Were you happy or sad when you got a scum role in this game?
Mini 956: The Quayside (Game Over)
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
So you're telling us you got a scum role. Thanks for the honesty. This whole forum mafia thing is quite a bit easier than I thought it would be.
Oh, I'm sorry. In my excitement I must have failed to answer your question. I felt pretty good when I stopped beating my wife. I was liberated from some personal barriers that had kept me restricted from being a respected and informed member of society. My wife is much happier too, and we've really started to patch our marriage back together again.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Because he's scum.Patrick wrote:
Why this qualifier?pops wrote:I mean yeah, I don't have any reason to think he's scum,
You're uncool with my actions, therefore you won't vote me?SerialClergyman wrote:I'd vote goat but I'm a little uncool with the domestic violence schtick that I don't understand.
As scum I tend to strategically lurk from time to time (close to deadlines, when I want to get town opinions before throwing out my own). I tend to be more aggressive and controlling as town, and more laid back with calmer, logical posts as scum.iamausername wrote:A question for all; if you were scum, how would we tell?
Page 2 and I'm still alive. Thug life. For those worried about spousal abuse I don't actually have a wife.Patrick wrote:Vote: Goatrevolt
Kill before end of page.
----------------------
On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.
Since then, there is his rampant use of qualifiers for each of his actions. There is "I mean, yeah, I don't have any reason to think he's scum" which Patrick called out, and then again the "But I hope I'm not omgussing" from his most recent post. The twilight bit felt forced as well. I haven't even taken into account him not bothering to even answer Patrick's question but instead throwing suspicion on him without backing. And he jumped off my wagon for no reason once it picked up, which is also interesting.
All of his posts suggest self-consciousness of the way he is coming off to the rest of the players. If he thought Patrick was scum, why wouldn't he just vote Patrick? Instead he throws suspicion on him but at the same time notes that it could be construed as OMGUS, which suggests that he is taking note of how others might perceive his actions.
Kill before the end of this page????-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
All Patrick did was ask you a question. His vote was on me. You "reacted" to his question by calling him suspicious for pointing the most baseless finger day 1. He didn't point a finger, he asked a question. Why didn't you bother to answer his question...something you still haven't done?popsofctown wrote:I mentioned omgussing because I was genuinely unsure of my own ability to respond to suspicions indicated towards me. Was it really silly to cast suspicion on me like that, or does it only seem silly because I know I'm not actually scum?
popsofctown wrote:Answers the other question, why I didn't vote for him. I hear constantly from people in seemingly every game I play that I ought to be voting whoever I'm talking about, but I move my vote as I please. I'm actually somewhat slower with my vote as town than as scum, I'm trying to work on that (slowing down my voting when I get a scum pm, that is).
These are both consistent. If you are more trigger happy as scum in the RVS, then you might be inclined to find scum to be naturally more trigger happy in the RVS. I think you're wrong, but that's not the point.popsofctown wrote:@Incognito: I think scum are more likely to take RVS seriously because there really on the average isn't anything there for the first few pages. Town sit around with the mentality "when something scummy happens, i'll move and accelerate the game".
Scum sit around with the mentality "when something happens, I'll move and accelerate the game". This is kind of a chunk of the universal tendency for scum to point fingers at something that isn't a valid tell, but it's a special case because scum are even more restless in the RVS stage, they can't even give thumbsup/thumbsdown to any real scumhunting.
Here's one question I have, though. I have easily been the most aggressive player so far and you could conceivably consider me "restless in the RVS stage." Why haven't you gone after me?
Ok. Nothing else in my post was worth addressing?popsofctown wrote:@Goatrevolt: Are you still beating your wife is a universal meme, it's kind of old and outdated and dead now but my dad still likes it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I'm not certain about his alignment, I'm just going after what I find most suspicious. Specifically what do you find bothersome about it? If not malicious, then what do you dislike?Incognito wrote:I don't really like Goatrevolt's certainty about popsofctown's alignment on this page, but I don't really see it as malicious at this point.
Agreed 100%. He read and responded to the portion of my post directed at him in 4 minutes time. That suggests he was "camping" the thread. If he was just checking in from the last time he had posted, he would have had to read like 10 posts from his last post and also type up a response to mine which would probably take longer than 4 minutes, and that's if he timed it perfectly too.Incognito wrote:SerialClergyman's post 35 stuck out to me too because it didn't really address some of the major things that have been brought up on this page. SC, any other thoughts on anyone else so far aside from me?
The part that bothers me most is that he didn't react at all to my 3 paragraphs on pops, only picking out the part that pertained to him and responding to it. Then 7 minutes later I asked him about his thoughts on pops and no further response.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Meh. Meh. I have reasons for looking at pops beyond him being "a bad comedian" as well. Why not bother to address that? You pulled out a small part of my post, said you don't buy it, said you have differing reasons to be suspicious of the same player I am, and then ignored the rest of my post where I also gave additional reasoning. Weird...NabakovNabakov wrote:
You mean like how your wife beating joke was forced? RL D1 of D1 of an invitational (basically) is a tough crowd, and while I have reasons for looking at pops, it's not because he's a bad comedian.Goat wrote: On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.
Ummmm...what? The question was 'why did you tack the qualifier that you didn't believe I was scum onto your joke vote?' Considering that qualifier had nothing to do with the actual joke, I really don't buy this response at all.popsofctown wrote:I didn't answer the question because I hate explaining jokes. Do you know anyone that likes explaining jokes?
Why did you care about making sure we knew that you were joking? What were you worried of happening?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
You're missing the point. You're putting undue emphasis on why I initially went after pops and ignoring any of my later reasons. Do you tend to go back to page 1 reasoning on day 3 and say "well that's what started this?"NabakovNabakov wrote:But that's what started this. You made the second post of the game, and you've claimed that the vote in that post wasn't random. All you would have had to go on at that point was pops' bad joke. Additionally, the post you're getting on his case about now can also be read entirely as a bad joke. The "I don't know if he's scum" part is essential to set up the "but he beats his wife" part. The joke, as a continuation of the "do you still beat your wife?" method of identifying a loaded question, emphasizes the absurdity of basing a vote on anything other than a scum read. By extension, it accuses Goatrevolt's loaded question and vote of being absurd. It is thus more akin to Ecto's paraphrase of SC than it is to pops' later qualifications about Patrick-suspicion, which I certainly do find to be suspicious.
Relax.popsofctown wrote:THE QUALIFIER IS PART OF THE JOKE. Geez. Is this going to be another brickwall game? I don't think I can handle another brickwall game. I really don't.
I already explained how that clause is integral to the joke. That might also be why it, durhur, isn't separated by something like a period or semicolon.
The clause isn't integral to the joke. The clause is integral to saving face in the off chance people don't realize it's a joke.
Unvote
Vote SerialClergyman
FoS: NabakovNabakov-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Nab: Do you think OMGUS is a scum tell?
No, that's fine. I just found it odd that you picked off the weakest part of my case and said it was bad but ignored the bulk, while pursuing the same player yourself for entirely different reasons.NabakovNabakov wrote:You're acting like I'm attempting to take apart your case piece by piece. Am I not allowed to say: "I'd like to pursue this point, but I don't like that point."?
@Incog: I've caught scum on the first few pages before, and I think there's a lot to be learned from early game interactions, but I'm fully aware of the strength of my arguments against pops. I think I learned a lot more being aggressive and surefooted about it than I would have pussyfooting around.
@Pops: What is that last post in response to?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Yeah, it was somewhat based on his frustrated responses. I also think I got about as much out of that as was possible and I think SC is more likely scum right now so I made the swap.Ectomancer wrote:Goat, the way you left the wagon looked to be as a result of Pops frustration response. I can see why you might back off pressing someone until they break. You said you know the strength of your arguments. Could you break it down for posterity? Thanks.
I knew that my arguments weren't as strong as I was pushing them or making them out to be. I did legitimately find everything I brought up against pops suspicious, but I was pushing it as a stronger case than it really was. For page 1 day 1, I felt this was better than what I normally go on.
What are your current thoughts on SC and pops?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
@Pops: Ok, I'm less confused now. I had no clue you were talking about me. 56 is a response to 52 and 53 is a response to 51. I see your point, although I don't get why you continue to be so pissed when I'm not even voting you anymore.
I love how you say you've heard worse justification to preface 3 paragraphs talking about how bad you think my justifications are. It has nothing to do with scum needing to appear anything. Scum could do what Elmo did and plop a vote with nothing else, or they could do what Patrick did and plop a question and a vote or they could do what pops did with jokes and a vote. They don't really "need" to do any of those things.RedCoyote wrote:
I've heard worse justifications. I don't necessarily think you're scummy for this, but I don't really understand it. Why would scum need to appear "casual/joking"? I mean, I get the idea that you want to blend in, but do you mean like scum have a harder time appearing as though they're jovial and carefree?Goat 33 wrote:On a more serious note, I think pops is scum. My vote wasn't random. Something about his first post rubbed me the wrong way. I felt like he was trying too hard to appear casual/joking and it came off as forced. Then he tried to joke when I called him scum, but it felt forced again, and hell, he didn't deny it.
