't prove?
Saying something that you can't prove isn't really defending yourself.I actually did defend myself later, if you notice, in post 355. Nonetheless, Iam made an arguemnt in the form of "people who do X are more likely to be scum", and I agree with the arguemnt, even though I did X and I am town.
Again, I never said that. I did, and do, expect to be suspected because I wasn't around. People who suspect me for that reason would be wrong, but that dosn't mean the logic isn't sound.And by agreeing with his argument you were saying that while you shouldn't be suspected for those reasons, Tarballs and Caboose could. It doesn't make any sense.
...
Again, if inactivity is the case for the no kill, and I'm being suspected because Caboose wasn't apparently a part of the game at that time(even though IAAU pointed out that he was active on the site during that time), then you, being the only logical partner for me in this case, should suspect yourself.No, my logic is not. Of course it increses my chances of being scum; it certanly dosn't increase them to 100%, and I am, in fact, town, but that dosn't actually invalidate the argument.
I should suspect myself?
Confirm vote:Hero
I'm hardly the "only logical partner". Neither Caboose (the person you replaced) nor Tar posted anywhere on the site during the entire night, and, as I've pointed out multiple times, if one person out of a 2 member scum team isn't online, then it will increase the odds of them failing to get a kill in.
Why are you completly ignoring what I say, Hero, and just responding with non-sequetors like "You are my only logical partner" and "You should suspect yourself"?
Theory: People who are not around at night when a kill is missed are more likely to be scum.
What?If "People who do X are more likely to be scum then people who do not do X", that argument may very well be correct even though I did X and am town. You're trying to find a contradiction where none exists.
Fact (from my point of view, at least): I was not around at night, and I am town.
If you think about it, that fact DOES NOT DISPROVE that theory, because that theory just said that people who were not around ARE MORE LIKELY to be scum, not that they ALL MUST BE scum. Do you really not understand the distinction here?
So, you're annoyed that he forgot to send it in, apparently?
1) Tarballs posted on this site during the night(5 hours before daybreak), that's why if he's my scum partner he could've easily sent in a night kill.I also find it interesting you're defending Tarballs here and attacking me. Your defense of Tarballs seems to be "He could have gotten the night choice in; after all, he was around 5 hours before night started." Well, sure, since the mod apparenlty accepts night choices sent in before night starts if you know you'll be away, he could have, if he knew he was going to be gone for the entire night. I did know I was going to be away for a week, so therefore I also could have sent it in beforehand; in fact, I would have had far more reason to do so then either you or tarballs. So why are you attacking me for this and defending him? Is it just because I'm voting you?
No, it does not. How many times do I have to explain this here?2) I'm attacking you for suspecting me when the exact same logic makes you my scum partner. For using illogical reasoning to vote for me. I would be doing the same thing if you had attacked anyone else. So no, its not because you are voting for me.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ah. I was actually talking about post 355, not 335. I wouldn't really consider that a defense.Hero764 wrote:
You don't know what I'm talking about? You're the one who pointed it out for me:Sure, I can prove it. If you don't believe me, ask the mod the same hypothetical question yourself. And I can also certanly prove that I knew I was going to be away for the entire time; there's a whole thread on GD about it, in fact. What part of it, exactally, are you saying I can't prove?
335 wrote:For the record, I was also on briefly a few times during the bash, on Ether's laptop which she brought, and I would have been able to send in a nightkill if I had been scum. I didn't post anything while I got on, though, so I can't prove tat either.
Again, no, no I don't.Don't you just love misreps? Read closely: You would be forced to suspect yourself ONLY if you continue using this logic.
Ok.1) Caboose is me, he can't be my partner.
2) Tarballs did post, 5 hours before daybreak.
Only if I was trying to argue that both partners must have been away all night, WHICH I NEVER DID. Stop trying to put other people's words into my mouth.3) You didn't post, so yes you would be the only logical partner.
Ok, let me explain this, because again, I've seen this happen. Let's say that Caboose sent in the nightkill night 1 and night 2. Let's also say, just for the sake of argument, that he and his partner didn't talk much. If his partner wasn't aware Caboose was gone night 3, then there's a pretty high chance that the nightkill might just not get sent in.4) Bolded makes absolutely no sense. Only one werewolf needs to be present in order to send in the night kill. Please show how one being absent decreases the likelihood of a night kill being sent in. If anything it would INCREASE the chance since there wouldn't be a second person for the first one to argue with.
Again, i've seen it happen before.
Nothing faulty about my logic at all.Using more faulty logic to try and get me lynched. Scummy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
There was noting horrible about my logic, hero. I explained it to you like 6 times yesterday. There's no way you still don't understand what I am saying. Therefore, I do think your attack on me is OMGUS, because I don't get how you could have a problem with my posts yesterday otherwise.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
It happens pretty often, actually. In any case, if the scum failed to get the kill in, I would expect both members of the scum team to not be paying much attention to the game; not to be completly inactive, perhaps, but people who are only semi-active. No matter how you look at it, it can only make Caboose look worse.Hero764 wrote:
Tell me Yos, how often do you think something like this could happen? Just because you've "seen it happen" doesn't mean that it's valid reasoning to use against someone. Maybe on day 2, but in MYLO?
Anyway, that certanly isn't my only reason for suspecting you. My biggest problem with Caboose's play is simply that I had absolutly no reason to think he was pro-town, I had no read on him at all, which usually means that someone is scum. And your play since you replaced in has mostly just been to flail and attack me for attacking you.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yes. And the scum didn't do that, apparently. So, what does that tell you?Hero764 wrote:
...it only takes like a minute of paying attention to the game to send a kill in.Yosarian2 wrote:It happens pretty often, actually. In any case, if the scum failed to get the kill in, I would expect both members of the scum team to not be paying much attention to the game; not to be completly inactive, perhaps, but people who are only semi-active. No matter how you look at it, it can only make Caboose look worse.