Maybe it's just because I don't get this from pops' opening post at all. I don't think it's forced, and even if I thought that, I don't know if I would immediately jump to the conclusion that pops was scum. Not only do you do that, but you also immediately attempt to box him in. If anything, I seeyouraggression as over-the-top.
This is coming from someone who usually sees aggression as a positive, too.
The point is that I felt like pops was trying too hard to look like he was making natural jokes. His post (and then subsequent posts) just came off as fake sounding to me. It's not that he needed to make jokes to blend in, it's that he was making jokes and they didn't feel like confident, natural posts.
I'm really failing to see why what I did was problematic in any way. You wouldn't jump to the conclusion he was immediately scum and "box him in" but does that mean it was wrong for me to do so? How did I box him in, what does that mean, why is it a bad thing, was my over-the-top aggression anti-town, and if yes, then why?
I agree it's weird he didn't vote, although I'm wondering why you haven't voted either.RedCoyote wrote:
Did you forget to vote or was this just a figure of speech?SC 64 wrote:Nab has earned my vote-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I was just saying I found it humorous, not that there was anything more to be found there.RedCoyote wrote:
Come on, Goat. Now you're just trying to start trouble, aren't you?Goat 74 wrote:I love how you say you've heard worse justification to preface 3 paragraphs talking about how bad you think my justifications are.
I don't know if we're just arguing semantics here or if you're missing my point or what. Scum don't need to joke around, but that doesn't mean scum don't joke around. Your argument against my initial "case" on pops was "why would he need to do that as scum?" I'm saying that he didn't "need" to do that as scum, but it doesn't mean he didn't do that as scum.RedCoyote wrote:
What are you talking about? You said like you felt his joke came off as forced, and, as a direct result of that, you voted him. You said your vote wasn't random. Logic dictates that your vote was a result of how you thought scum would appear.Goat 74 wrote:It has nothing to do with scum needing to appear anything.
Logic doesn't dictate your conclusion. I don't have a grand theory of scum appearing as jokesters in the random phase. I just thought that pops' specific post came off as really fake and so I pressured him on it to see what came from it.
If you think I'm unnatural and fake sounding, then by all means have at it. I'm not paranoid of your criticism at all. As for defensive, sure, I am. You attacked my stance, what did you expect, me to ignore and not defend myself? Here you are again with this needing to appear thing. Pops didn't need to appear like that, but pops DID appear like that. Scum do things every game that they don't need to do, does that invalidate them as evidence?RedCoyote wrote:
You box him in by asking him a loaded question, and an obvious one at that. I feel as though you're the one, and this post is another good example, who is acting "unnatural" and fake sounding. Questions are great, but this seems over-the-top. You sound defensive, almost paranoid, of my criticism. You say that you felt pops was trying too hard to look natural, but in the same breath you say that your vote had nothing to do with how pops needed to appear. Huh? Is there really an argument here, or are you just playing Mr. Interrogator?Goat 74 wrote:How did I box him in, what does that mean, why is it a bad thing, was my over-the-top aggression anti-town, and if yes, then why?
I'm asking you questions because I want to gauge you. Here are a few more... You don't think my actions surrounding pops were scummy, but yet you're really attacking it nonetheless. You like aggressive play, but yet you find me "too aggressive" and are taking a sarcastic jab at my aggressiveness by calling me "Mr. Interrogator". In essence, I agree a lot with what Ecto said. Can you explain these? In both cases, your actions aren't matching up with your words.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Are you seriously still going on about this? If you consider me attacking you on page 1 and backing off you by page 3 "brickwalling" then I'd like to know what you call it when someone actually does tunnel the hell out of another player. My pressure against you was minor, and I backed off relatively soon, all things considered.popsofctown wrote:
A brickwall game is a game where I have to argue with brickwalls that may or may not be named GoatRevolt.Jahudo wrote:
@pops: what's a "brickwall game"? Who did you hope you weren't OMGUS-ing, or was it a statement to hope that you wouldn't OMGUS people in the future?
You've contributed essentially nothing to the game but whining about how I went after you, and have continued to contribute exactly that even after I stopped going after you. Literally the only comment you've made on any player about whether you believe them to be town or scum is your gut town read on Elmo for his single post, a vote with nothing else. Correction: You said Patrick was suspicious for pointing the finger early on, but no followup on that has occurred.
If anyone wants an example of something pops posted that looks really fake, here it is:
The bolded part (not the twilight vote). Call me crazy, call me a brickwall, but that just feels off to me.popsofctown wrote:
Oh yes. We hypoclaimed as town in that game and it was very advantageous. It's always good to hypoclaim in games like that. To hypoclaim by twilight at least.Incognito wrote:I modded you in that Open game that I created. Weak M.D.
Twilight.
I hate that book, Twilight.
Vote: Twilight.
As for this game, Patrick looks suspicious. Whoever starts pointing the most baseless fingers in the RVS looks fishy to me. But I hope I'm not omgussing.
Oh I got on such a rant.
------------------------------------
Oh you did, did you?popsofctown wrote:
Missed the unvote actually.Goatrevolt wrote:@Pops: Ok, I'm less confused now. I had no clue you were talking about me. 56 is a response to 52 and 53 is a response to 51. I see your point, although I don't get why you continue to be so pissed when I'm not even voting you anymore.
This is the post where I unvoted. You'll notice that my unvote is directly below a part of the post thatGoatrevolt wrote:The clause isn't integral to the joke. The clause is integral to saving face in the off chance people don't realize it's a joke.
Unvote
Vote SerialClergyman
FoS: NabakovNabakovyou responded to. Interesting, no?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I did consider him to be scum. I was making a case. My vote was serious. I still consider him a decent shot at scum. I put case in quotation marks because I obviously pursued it harder than what it was truly worth to see what came of it.RedCoyote wrote:
You put case in quotation marks as though you didn't sit there and say your vote was serious. Are you implying that you never considered pops to be scum or that you weren't making a case?Goat 89 wrote:Your argument against my initial "case" on pops was "why would he need to do that as scum?" I'm saying that he didn't "need" to do that as scum, but it doesn't mean he didn't do that as scum.
I don't have a grand theory of scum appearing as jokesters in the random phase. I just thought that pops' specific post came off as really fake and so I pressured him on it to see what came from it.
Actually, this is pretty accurate . I don't know whether scum will joke, be serious, say nothing, etc. during the random phase. But that doesn't mean that I can't pressure anything or that I can't find anything of value in that phase. I don't know IF scum will choose to make jokes, but if I find that their jokes seem fake then I'll go after it. Make sense? In this case, I felt like pops was trying too hard to make a joke, and that his post seemed fake. When people seem fake or not genuine, then I will pressure it.RedCoyote wrote:So you don't know how scum would appear, but you know that pops appeared to be scum? But it wasn't because of his joke, but the way he delivered the joke?
That might be true. I was exaggerating my position, so to some extent it was "fake." Not fake as in I didn't believe what I was saying, but fake as in I was pushing it harder than I knew it was good for.RedCoyote wrote:
Don't take it out of the relative frame with which I made the statement, but yes, ironically, I would say that the forcefulness with which you pushed your case on pops was more fake than the fakeness argument you were pushing on pops.Goat 89 wrote:If you think I'm unnatural and fake sounding, then by all means have at it. I'm not paranoid of your criticism at all. As for defensive, sure, I am. You attacked my stance, what did you expect, me to ignore and not defend myself?
I didn't think you had your sights on me, because you announced that you didn't. I wasn't paranoid, you weren't voting me and you stated that you weren't planning on it. Hypothetically, even if I were scum here, this wouldn't be something I would be paranoid about. Me firing back at people who criticize/attack me is pretty much a facet of my playstyle. When people attack me I like to try to figure out how honest they are in their attack and whether they truly believe it or not. I find it easier to get a read on players that way.RedCoyote wrote:I was just a little surprised when I made an effort to give a neutral stance of, "I don't think I buy your argument, possibly because I don't understand it, but if I had to choose I would say it makes you seem like you're reaching", you were right there ready to fire back at me as though I had my sights on you.
Nope. I don't think you're rooting for a Goat wagon. I agreed with Ecto in that I think you are spending your time doing "busy work." What I mean by that is you've spent the bulk of your time going back and forth with me and yet you don't even believe me to be scum, or at least you aren't pushing for it.RedCoyote wrote:You agree with a lot of what Ecto said. Ecto thinks I'm being passive aggressive, and, I imagine, he is implying that I'm subtlely rooting for a Goat wagon. Do you agree with that?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I didn't jump to the conclusion that I needed to fend you off. I really don't understand your point of contention here. You wrote 3 paragraphs on me, and I addressed them. The idea that I somehow needed to fend you off is entirely your interpretation, and it's incorrect.RedCoyote wrote:There's still something wrong with this. Maybe I didn't use enough smileys, because I still contend that I didn't see it much of an "attack". I of course understand you asking questions and firing back at me, but the proportion, I thought, was off. In a way I can't blame you, because I guess it was the biggest chunk of text I had written in one setting, but the way you jump to the conclusion that you needed to be fending me off is off-putting.
SerialClergyman: What is your stance on Nabakov?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
@Nab: I haven't found anything particularly scummy about any of SC's recent posts, at least nothing relevant now.
I was debating whether to keep my vote on SC or swap back to pops, but after pops decided to ignore me calling him out on a possible lie (but addressing the rest of the post, so I assume he read it), I'm feeling good about swapping back.
Iam: Can you explain your previous experience with RedCoyote? Your first post hinted at a history of you voting for him and right now you are.
To the following people who still haven't placed a non-random vote:
Incognito
NabakovNabakov
Jahudo
popsofctown
Patrick
McGriddle
If you had to vote someone right now, who would it be?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Hah! I wondered if that was coming into play at all. And actually I am doing the same thing with you. I've read you as scum (incorrectly, I believe) every single time I've played with you. We both know what happened in the last game .Ectomancer wrote:I waffled over having to deal with expected attacks over this next part, but I'll also reveal a second, personal layer of reasoning for my decision. When a player kicks out a starter case, you have two options. You can support their "case", or you can oppose what they had to say.
In this case, for me, who the player was that kicked off things was as important as what they had to say.
I have a problem with Goatrevolt. Not a personal problem, a game problem. He may have similiar recollections, maybe not.
I've played a number of games with Goat, and it seems we've gone head to head nearly every time. I've never known his alignment. Ever. I've never spent as much time waffling over someone's alignment. I remember having a vig shot that I wanted to use on him, but never could. Not because I didn't think he could be scum, but becauseI had no clueand so was forced to leave the judgement to others who felt they did know.
So I made a conscious decision to let him go head to head with other people instead and see if it makes a difference. It at least is allowing me to be more objective about the material. It also allows me to stay "chill".
Primarily I posted that to head off any "buddying" posts concerning Goat. This doesn't mean I'm not going to call him out when wrong, but you can expect a different treatment of Goat by me. Goat himself isn't going to like it and this could very well bring about the exact situation I intend to avoid. Ce 'est la vie. I plan to win, and this is my strategy for dealing with a player I've been unable to read in the past.
I'm trying to make a conscious effort to remain more "chill" as well. I really don't want to get into the kind of back and forth we had last time around.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Unvote, Vote NabakovNabakov
RedCoyote is neutral/townish.
SerialClergyman is neutral/scummy.
Incognito is town.
NabakovNabakov is scum.
Jahudo is ??.
Popsofctown is neutral/scummy.
Iamusername is neutral/townish.
Elmo is town.
Patrick is neutral/townish.
Ectomancer I can't read worth a damn.
McGriddle is town.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I could actually go for a few more reasonless votes on the wagon.
I've been pretty sure Nab is scum since the point I FoS'd him but I wanted to wait it out and see how things progressed. At that point I didn't have much more than gut against him, which obviously wasn't going to convince anyone, as demonstrated by my pops case, and there was no real point in trying to push a case that had no legs against him.
One really key interaction I noted was the one between SerialClergyman and Nabakov. If Nabakov ends up as scum, I bet SC is as well. SC called out Nabakov, but didn't vote him in that post. I found that really odd at the time, and then when called out on it by Red Coyote, he votes for Red Coyote next, and never goes back to Nabakov, which I also found odd. When the Nabakov wagon picks up, SerialClergyman jumps on immediately. Distance, distance, distance! There is a strong chance the two are scum together.
I think Pops could be the 3rd. No content this game at all. I still find some of his early posting to be off, and then there is the thing with him claiming to not have known I unvoted, despite having responded to the sentence directly above my unvote. It's possible that he legitimately forgot or didn't notice, but it's definitely weird.
In addition, SerialClergyman ignored my pops case (he says he chose not to respond to it on purpose, but meh) and then after it became clear that it wasn't gaining any support, he "pops" in to say he doesn't find it that convincing and then does the whole Nab/RC thing. Nabakov tried to discredit part of my push against pops while also pushing pops himself for differing reasons, which is why I initially found him suspicious. As soon as the pops thing died out, Nabakov basically just kind of stopped putting any pressure on pops anymore.
Despite that, I'm not totally sold on pops being the 3rd.
I think RedCoyote is town, despite some skepticism over his play. This is mainly based on his interactions with other players, namely how his wagon and pressure aimed at him started up in opposition to the pressure I had on pops and opposed to Serial's "pressure" on Nabakov.
Incognito has felt town through and through.
Elmo has felt fairly town, and his interactions with Nabakov cement that if Nab is scum.
McGriddle has felt town as well. In direct opposition to Nabakov's push, I felt like his stance on pops was natural and honest.
I've picked up a few town tells from Iamusername, but I'm not sure how strong they are. Probably town if Nab is scum, though. 4th vote on the wagon for a good reason gives me a good feeling.
Patrick, not sure. Elmo thinks town and the two seem to have a history together. I've waffled some on it, but I've found his recent posts to be good, so he's not a huge suspect right now.
Ectomancer - Like I said, I can't read him at all. Might be able to peg him as scum based on virtue of process of elimination/his stances, but at this point it's hard to tell.
Jahudo - Unless he's decided to shed his busing meta, he's probably town if Nabakov is scum. Weak read, though.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
1. "possible" innocent.SerialClergyman wrote:Goat pretty genius. Current theory is that I ignored his case on a possible innocent to stick it to my scum mate.
2. Your "stick it to my scum mate" involves calling him out for one thing, not voting, and never going back to it until the wagon on him appears, where you then decided it was time to vote him. You found him scummy enough to vote, but didn't vote and instead voted someone else. And then when I asked you about it, you said you weren't sold to Nab, but when the wagon sprung up you jumped aboard pretty quickly.
3. Even if pops is innocent, not joining a wagon on an innocent, especially one who is the popular suspect at the time is hardly a surprising scum move, especially when factoring in the prior timing concerns with how you handled the pops case.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Can you show me where both of these are?Ectomancer wrote:In other words, he has twice posted a reply, ostensibly to answer that question, but his answers belonged to a different textbook.
As for Nab, I don't have time to post a case right now, but I'll try to get on that today or tonight. The general gist involves our interactions at the beginning of the game, his vote on McGriddle, interactions with Elmo, and attitude toward the wagon on him. The McGriddle vote felt like an attempt to frame a possibly scummy McGriddle as scum rather than a legitimate feeling that he was scum.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
@Serial: why aren't you still voting RC? Explain your thought process in swapping from RC to Nabakov when you did. Your answer to #2 suggests suspicion of RC and then increased suspicion based on him trying to discredit your Ecto read. When I asked you how you felt about Nabakov, you said you weren't really sure on him. Somewhere in there Nabakov not only passed RC's suspicion but became suspicious enough to where you were fine with his lynch.
I'm not surprised by McGriddle's vote considering he had basically announced his intentions to do so already, and I agree with the idea that he'd probably try to come up with a reason based on the iso read as scum.
@Patrick: I'll look at Jahudo more closely later. You might be right. My thought is that he would bus earlier, but I need to analyze his stances with respect to the wagon closer.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Good responses. Your progression on Patrick matches my own, which makes me feel a bit better about you. I felt your question to Patrick earlier on in the game was your most pro-town post in that I was thinking the exact same thing about Patrick and it reflected genuine scum hunting. And I agree with your current read on him as well.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Worst argument ever. If you think the scum bother to use random townie's lists from early day 1 to decide on night kills, then you are wrong. Scum aren't stupid. They can figure out who is trusted and who isn't without requiring people to spell it out in lists. When people point out who they think are town and who they think are scum, there is more information to go off of. The game isn't just finding scum. Finding town is just as important.popsofctown wrote:Other less intelligent players in this thread do, in order to form a more perfect itinerary for the scum nightkills.
Get over it.pops wrote:Goatrevolt has the most posts. He just posts whatever he thinks. So surefooted.
The only points I really buy from pops case are the ones that reflect stuff I've brought up before. I didn't buy the word choice point at all. Serial's word choice in that scenario seemed pretty much exactly what pops was saying it should logically be, so...yeah.
The case doesn't really make me feel any better about pops. Or SerialClergyman for that matter. Not really worse either. I'll have to go over it in more detail later, but I'm not really reading much from it either way on either of them.
Between Nab, Jahudo, SC, and pops I think we'll find at least 2 scum.
Oh yeah, I read through Jahudo in ISO. I definitely think he could be scum. Furthermore I disagree with whoever said that pops/Jahudo don't fit as scum together. I think they definitely can. Jahudo jumping on him for a reason that wasn't very good long after the wagon died out doesn't suggest that pops is town if Jahudo is scum.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Elmo is town because he was the first to jump on Nabscum when Nab decided to push McGriddle. That's really unlikely to be busing.
RC: Get over it. You're not happy with me because I bothered to try to get a read on you after you said you didn't find me scummy but wrote 3 paragraphs on what was wrong with my case anyway. Look, I understand your mindset. Things seem bigger and badder when they involve you personally, but I asked you a few questions and you're blowing it way out of proportion into some sort of theory that I'm overdefense/paranoid and couldn't handle you tearing apart my case. Nobody else feels the same way as you do about this. I think that's an indicator that you're overreacting because it involves you personally and thus not giving it an honest appraisal. Considering I am called overdefensive in almost every game of mafia I've ever played and considering Nabakov already tried to tear apart that exact same aspect of my case earlier in the game, you were really jumping at nothing.
At any rate, my case on Nab will hopefully come tomorrow, and worst case Tuesday, so hang tight.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Yes it does. The marvelous Goatrevolt requires constant groveling.RedCoyote wrote:Does it really bother you that much that I'm not throwing myself at the marvelous Goatrevolt? You ask a lot of questions. Great. You're getting people riled up. Awesome. I'm not going to be browbeat into this mindset that Goat must be town because of all this activity, and I'm certainly not going to change my mind over a quote like, "Nobody else feels the same way as you do". That's the very definition of an appeal to popularity.
Actually the reason I even bothered to respond to that is because you seem to be ignoring Nab or thinking of him as town at least partially because I'm on the wagon and you incorrectly believe me to be scum. I'm telling you that you're wrong about me and probably wrong about Nabakov as well.
Last time you had actually legitimate points against me regarding my stance on Budja, my scum buddy, but you got too caught up in the point about me lurking, which I was able to fairly easily twist in my favor. Here, you don't really have anything legitimate at all, and I haven't twisted your arm either. I think you are the one who is paranoid that I'm scum.RedCoyote wrote:As I recall, the last time you twisted my arm into reading you as a townie, you came up as scum, so this post definitely isn't helping things.
1. Why did you even bring this up at all? You randomly decide to just analyze my play...?SerialClergyman wrote:I disagree with Goat on almost all of his methods, including constantly looking for a buddy of Nab before Nab's flip and the upcoming case, which will be done primarily to look like Goat has some substance rather than do anything convincing regarding Nab. In my experience, D1 is betterp layed on gut than on confirmation-biased paragraphs of language analysis. I'd prefer to see a lynch. Also - I'd lynch any one of Jahudo, Red and Nab, at least.
2. There's no problem in looking for a buddy for Nab. It's not relevant today, but I might not be around tomorrow, so I wanted to get out my notes on Nabakov interactions today. If he's town, then you can just ignore it all. If he's scum, then you can refer back to it. No downside, plenty of upside. Where's the disconnect?
3. The purpose of my casing Nabakov is to get the last 2 votes. It has nothing to do with me trying to save face by having a case. I'm pretty sure he's going to be scum, and in the case he's not, I could always go back and point out a case later if someone asked, so that's hardly a reason.
@Patrick: I'm pretty sure RedCoyote is town. I'd have to go back and find exactly what they were, but he dropped a few things that struck me as definite town tells.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I've been busy. I'm hoping I'll have time tomorrow night to make the case and I want to go over the last few pages in more depth as well.
I'm still really happy with my vote on Nab.
What's wrong or suspicious about me looking ahead or pointing out connections? It's not bad play. I find people I think are scum and I watch how others interact with them. Who cares if it doesn't mean anything to you now? Just ignore it then. If Nab is town, ignore it. If he's scum, then it's there.
SC: Can you respond to 263?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
@Jahudo
Really? Yet another person decides to jump on Serial's "I don't like Goat pointing out connections" point?
Detrimental behavior? How could this possibly be considered detrimental. As I've said numerous times, at worst case it's unimportant information, but to say it's actually being a detriment to us is quite a ridiculous notion.
How can you say I'm setting up conditional suspicions to be independent ones? That's pure speculation on how I would play tomorrow in the chance that Nabakov isn't scum. Calling me suspicious because of how you believe I'm going to act if a conditional scenario is reached is pretty poor. You've got a lot of ground to cover if you want to convince me that you actually believe this to be true.
You don't seem to find Nabakov particularly scummy, but yet you're hesitant about me because it hinges on Nabakov's alignment? Tell me how that makes any sense.
As for Nabakov, it's half gut, half logic. I play a lot with my gut and then back it up with logic, at least early on. I thought Nabakov was scummy from the get-go when he tried to tear apart my pops case by attacking a small part of it he found wrong, but yet also agreeing that pops was suspicious and pushing different reasons on pops. It's just weird for someone to push suspicion on a player and yet try to refute arguments someone else is bringing up against the same player. Since then he did no scum hunting period until the McGriddle case, which wasn't scum hunting at all. That's when the wagon on him picked up, which he ignored, and as town I would expect him to be like "No guys, you're wrong, it's McGriddle not me" but instead he was more apologetic for his bad McGriddle case. I've still yet to see something from him that at all suggests he's legitimately looking for scum.
As for my pairing players and the way I handled the Nabakov case, here is my thought process. I thought there was a good chance Nabakov was scum from the moment I dropped a FoS on him way back when. I thought SerialClergyman was somewhat more likely, but then SC made a few posts in his defense that essentially changed my mind. I decided to go back to voting pops instead of Nabakov, because I didn't really have anything strong against Nab and I didn't want to try to push him based on just his odd stance on pops and my case against pops. I wanted to see how Nabakov would act and how others would act in relation to him without knowing I suspected him that strongly. I was not disappointed. The McGriddle case strengthened my notion that Nab was scum, and Elmo's reaction makes me believe fairly strongly that Elmo is town.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
My take is that he saw a few other people jump on me for this same point and decided to get on it himself. Nobody has yet to provide any kind of reasoning as to why it's suspicious I act like this, only that it is. I think RedCoyote and Incognito both have town interactions with me in this regard while Jahudo and SerialClergyman don't. Incog says it's bad play but wonders why it's scummy. I disagree about bad play, but like that you are examining things beyond the surface. RedCoyote is expressing reasonable doubt, at least explained why he thinks it's anti-town, and I believe has biased read on me based on a previous game where I was scum (he has never seen me as town). Jahudo is suspicious because he went so far as to call it detrimental, as though me playing like this is actually hurting the town, which is laughable. Serial Clergyman is odd because completely out of the blue with no prompting he decided to just post his opinion of my play. I asked him to explain it and he didn't, so I've asked him again and I'm sure he will respond this time. I want to know his thought process behind writing that post.Incognito wrote:- The Goatrevolt stuff doesn't make much sense to me either. Namely, I don't understand why your Goatrevolt suspicions don't apply to people like SerialClergyman or Elmo who also didn't really delve into their reasoning right away and also began looking for possible ties back to NabNab too instead of fully elaborating on the NabNab case. Explain?
I think there's a strong chance Jahudo is scum as well. And if I'm going to pick a 3rd right now, which I am, it's pops with an honorable mention to SerialClergyman.
@Patrick: I'm kind of undecided on SerialClergyman, regardless of how Nab ends up. There have been a few things he's done I've found town, and some things that have struck me as awkward/maybe scummy. I found his doubt on Nabakov based on McGriddle's vote to be genuine. I found him asking you for a solid stance to be good scum hunting. But then I have also found his early interactions with Nab to be scummy as well as I want to know what his thought process was behind randomly dissecting my playstyle.
I think Patrick and RedCoyote are both making genuine reads of my play. I am not playing anything like how I played in the invitational 5 game where I was scum, and I like how Patrick has acknowledged that. In the game I was scum with RedCoyote, we spent a lot of time in frustrating back and forth arguments where I felt like he was constantly misrepresenting me. Even though I was scum, he was attributing behavior or thoughts to my actions that weren't true, and I feel like a lot of the same thing has happened in this game. Our early game interaction is a prime example where he wrong attributed paranoia and "overdefensive" to a post I made, when in reality it was me trying to get a feel for RedCoyote. At any rate, we are interacting in a similar fashion this game, so I don't think it's odd for RedCoyote to feel the way he does.
RC: As for your take on my playstyle being anti-town, I disagree and I also think that you don't actually understand how I play. Me looking into the future and saying that I think X makes sense as scum with Y doesn't mean that I'm so sold to that idea and can never change my mind, just like you voting someone right now doesn't mean you're necessarily going to want to lynch them 5 pages from now. However, I like to make what I call "dynamic" reads, where I read players both on their own merits and how they fit into the game based on the big picture.
I draw the line when scum/townreads become dependant on certain flips to go in your favor.
I don't see how this is weird at all. Ties to dead scum is a huge, huge tool to use in finding townies and identifying scum. For example, I don't think my judgment that Elmo is town if Nabakov is scum is weird at all. Elmo was the first to jump on Nabakov with a vote directly after Nabakov made a post I found extremely suspicious. It's rare that a scum buddy is going to be the first to jump on something like that, and much more likely that a scum-Elmo would wait and see how others perceived scum-Nab's McGriddle vote before making a move.
My playstyle has been very successful for me. I've successfully avoided lynching town players who have been scummy simply because I've noticed that they are unlikely to be scum with someone I find even more suspicious, etc. I think evaluating players purely in a vacuum without respect to the game as a whole or their interactions with everyone as a whole is sub-optimal.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
What about scum with a role?NabakovNabakov wrote:Townies and scum show as vanilla, everyone else shows as their role.
And this is no longer possible? I don't see how a revealed role cop is "worthless".NabakovNabakov wrote:Now that I've revealed it, it's pretty much worthless, as the only really useful thing I would think to do with it is catch scum in a lie.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
That claim doesn't change my mind, and I don't like how Nabakov is trying to sell a role cop short as being worthless now that it's claimed. The fact that he seems unable to see the town value in a role like that suggests to me that he isn't town. If I were a town role cop, the first way I would think to use my role is to try to catch scum roles with it, and the 2nd way would be to verify claims other people have made. Claiming wouldn't make either of those potential ways to use the role worthless.
It's clear Nabakov hasn't thought of the role in terms of rooting out scum power, based on his statement that scum show up as vanilla (all scum, even those with roles? Doubt it) and the insinuation that it's worthless now because it's primary purpose of catching fake claims is no longer easy. To me, checking a suspicious player in hopes of hearing something back like "godfather" or "roleblocker" would be the obvious night 1 use of the role from a town perspective, but he doesn't seem to even consider that.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Exactly my stance on Red. I don't think I've agreed with a single thing he's said all game, but I also don't think any of his stances have been scummy. Elmo is one of my strongest town reads, he's wrong about me, and he's most likely wrong about Nabakov as well, but I'm not really seeing scummy motives behind these actions.iamausername wrote:Huh, I'm getting pretty much the exact opposite. I disagree with a lot of what he's saying, but I'm getting a good gut feeling from him.
I will say that I'm done arguing with Red under the current context. It's pissing me off and is completely pointless to boot. If you want to make a case suggesting that I'm scum then be my guest. But if you're going to continually whine about how "popular" I am and how you don't agree with my playstyle, then I'm just going to ignore it. You don't seem to really think I'm that scummy, just dislike how I've played and my status among the town (which you are greatly overstating), which is pretty freaking stupid. Get. Over. It. As for my stance on Elmo, if I'm fairly certain someone is scum, I'm not going to ignore that information in evaluating other players. If for some reason I change my mind and no longer believe that player to be scum, then my reads on other players will shift accordingly. If I'm 80% certain A is scum, and 60% certain B is scum, but B makes no sense as scum with A, then I'm not going to want to lynch B. But if something happens that makes me reconsider A as town, then I may be willing to lynch B after that point. I don't see this as being ridiculous or a bad playstyle. I've found it to be successful. Generally this doesn't play a big factor into how I read my main suspect, but it does play a factor into how I read other players in relation to my guess that my main suspect is scum, if that makes sense.
Bingo. Exactly the point I was going for, but worded much better.Incognito wrote:Also, if NabNab really is scum, I could see this as being a potential slip:
As Goatrevolt pointed out, a Rolecop has the ability to tell the user if a given person has a power role EVEN IF the person investigated is scum; it just won't show the person's alignment. If NabNab is the scum team's sole PR, he might have been thinking about the results he might have gotten on his potential buddies rather than thinking about how his role might look in a different game-state from what we might have here.Post 325, NabakovNabakov wrote:Townies and scum show as vanilla, everyone else shows as their role. Now that I've revealed it, it's pretty much worthless, as the only really useful thing I would think to do with it is catch scum in a lie.
I liked Iam's case on pops, and I still find Jahudo suspect as well. I wouldn't be surprised if the two are just distancing from each other. I'm not sure how to read their interactions with Nabakov. Both have called him scummy at various points but neither have bothered to get on the wagon at any point. My read on it right now is unwillingness to lynch the scum buddy with the powerful role.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I've never used my "popularity" as a justification for you to get in line. I was simply trying to show you your biased view of my play because not a single other person in the game held the same viewpoint you did about something that directly pertained to you. The point I was making is that you were overreacting to how I handled you because it directly related to you personally (emotionally invested) while the rest of the game from an outside perspective didn't see it the same way.
I hit scum roughly 50% of the time on day 1. Maybe even higher, but I would need to actually check stats on that. I don't buy into it being dumb luck or a crapshoot, and I still don't really care whether you like my playstyle or not, as you continue to show that you don't. I'm only as sure as I feel reasonable to be sure about my reads. It's no different than anyone else, I just play with connections and interactions in mind. Again, you are entirely trying to lecture me for something you think is bad play. If you think I'm scum, have at it, but you're getting nowhere by telling me you don't like how I play.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
WRONG. When are you going to stop misrepresenting me?RedCoyote wrote:I don't agree with you, and I further contend that you're trying to marginalize me in an attempt to keep this majority of yours intact. The mindset you're coming from is what speaks to me. Nobody agrees with my interpretation of you because I am biased against you. I'm biased against you because nobody agrees with my interpretation of you. Elmo is your strongest townread because NabNab is scum. NabNab is scum because Elmo is your biggest townread. There's a strong chance Jahudo is scum, so NabNab is scum. NabNab is scum, so there's a strong chance Jahudo is scum.
I have explained, over and over and over again that my read on Elmo is based on my read of Nabakov. What you're doing is INCORRECTLY saying that my read of Nabakov is based on my read of ELMO when I've explicitly said infinite times that IT'S NOT. What the **** do you not get about this? It's not difficult. I find someone who I think is scum, Nabakov, and I base my reads on the rest of the game PARTIALLY on my read of Nabakov. This is not a difficult concept. If you continue to come at me with your wrong and ignorant version of my playstyle then I'm going to seriously consider policy lynching you for being a liability.
What's that? Yes, that's right? Two can play at that game, dude. If my playstyle is such a liability to town, then I can certainly say your reading comprehension is a liability, because you are completely unable to read anything I've wrote in a way that isn't twisted.
CAN WE PLEASE LYNCH NABAKOV? It's clear he's going to be lynched, and he has no interest in doing anything pro-town at all before the end of the day. The way this wagon is struggling to finish, and the lack of care Nabakov has shown this entire game to helping the town makes me convinced we're going to hit scum.
Pops is also scum. I've already elaborated on the Pops/Nabakov interaction earlier in the day, and basically he's been pinging my gut over and over with things he's said. I know that doesn't mean jack to anyone else, but it's there.
This is one of the scummiest things I've read today.Well it's kind of obvious that the way Goatrevolt commented on Elmo's alignment was totally out of line, and scummy too (If Nab flips scum, it's clearly the certainty tip. Even if he flips town, I think it still could be a certainty slip, because a townie would say Elmo is probtown and be unsure about his Nabkov read in the first place, it's more conceivable for scum to totally reverse the statement on Elmo's alignment rather than move it to the correct level of certainty. Gosh, I cannot be succinct today)
1. It's out of line for me to say I read Elmo as town? Hilarious. Of course it's not out of line.
2. If Nabakov is scum, then I'm scum because I was "certain" about it. If Nabakov is town then I'm still scum because I was "certain" about something that was wrong. Yeah...not buying that.
3. Correct level of certainty? HAH. I didn't realize there were levels of certainty we were allowed to have. Excuse me for having exceeded the acceptable boundaries. Won't happen again, man! You can count on me!
I love how pops jumps on me for my stance on Elmo after others have expressed disagreement with it, and he takes it a step further by attributing ridiculous tells to it that don't exist.
It's quite reminiscent of how Jahudo decided to attack me earlier! --Cue RC coming in and saying how me defending myself here is me trying to appeal to my popularity and discrediting pops.-- Bring it on Red. I've gotten over my rage at your last post and I'm ready to dance.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Hey RedCoyote, why are you using the interaction between me and pops to suggest that we're scum? I thought you didn't use interactions. BUSTED! Or, do you find us both scummy individually and believe that our interactions don't prevent us from being scum together? If the latter is true, then congratulations. You now understand how I play the game of mafia, because you are playing the exact same way I do. Maybe if you bothered to read any of my posts without trying to find ridiculous interpretations that don't exist, you would understand how I play the game and not misrepresent me over and over and over again.
Anyway...now that I got that out of my system. There's a huge ass difference between busing and going out of your way to make your scum buddy a suspect when he wasn't one and continuing to put pressure on him when it isn't necessary. What is the likelihood a scum buddy comes into the thread and jumps on Pops for his random vote and continues to pressure him for the first 4-5 pages? It's very unlikely. 99 times out of 100 a scum buddy places a random vote of their own instead. That 1 time is almost always a complete noob who thinks that busing is necessary as scum, and doesn't get how to do it properly. The only way that happens is if the scum buddy decided before the game they were going to bus pops. I'm going to call on the great god of meta and show you that in the 7 games I've been scum on this site, 4 of them were perfect scum wins with no scum casualties and I bused 1 scum buddy in each of the other 3 games, all 3 times because the scum buddy was caught based on a role or roleclaim. So yes, your argument is ridiculous, and even though I find pops scummy, he's 100% right in pointing out how ridiculous your argument is.
I'm in the process of writing an answer for your other post.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Why didn't you vote me yesterday? Interactions mean nothing to you, so it's not like you were waiting on Nabakov to evaluate me. After he flipped town you wasted no time jumping on me, whereas yesterday you beat around the bush all day and never got on board.RedCoyote wrote:Anyways, I don't have much of an issue with the pops wagon right now, but I need to do something that I should've done a long time ago.
Vote: Goatrevolt
Ahhhhh, the relief. It's like taking that swig of pepto when you've got stomach cramps; Goat is my stomach cramp. XD
I haven't given my reasons for being on the pops wagon yet. But yes, I expect that anything I present shall be considered nonsense.RedCoyote wrote:I like the pops wagon, and I'd say I have a scumread on him at this point. I don't like your getting on it, because it's the same nonsense arguments you're using to respond to me.
Clearly you have reading comprehension issues. Go back and find the quote where I say I will ignore my previous reads. Do you mean where I say to ignore my read that pops fits with Nabakov or that SerialClergyman fits with Nabakov? Those I have ignored. I'm certainly ignoring any of my reads that were based around Nabakov's alignment, but I'm not throwing everything in and starting fresh.RedCoyote wrote:Look, I don't expect you to up and do a 180 with your entire take on the game. Here's the kicker, you're the one who made a big deal over the fact that, "if NabNab flips town, ignore my previous reads". Yet here you are, Ecto is suspect, pops is suspect, Elmo's vote isn't suspect. The only thing missing from that was a swipe at Jahudo, but you're too clever to make it that obvious.
I don't remember ever calling Ecto scum yesterday, so that's new, although at this point I realize I was misinterpreting so I've dropped that. I never said Elmo's vote on Jahudo wasn't suspect, I just didn't jump on it either. Lack of attack is not the same as defense, and you know that. I missed a swipe at Jahudo, but I still find him suspicious. So there you go, add that to the tally. I think Pops/Jahudo could easily be scum distancing from each other.
At any rate, the point is that you're misrepresenting me again. It's not even worth arguing with you because I know it's not going to get anywhere. You will misrepresent every single thing I say, as you have done in every game I've played with you. You take something I say, like "ignore any of my reads that are based on Nabakov being scum" and take it out of context and apply it as "ignore all of my reads' which is clearly not what I meant. And clearly me pointing this out is just more appeal to popularity, or some other argument you're going to further misrepresent to keep going at me. It's a never ending cycle.
You knew Nabakov would be town? I thought you found his claim suspicious. I guess not.... I answered the rest of this above. My reads that were based on Nabakov are now voided, but any other reads I have picked up on the game are still legitimate.RedCoyote wrote:And I knew this would happen, you know. I knew you'd end up just ignoring NabNab's town flip and going down the same path you were going down. I'm not saying all of your reads are wrong, that's besides the point (As a matter of fact, pops/Goat sounds like a pretty good team to me). I'm saying your rationale for getting there fraudulent. I'm ready for you to deny this too, because I think I've got the ammo to back it up.
Pops/Goat team is ridiculous. Obviously me saying this just means I'm trying to manipulate you away from believing it, thus furthering your mindset that this is true, but I'll say it anyway. Actually, pops said it already. There is busing and there is no going out of your way to attack a scum buddy for no reason. I know you don't care about interactions, but you probably should, because they are a strong tool for catching scum. And that doesn't even take into account how I rarely bus as scum, and only bus when I feel it's necessary. In the 7 games I've won as scum here, I've bused 3 scum buddies total, and all 3 of them were busted by roles or were counterclaimed on a role claim. The most busiest bus I've had was when I jumped on Budja in the game we were in together, but even there I tried to get FHQ lynched instead (which you rightfully called me on).
Here is an explanation of how I play, again. I've said this before, but I don't think you get it. Step 1: I find people who I think are suspicious. Step 2: I watch how other people interact with those suspicious players. Step 3: I base my reads on players partially on how they interact with the suspicious players. My read on the suspicious players is based on their own actions. What this translates into is really not that different from how other people play. The main difference is that I'm unwilling to lynch people who don't make sense as scum with my main scum suspect even if they are suspicious on their own right. I think if you boil it down, that's about the only real difference in how I play from how most people play. A lot of things that people get really worked up over were just basically notes for day 2 in the case I was right about Nabakov. That's nothing new. A lot of people do that. As town I always try to make sure I give out reads before the end of the day in case I die. In this game I just decided to do it earlier. I didn't really have a reason it was just on my mind so I pointed it out.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10447
That game is an example of a successful use of my playstyle. In that game, I found Zilla to be the most suspicious player (I also went through the same crap as I have in this game with people harassing me for playstyle, but that's nothing new). I found BeyondBirthday and Panzer to both be suspicious as well. However, based on interactions between the 3, I was able to determine that there was really no chance of BB and Panzer being scum with Zilla. Both BB and Panzer were within 1 vote of being lynched on multiple occasions, but I argued the town away from lynching them, because I didn't believe them to be scum based on my read of Zilla as scum and the interactions between them. I was correct, Zilla was scum, and BB and Panzer were both town. Had I approached the game from the perspective most people do, then I would have let the town lynch BB or Panzer without a fight, because they were suspicious on their own accord, so why would I defend them? Instead, I pushed to save them and get out Zilla instead based on interactions. We ended up lynching someone else entirely (who was scum, who I called as being the most likely scum buddy to Zilla), but still.
In that game people harassed me over and over again to not base my reads of other players on my read of Zilla, but I frankly don't think it makes any sense to NOT do that. If I'm convinced X is scum, why would I ever think someone else is scum who doesn't make sense with X? That's illogical.
What do you find fraudulent about my rationale this game? Is it that I found Elmo town because I thought Nabakov was scum? Had Nabakov been scum, I would still be convinced Elmo is town. Now that Nabakov was town, Elmo is fairly neutral for me. I no longer find him town based on that, but I also don't find him particularly scummy on his own accord. You mistakenly assume that since I didn't call out Elmo for voting Jahudo that I think he's town, which is dumb. I've let people I think are scum vote someone without bothering to call them out...big deal. I am interested to see what Ectomancer has to say, considering Ecto suggested he knows how Elmo plays. With that being said, I am fairly neutral on Ectomancer, so I'm not rushing to join him on Elmo based on his unsupported word. The other person pushing Elmo is you, and I know firsthand that you are prone to misrepresentation and reading into things that don't actually exist, so I'm not exactly eager to follow your lead.
Hahahahaha. The fact that you are taking that as a legitimate threat pretty much convinces me that there is no value in arguing with you at all. Come on man. I said that to prove a point, I wasn't seriously advocating that position.RedCoyote wrote:Do you think you can handle that, big guy? Are you still going to threaten me with a policy lynch if I don't tow the line?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
RC: After I saw that Nab was town I knew I was going to get shit from you today. I have no clue what you mean by "came in all prepared for you" or why it's a big deal.
I'm both put off by the speed of the pops wagon, some of the later votes on said wagon, and I also agree with pops point that Red has avoided taking a stance again on the popular wagons of Jahudo/Pops just like he skirted around Nabakov yesterday.
I'm starting to doubt my town read of RC and doubt my scum read of pops. Serial's vote on pops struck me as off, but I can't put my finger on why exactly.
I'm going to reread day 1. Don't put anyone to claim range in the meantime. Thanks.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
SC: Did you read my huge response to RedCoyote? I explained what reads of mine have changed based on Nabakov's town reveal. You attribute a lack of reversal of stances to be the same as a lack of change of stances, which isn't true.
Ectomancer: You want to lynch pops to maybe get a read on me? Missing is any reason why you think pops is scum, just that if he's scum then I look town by association. You draw the conclusion that one of me/pops is scum with no underlying logic to make that conclusion with and then suggest that it's not me so it must be pops. Why must one of us be scum?
SC: Top 3 suspects and why?-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I've hardly backlashed against Red. I am annoyed by him and I feel like he isn't bothering to try to get a read on my alignment but is rather just picking at anything I say and trying to manufacture scumminess that doesn't exist. If he's town, he's already convinced himself that I'm scum and is tunneling based on a game we played together that was probably a year ago or more where I was scum and I convinced him off of my case. The part I don't get is he's calling my playstyle out as scummy despite me not using that playstyle as scum in that game and him having never seen me actually play as town. He takes me defending myself or trying to convince him that he's wrong about me to be me as scum trying to manipulate him off of my case, but he fails to see the possibility that I'm town trying to defend myself from incorrect accusations.SerialClergyman wrote:It doesn't seem logical to paint him as shying away from the spotlight and not giving his opinions on the wagons when he just made a bold, ballsy case about someone he knew would backlash against him (and probably draw others as well). As well as not being an easy target, you also aren't an easy lynch, he could hardly have expected getting overwhelming support for his case.
I actually don't usually care if people harass me over my playstyle that much, but RedCoyote is pissing me off to no end because of the repeat misrepresentation and confirmation bias he is displaying.
The part that bothers me about RedCoyote is that he pushed me all day yesterday but never bit on my wagon and then today he starts out strong on it after Nabakov ends up being town and I get the "I told you so" treatment, despite his stance on Nabakov post claim being in favor of the lynch. Why didn't he jump on me yesterday? I just feel like he set me up. While I'm not likely to get lynched and I'm a hard player to lynch, I still tend attract scum on my wagon more frequently than town based on unconventional play, aggressive play, or by holding unpopular stances. Scum love to jump on that kind of stuff, and I'm bothered by RedCoyote's continued insistence that my playstyle is wrong, that wrong is scummy, and his unwillingness to assess my play with an unbiased look.
Meh, I am struggling to get a read on you. There are posts like your last one that make me think you're town and then posts like the previous one that make me think you're scum.
My views really haven't changed that much, but all views of mine that were based on Nabakov being scum are now void. You all attributed far too much of my opinion that SC and pops were scummy to my pairing of them with Nabakov, so just because Nab was town doesn't mean I'm just going to basically throw that away. I'd like both you and RC to explain how you expected my views to change and how they haven't changed based on your expectations. Is there a line of how much my views were supposed to change and I didn't quite make it there? I want specifics. Which specific stances did you expect to change and yet they didn't? Generic "your views didn't change enough" is BS, but a "I expected you to take X stance on Y after Nab was town but you didn't" might be valid.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
I guess this would be the best place to state that I hate the term WIFOM and I think it's done far more harm than good for the game of mafia. I believe very few things are WIFOM and this specific example is something that I don't believe can be correctly called WIFOM. The only time I've seen WIFOM be used in a somewhat correct manner is when it pertains to gaming the mod, and sometimes you can game the mod fairly accurately, so it's not even always right there.RedCoyote wrote:Even though this question is rhetorical, it's so steeped in WIFOM that it's useless to anyone. I'm not about to sit here and have a WIFOM debate (because I've learned, through experience, that it isn't a good scumtell), but I think we can at least agree that you can't use WIFOM to make a townie argument, right?
In this case, you're trying to say a statement of the form "two scum buddies wouldn't act like ______ to each other" is WIFOM and should be discarded. However, isn't answering these types of questions the entire point of the game? WIFOM pretty much says "we can't know how scum would or wouldn't act" but the fact is we can know that and we have experience and statistics and all other kinds of metrics to know that. If we couldn't figure out how scum would or wouldn't act we would never catch scum.
This isn't to say scum could never act toward each other like me and pops did, but to write if off as WIFOM is folly. I bet if you looked at every time one player jumped on another player early in a mafia game, you'd find an abysmally small result set of scum on scum. You could say it's WIFOM, but wouldn't looking at historical precedent and trying to make a case off of that one way of trying to figure it out? And wouldn't ways to figure it out invalidate the idea that it's WIFOM in the first place?
Perhaps. I could see it being a good strategy. Just because something could possibly be a good strategy doesn't mean it was a strategy that was used, though. I don't think you are looking into this from the right perspective. You think pops is scum and I am scum individually, so you want us to be able to be scum buddies together, so you try to find to make it work. It's like you're starting from the conclusion that we are both scum together and trying to go back and prove how it could be possible, rather than starting from an unbiased perspective and analyzing if it really is a likely possibility.RedCoyote wrote:I actually think it would be a good strategy for scum to go at each other's throats right out the starting gate. Given that early wagons never amount to anything outside of that occasional Newbie Game, the scum would be comfortable in the fact that they're getting some early distancing in with no fear of repercussion.
What changed to make me a stronger candidate for scum than Elmo?RedCoyote wrote:For one, I saw a better candidate in Elmo. Secondly, NabNab's flip has less to do with this vote then you're assuming here (although I will admit if we had a scum flip I would've naturally had to rethink my suspicion of you). Thirdly, I made it very clear yesterday that I thought I had no chance in a Goat wagon yesterday, given the majority of players who saw you as town. Yesterday you damned me for coming after you against what was "popular", and today you're criticizing me for not coming after you hard enough then?
You are putting so much emphasis in this "I damned you for coming after me because it wasn't popular" notion you've got stuck in your head even though it's not true. There was only one time where I said anything like that at all, and you are misinterpreting that statement as I have explained in the past. I never said anything like "everyone thinks I'm town so you should too" as you seem to believe. What I did try to say was something akin to "you are overstating the importance of argument X because it personally relates to you. My evidence for this is how you are making a huge deal out of it while nobody else even noted it."
No, I never said that. You assumed that, although I can see how you could draw that assumption. I voted him, and in the same post pointed out something that I wanted to respond to yesterday but didn't have a chance to before the end of the day.RedCoyote wrote:
That's not true. You said you voted him because of his interpretation in post 385. Are you trying to back away from this?Goat 413 wrote:I haven't given my reasons for being on the pops wagon yet.
I voted pops because a lot of his votes and actions felt forced and not genuine from yesterday. I decided to unvote, though, because I realized that I needed to read over day 1 again and play this game on more than just my gut, since that obviously failed on Nabakov. At this point I'm also not sure what to make of the wagon on him. My take is that if pops is scum he's being bussed, and if pops is town then he's probably being scum-pushed away from the Jahudo wagon.
Check out the orange part. When I said ignore it all I was referring to Nabakov interactions, not the totality of my reads on the game. This is also a prime example of how I feel like you misrepresent me. So many of my comments you take out of their intended contexts or take to mean something they don't actually mean and use it as fuel against me.RedCoyote wrote:Goat 413 wrote:
Go back and find the quote where I say I will ignore my previous reads.RC wrote:Here's the kicker, you're the one who made a big deal over the fact that, "if NabNab flips town, ignore my previous reads".Goat 263 wrote:2. There's no problem in looking for a buddy for Nab. It's not relevant today, but I might not be around tomorrow, so I wanted to get out my notes onNabakov interactions today.If he's town, then you can just ignore it all.(emphasis added)
Yes. I was comfortable enough not to ask about it. To some extent you are right about this and to some extent you're wrong. You're right in that I didn't jump on Elmo and thus didn't find his vote particularly suspect, because if I had I would have attacked him over it. You're wrong in attributing that to a town read on Elmo.RedCoyote wrote:
Point taken. It still is or isn't suspect though, and you not bringing it up implies that you're comfortable enough not to ask about it.Goat 413 wrote:I never said Elmo's vote on Jahudo wasn't suspect, I just didn't jump on it either. Lack of attack is not the same as defense, and you know that.
I don't think there is any way I can convince you I'm town. You read my posts with a biased perspective. I've pointed out a few times in this post already where you've completely taken things out of context or misinterpreted the real meaning behind something I said. It's not worth it for me to argue with you because I know it's not going to get anywhere. You've convinced yourself I'm scum, and you read all of my posts as if I am already scum, so what is the point?RedCoyote wrote:Cry me a river, Goat. If this is the attitude you're going to take, then I'll just hit you up for pathos too. I mean, news flash, I think you're scum, big guy. I'm going to engage you. I'm sorry if you don't think it's worth it, but I don't think you've done a good enough job convincing me you are town. I think you've saddled us with circular arguments, appeals to popularity, and fradulent, concocted rationale behind your reads in the game.
And yes, I continue to debate with you...I don't even know why.
I wasn't really being serious with that. I am resorting to sarcasm as an outlet for frustration.RedCoyote wrote:Now who's misrepresenting? I said I knew it would happen that you would ignore NabNab's flip. I didn't know what alignment NabNab was.
None of my scum reads on players day 1 were based on Nabakov, just town reads. I hashed it out with pops time and time again over day 1. I thought he did make sense with Nabakov, but I found him suspicious before I jumped on the Nab wagon and found him suspicious at the end of the day for reasons unrelated to Nabakov.RedCoyote wrote:Do you deny, as pops does, that your scumpops read wasn't based in large part on his ties with NabNab?
Before you go back and find a post where I point out how I think Pops makes sense as scum with Nabakov, allow me to explain myself. Nabakov was the leading lynch candidate, and my top scum suspect. Pointing out how other people I find suspicious makes sense as scum with him doesn't mean that I found those people suspicious BECAUSE of their interactions with Nabakov. I believe this is one of our main disconnects. In reality, I found them suspicious and my suspicious of them didn't conflict with my read on Nab.
There is a huge difference between the two, and even though I keep trying to explain this to you I don't think you get it yet, or maybe you do but think I'm lying to you or something. At any rate, what you believe is that I found pops scummy because of Nabakov. What is true is that I found pops scummy and thought he made sense as a scum buddy to Nabakov.
Let's say the Nabakov wagon died, and we started to push a pops wagon and I jumped on board. Connections to Nabakov would not be a reason for me to be on that wagon. Maybe you don't understand that, or think that I would use that as a reason to push pops before seeing Nabakov's alignment, but that isn't true. The only reason I ever called any of that out was specifically for day 2.
YOU made a big deal of this connection, not me. I pointed it out for day 2 in the case Nab was scum. That's not really that ridiculous of behavior. In Patrick's last post of the day he mentioned suspicions of Jahudo and related them to Nabakov's alignment. That's essentially what I did as well. I just did it early enough in the day that I guess everyone found it absurd.RedCoyote wrote:Exactly what I've shown. You made a big show of connecting pops to NabNab yesterday, the team was either NabNab, Jahudo, and pops/SC, right?
That wasn't my primary reason on any of them. I agreed with whoever told me to go back and look at Jahudo's posts that he was suspicious. I have played with Jahudo as both town and scum and when I read him in ISO it felt more like Jahudo-scum than Jahudo town. When Jahudo jumped on me for something that 3 other people had already jumped on me for but yet made it out to be a far bigger deal than it really was, I thought that was extremely suspicious. He was exaggerating how grievous my actions were, and then when I called him on it, he gave it up and never went back to it.RedCoyote wrote:Jahudo is still scum today, pops is still scum today, and SC is still suspicious today, even though the primary reason, that you gave multiple times, was that pops/Jahudo looked like scum when paired with NabNab.
As for pops and SC, my reasons are fairly well documented within the thread. I called out SC numerous times on day 1. While I paired him as scum with Nab, my reasons for finding him suspicious were a lot of various posts that had nothing to do with Nab. As for pops, I had a lot of different things I jumped on pops for during the day.
Maybe I need to read back through my own post history and see where you are getting this from, because I don't really understand where you're coming from when you think that all of my reasons for finding people suspicious were based on Nabakov.
I don't remember calling Ecto out yesterday, although I've found him to be off and on suspicious all game. I explained the "ignore your reads" part above. You took that out context. It was clear I meant ignore my reads on INTERACTIONS WITH NABAKOV not all of my reads, period.RedCoyote wrote:With NabNab's flip, surely you we can all "ignore your reads", as you instructed us to do, only to find that you're still content with calling pops and Jahudo out, you don't have an issue with Elmo, and Ecto, who you suspected yesterday, is still suspect today.
The idea pissed me off because it basically meant that I can expect you to ride my ass all game regardless of other player's alignments. I also found it completely absurd and an excuse for you to suspect two people who don't make sense together. Of course I'm going to shoot down a ridiculous idea with ferocity.RedCoyote wrote:I got that feeling as well, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be correct. As SC will bring up later (although he discredits it), the ferocity with which both pops and Goat leveled toward the suggestion that they would be scum together is sort of an actions speak louder than words moment for me.
You've got this idea in your head that if I deny something, that means it's right and I'm trying to manipulate you away from believing the truth. But if I were to leave an accusation unanswered, I'm sure you would call me out for ignoring it. You've left me no option of how to respond to something you bring up against me without you using it to further your idea that I'm scum.
I'm not sure the point you're driving at here. What do you think my agenda as scum is? It seems like you're pushing two different ideas that are contradictory.RedCoyote wrote:Despite all Goat's attempts to connect pops and NabNab, should we look past that in favor of Goat's supposed sincerity? At the moment I don't think so, do you?
You think that pops and I are scum together and that I am busing him. However, my actions concerning pops and Nabakov don't fit this busing scenario you've attached yourself to.
Assume for a second that I'm scum and pops is my scum buddy. Assume again that my basis in believing pops is scum is based almost entirely on his connections with Nabakov. That is what you believe, and I'm going to assume it's true so I can prove it wrong.
If I am trying to tie scum-pops to town-Nabakov who is going to be lynched, then you can conclude I'm not interested in busing pops, because my reason for finding him scum is going to be proven false once Nabakov is lynched. If I'm suspecting my scum buddy for reasons I know will eventually be proven false, I'm doing it to distance and to "semi-clear" him once those reasons are proven false. I can conceivably change my mind on pops and view him as town the following day, because my reason for thinking he is scum was just invalidated. That would be the motivation for goat scum to pair pops-scum with town-Nabakov.
Instead, I jumped on pops immediately today before anyone else did. This would suggest that hypothetical scum-goat is very much interested in busing hypothetical scum-pops*. However, if scum-goat so badly wants to bus scum-pops, why would scum Goat ever try to tie scum-pops to a dead townie, since that would weaken/invalidate scum-goat's reason to bus scum-pops? It doesn't make sense.
*Kind of like lollipops but they taste like shit.
Just so you know, Goat is much heavier handed as town than scum, and you've never seen me as town. Why don't you ask Ectomancer what he thought of my play in our last game together?RedCoyote wrote:I think they are. I'm very cognizant of this heavy-handed Goat as I have been smacked down by it before.
None of my threats were serious. I use tools like sarcasm and imitation to prove points. I've never policy lynched anyone before.RedCoyote wrote:He doesn't intimidate me in the slightest, his stream of increasing threats, "maybe I should policy lynch you!!!!", "okay, I wasn't serious about the policy lynch jeez lighten up ", and "I'm rethinking RC as town!", his penchant for circular logic, his reliance on appealing to popularity to attempt to squelch dissent, and his need to connect his reads directly to a flimsy, unexplained NabNab vote are all scumtells to me.
You keep bringing up some of these same incorrect points I've showed you are wrong time and time again. Reliance on appealing to popularity I have debunked probably 5 times already if not more, including again in this post. I've hardly been a popular player this game. I've taken a good deal of shit for my play and being wrong about Nabakov after talking about how good I am at lynching day 1 scum is just more fuel on the fire. Did you read the game I linked to you? I was town in that game, and I connected all of my reads to Zilla, my main scum suspect. It's an example of me doing this as town. Ectomancer again can attest to me doing the same thing in our last game together, when I paired him to Main and Eldarad day 1. On the other hand, I don't think I've ever actually done this as scum before, including NOT doing this as scum in the game we were in together.
Nope. Town question me too. However, when I'm town I'm usually good at convincing other townies to not find me suspicious and scum are the ones who linger on my wagon a long time, generally via ignoring my defenses, misprepresenting them, or just keeping the same invalid points.RedCoyote wrote:I think this just exemplifies what SC just observed about you, that you become irate at the idea of someone questioning your authority. Basically what you said here is "scum question me; town don't".
What I find scummy about you is that you continue to stick on me for some of the same points I have answered and responded to 5+ times. You don't bother to address my response and then a few posts later you bring up the same point again. That's scummy. When it's day 2 and you are still bringing up stuff from early day 1 that is based on you taking something out of context that I have explained...infinite...times, I am bothered. I get the impression that you don't actually care what I have to say and are wagoning me without regard to my defense.
All in all, I still think you're probably town. You're definitely not weak-willed or worried about how others will perceive you for going after me, which is a town tell. If this is all just a show, then you're doing a good job of faking it.-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA
Your vote has been moving around extremely fast this game, ever since you quit posting fluff and started making legitimate posts. Can you explain why you are playing up to your scum meta?popsofctown wrote:I hear constantly from people in seemingly every game I play that I ought to be voting whoever I'm talking about, but I move my vote as I please. I'm actually somewhat slower with my vote as town than as scum, I'm trying to work on that (slowing down my voting when I get a scum pm, that is).-
-
Goatrevolt Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Pond Scum
- Posts: 2421
- Joined: May 17, 2008
- Location: Blacksburg, VA