Except obviously he wasn't.If you claim you are town and I'm scum, then my scum partner was certainly active that night
Look, the most likely scenerio here is that both members of hte scum team were careless, not paying attention, and perhaps didn't care much about the game. This is especally true since even if they wouldn't be around they could still have sent a kill in beforehand. They may have just screwed up for some other reason, but even then, that's more likely to happen if they're not paying attention to the game. And all of that makes Caboose look worse.
You are claiming my logic is flawed, even though it clearly is not. Therefore, either you are using OMGUS, which is scummy, or you are attacking me with flawed logic, which (as you just said) is scummy.And again, I attacked you for using flawed logic, even if you think I'm wrong, you can't just dismiss it as OMGUS. Doing so is incredibly scummy.
I know. It sucks when you replace in and you're scum and your predecessor screwed up, huh?Also, to be fair, I've not even been in this game for a full 24 hours of the day phases.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um, no it's because the scum didn't kill anyone, and if they were paying attention they should have.Hero764 wrote:]How do you know what scum did? Is it because you're scum?
Like what?There's a number of reasons for them not sending in a nightkill
Eh? That dosn't make any sense. How is it "highly unlikely"? It happens all the time that scum just fail to get a kill in because they're not paying attention or not around or not thinking or there's a miscommunication or something. I can think of any number of games where it's happened., and you're just assuming that your theory(that inactivity caused it) is correct, and I'm telling you that it is highly unlikely.
[/quote]
What the hell makes that the most likely scenario? I certainly don't think it is. Sending in a night action is probably the easiest part of the game.Except obviously he wasn't.
Look, the most likely scenerio here is that both members of hte scum team were careless, not paying attention, and perhaps didn't care much about the game. This is especally true since even if they wouldn't be around they could still have sent a kill in beforehand. They may have just screwed up for some other reason, but even then, that's more likely to happen if they're not paying attention to the game. And all of that makes Caboose look worse.
Well, then, what do you think happened?
Yes, sending in a nightkill is easy, but it's also a pretty easy thing to forget to do, especally if your scumbuddy has vanished.
What scenerio do you think is more likely for why the scum didn't kill, then?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
ALso, I really, really find it scummy the way you've ignoring everything else that happens all game and all you seem to care about is me supporting the theory that the fact that no one got a kill in makes Caboose look worse, especally since I'm not even the only one who thinks that's true.
We're in lynch or lose, hero. Why aren't you scumhunting? Why are you just flipping out on me just because I suspect you?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Excuse me? "100% chance"? Where do you get that from, exactally?Wulfy wrote: Yos2 and Caboose (now Hero) would be forced to slam each other as there is a 100% chance one of them would be scum today.
I'm calling it. Scum team is Hero and Wulfy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You "can't even fathom" the contrary? That's hard to believe. There's no way a pro-town person could be 100% certain of ANYTHING, especally involving the scum kill.Wulfy wrote:What do you mean where do I get that? My theory yesterday states that between the three of Tarballs, Yos2, and Hero (caboose) there is (essentially) a 100% chance of at least one scum. I can't even fathom the contrary.
From my point of view, it looks like yeterday you distanced from Caboose/Hero while actually pushing the tarballs lynch over his without any really good reason, while I was actually trying quite hard to lynch Hero instead of tarballs. Now, it looks like you're willing to bus Hero, but only if it means you can get me lynched tommorow in a 3 man endgame for the scum win; the way you're trying to say that "hero and yos are both scum" really looks like you're trying to set up a scum win tommorow.
Plus, both OGML and Iamusername have looked pretty pro-town to me this game. That really just leaves you and Hero.
It's not that one of those people "is gone". You delibratly pushed for tarballs to be lynched, instead of the obvscum Hero. And now you're willing to bus hero, but only if you can connect him to me first.Today, one of those people (Tarballs) is gone, so why would my reasoning not continue to say my above statement that concludes a 100% chance of wolf between you and Hero. I feel that you're reaching Yos2.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I still don't get how you would think that anything is 100%. I'm not 100% sure of anything in this game, or in almost any game when I'm town.Wulfy wrote: This is part of my sentiments exactly. Maybe, you're town. However, that doesn't explain why your paranoia. I stated that between you and Hero there is a 100% chance of scum. I didn't intend this to mean the scum team.
I'm attacking you because you are acting in a way that I would expect the scum to act both today and yesterday.So, we both think that UN and OGML is town. You are attacking me because I'm making the obvious deduction that Hero and Yos2 is scum?
You haven't actually answered my main concern here, wolfy. Why were you pushing the tarballs wagon over the hero wagon yesterday? You kept saying that you would be willing to lynch either, but I think that was a smokescreen; you didn't really seem interested in lynching hero yesterday, looking at your actions and your votes, despite your words.
It's not speculation or nonesense. It certanly is conjecture, but that's a bit part of what mafia is about. For the most part, it's just that the most likely scum is you-hero, and your actions today and yesterday seem to fit that model perfectly. Especally with you pushing the unlikely "hero and yos are scum together" theory, when I really can't imagine you believing that as town, considering the way I've been basically the main one attacking him both yesterday and today and considering the way he was fighting back.I mean, really. You're creating a giant ball of speculation based on conjecture and nonsense. Then again, you might be caught scum who is trying his best bet, which is to attack anyone with baseless speculation...
Oh? I thought you had already declared that there was a 100% chance of you being right?It's not impossible, but I still wanna continue picking through other potential pairings. One can be wrong, you know.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey