Mini 1505: N is for Normal (game over)
-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Hey guys, sorry for joining late -- had work all day.
First, @Garmr: What does EDBWOP mean?
Second, @Maxous: In post #13, you said Axxl's post looked like town to you. Care to elaborate?"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Even if it wasn't in the early stages of gameplay, I don't see how it looked like bussing any more than anyone voting for anyone else."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
EDBWOP (thanks Garmr for the definition)
I guess what stage of the game it is would matter a little bit.
What I'm saying is, at this stage in the game there's very little logical reasoning a mafia could give to bus their partner. So I think you'd have to see something pretty convincing at this stage in the game to think something is bussing. Otherwise, you could say any post of one person voting for another was bussing.
Unless I'm missing something. Why did you think it looked like bussing, outside of the fact that one voted for the other?"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
No. But unless it's a purely random vote, I don't like to vote this early in the game very much.In post 32, Sir Bastion wrote:
so would you have voted axxle?In post 31, toolenduso wrote:Even if it wasn't in the early stages of gameplay, I don't see how it looked like bussing any more than anyone voting for anyone else."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Well my case for not knowing acronyms has been established. I actually signed up for a newbie game before but was rejected and told to sign up in the normal queue.
If anyone really has a concern with me apologizing for not posting right away, I'll explain that. I didn't remember games moving this quickly (had mostly played newbie games before), so felt like I was kind of late showing up because several people had already posted.
That being said, where the hell is Maxous? I asked you a question on the first page...
And is there any way of knowing exactly how many mafia we're dealing with? Because I've seen suspicious stuff from several people now.
Thor for being quite zealous to lynch. (could just be style)
Albert for contributing nothing. (also could just be style, but not a great one if that's the case)
Slandaar for latching onto the least scummy thing that's happened all game on p3 as evidence for a vote. (I'll admit I'm a little biased on it being the least scummy thing given that the vote was against me, but I really don't think me apologizing for being late says anything)
I'mmaFoS: Albertout of those three because I don't understand a town's logic in avoiding conversation."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Sorry, I'll add Maxous to that list of suspicion for only posting three times on the first page, saying Axxl's post looked towny for reasons I can't discern (possibly protecting mafia partner) and then disappearing."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Well I feel like everything I was going to say in my defense against the charges of over-explaining and apologizing when I need to have been covered. If anyone else has questions about it I can address them.
@Garmr: Did I miss something, or did you provide no reasoning for why you voted GG at the end of your post?
I'm going to make use of this awesome "display posts by user" tool I never knew existed tomorrow morning and give more analysis on what I think."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Before I vote, I'd like to point out that I think there's a difference between inactivity and lurking.
Inactivity is when you post once and then don't post for a couple days, because you're too busy or you don't care about the game or whatever.
Inactivity could be lurking, but there's not much evidence for that from zakk right now. Btw, that's zakk's only post.In post 43, zakk wrote:
Best post of the game so far.In post 11, Axxle wrote:Vote: Garmr
Not sure I like the tone of the double post. It seems like he's trying to minimize the impact of being third on the rvs wagon.
Vote: Garmr
Then there's this kind of pseudo-lurking where you post enough to not be called a lurker, but you don't say much of substance -- just like a lurker, you're not contributing to the conversation, but you get to escape from the label.
Early in the game, you get away with it because it's the random voting stage and it's mostly silly anyway.
Then, as the game progresses, you continue to post things that don't hold much substance. This accomplished through being vague and providing little reasoning.
In post 62, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Don't act like you're familiar with me. I hardly remember you existed.In post 98, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I think it goes deeper than that.
When called on to justify the little you do contribute, you give minimal reasons. Again, you're not looking to draw attention to yourself, because then people will argue against your logic and put you in the spotlight.In post 122, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I don't want to talk about the town tells I've noticed, as that would only advantage the scum, and make people try to meta me in the future. A gut read on Slandaar is the best I can give you right now.
In post 68, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Last night, I dreamt that I got quicklynched on page 3 in this game. I'm still re-adjusting.In post 87, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Given that you announced that you wanted him speedlynched, I'm reluctant to encourage that behavior, given the dream I had last night.
This doesn't necessarily preclude voting, because it takes seven to lynch and there are others already drawing attention to their own votes. But it doesn't matter a whole lot who you vote for. Again, you don't want to go into detail about why you're voting these people because it could draw attention to yourself.In post 108, Albert B. Rampage wrote:My dream, remember?
In post 83, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Vote: Slandaar
I haven't seen anything particularly scummy in this game, and several posts seemed relatively town, so by process of elimination, I've determined that Slandaar is likely scum.
In conclusion,In post 139, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Unvote Slandaar
Vote Garmr
Still think Slandaar is scum, however I can get behind a Garmr wagon.Vote: Albert B. Rampage.
Secondary post coming with my thoughts on everyone else. Hopefully shorter."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
First, a voting history for everyone:
ABR: Slandaar, Garmr
Axxle: Garmr
Garmr: ABR, Maxous, GuthrieGov
GuthrieGov: ABR, Axxle, ABR (note: didn't unvote ABR before voting Axxle, so it wasn't counted.)
ICEninja: Sir Bastion, ABR
Macros: Axxle, Garmr (note: first vote on Axxle was unintentional)
Maxous: Thor, Slandaar
Sir Bastion: Macros, GuthrieGov
Slandaar: toolenduso, Thor
TCold: Garmr
Thor: ABR, GuthrieGov, Sir Bastion
toolenduso: ABR
Axxle: Garmr
Unless I'm counting incorrectly, that means Garmr has 5 votes, which is L-2.
On to player-by-player analysis:
ABR: see my last post -- scum read.
Axxle: only three posts, the first of which ignited the "bussing" argument. Has provided some analysis -- neutral read.
Garmr: tied with Thor for most votes so far, but one was in rvs. Has had reasoning for both subsequent votes. Hasn't said or done anything all that scummy -- neutral read.
GuthrieGov: lots of logic in each post, questioned townreads without claiming they were scum, playing relatively aggressively -- neutral-town read.
ICEninja: posts well-argued thoughts, has tried to balance conversation between opposing views (see post 89) -- town read.
Macros: good logic, has argued against rushing to a vote, but did it when he thought it was justified -- town read.
Maxous: not much reasoning behind actions, has mostly questioned other people -- neutral-scum read.
Sir Bastion: claimed bussing early, was able to back it up reasonably later, started asking people if they think he's stupid for some reason -- neutral read.
Slandaar: started by voting based on a flimsy argument, reacted a little defensively when pressed on it, then got all Sextus Empiricus on us by saying there's no value in argument -- neutral-scum read.
TCold: replaced in (thank you for this, btw), started noting town and scum reads -- neutral read.
Thor: has more posts than anyone, very aggressive, very logical, doesn't need much to vote somebody, could be leading so as to avoid suspicion based on lurking or posting without logic, could be town trying to generate pressure and conversation -- neutral read.
zakk: only one post, willing to jump on Axxle's bandwagon on Garmr based on little logic, willing to give benefit of the doubt on inactivity -- neutral-scum read.
Well so much for that post being short..."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
EBWOP
I accidentally wrote Axxle twice instead of zakk the last time. Here's the actual vote history:
ABR: Slandaar, Garmr
Axxle: Garmr
Garmr: ABR, Maxous, GuthrieGov
GuthrieGov: ABR, Axxle, ABR (note: didn't unvote ABR before voting Axxle, so it wasn't counted.)
ICEninja: Sir Bastion, ABR
Macros: Axxle, Garmr (note: first vote on Axxle was unintentional)
Maxous: Thor, Slandaar
Sir Bastion: Macros, GuthrieGov
Slandaar: toolenduso, Thor
TCold: Garmr
Thor: ABR, GuthrieGov, Sir Bastion
toolenduso: ABR
zakk: Garmr"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
My heart, gut and head happen to agree on this one. I could've voted for Slandaar too (my second strongest scum read), but I believe that if I'm going to do something, I need to be able to back it up. That's why I laid out my reasoning for both of you and decided that you were the better option.In post 149, Albert B. Rampage wrote:You might as well be honest like me and say you've got nothing and vote where your heart tells you.
In day one there's not much to go on, so isn't it best to go with what little you have? That way, evidence builds up on various people and can complement later accusations or fade away into irrelevance after we have records of who voted to lynch who, who died in the night, what people's alignments were, etc.
My question for you is this -- what led to your gut feeling that it was worth it to put Garmr at L-2?"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Why thank you.In post 151, Albert B. Rampage wrote:#147 is literally a piece of crap.
No I don't. But it's as good a tell as any at this point in the game. Later in the game they will be more developed. You can disagree with my reads."X Provides reasoning to his votes. Neutral-Town."
What the hell are you talking about? Do you think only town can make up a half-baked reason to justify a vote?
My history has already been discussed -- my last game was in 2007, and I mostly played newbie games. All the threads I've posted in are in my profile if you want to look at them.Have you seriously been playing since 2007? Show me your town games, I want to read your meta."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
@ABR: I don't get how saying who you think is town benefits the mafia. Could you explain?
As for Slandaar, here's my reasoning:
1. Started by voting based on a flimsy argument.In post 147, toolenduso wrote: Slandaar: started by voting based on a flimsy argument, reacted a little defensively when pressed on it, then got all Sextus Empiricus on us by saying there's no value in argument -- neutral-scum read.
Continued to argue that point by saying I was overexplaining things, ignoring most of the rest of the players. The argument is flimsy because my tendency to reason things out isn't as good of evidence as other things happening in the game.In post 53, Slandaar wrote:
Anyways sorry for showing up late everyone I have been really really busy, I just didn't have a chance to post yet, don't hold it against me please I am just a little late that's all and I am very very sorry but you know how it is; can't post at work and then when you get home gotta make a cup of tea but then realise there are no biscuits left and can't have tea without biscuits so you have to run out to buy some. So, yeah, sorry I missed the opening of this game please don't think I am scum because I didn't show up immediately I really truly am sorry for not getting here first.
VOTE: toolenduso
2. Reacted a little defensively when pressed about his arguments.
Asserts his ability (which is apparently very good, as he said in the quotes I pulled for my fourth point) to scum hunt is being hindered, asserts he is town (which has no value) and calls Thor superficial. It's a little defensive, but it's not like he's blowing up about it. Just a little hint, not the main part of my argument.In post 114, Slandaar wrote: Do a line by line breakdown of what is wrong with my post in regards to overexplaining.
Now let us figure this out; You know we don't agree on anything so instead of letting me do what I do and catch the scum you are trying to come after me for posting something you think is wrong well that is what you should expect to happen when I am town.
...
In short: You are being very superficial.
3. Goes all Sextus Empiricus on us by saying there's no value in argument.
In post 114, Slandaar wrote:I could bring up everything you have posted I don't agree with but I don't; why? because its pointless to argue it as I know I won't agree with you it's just how it is.
tl;dr -- arguing logic is pointless. Except the function of voting in this game is based on logic. You vote for people because you have a reason to. This argument against argument is, I believe, his support for his next claim, which I go over in my fourth point.In post 133, Slandaar wrote: Simple version;
Before a game even begins you know we will not agree on logic especially if we are both town and you know that actually all that will happen is wall wars where we just don't come to agreement and want to lynch the other.
During game Thor tries to argue my logic is scummy.
Doesn't make sense, I expect if you were town you would have tried alternative methods like seeing if I lurk hard or not, but instead you went the superficial way of arguing logic which is ultimately pointless and not actually going to get you a read that is useful because it always ends the same way.
4. Something I just noticed after reading some more is that Slandaar is basically just asking us to trust him because he's never wrong. Asking people to basically just follow on faith without reasoning it out themselves.
In post 133, Slandaar wrote:Add to that the fact I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct and it is just a ridiculous strategy from a TownThor plus its always to do with how things are worded so at a minimum a TownThor should have at least tweaked a little."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Sorry to dwell on it, but what I'm asking is how does this make scum play better? Doesn't it give scum just as much as a vote, an FoS or an argument by a player?In post 158, Albert B. Rampage wrote: On day 1, explaining this makes scum play better ... I don't want to dwell on this."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
ABR: "I vote for X"
Scum: "Let's avoid X's style of playing so we can avoid being lynched."
or
Scum: "Let's try to build support for lynching X so the town will mislynch."
or
Scum: "Let's vote for someone other than X so we can distance ourselves from looking like bandwagoners."
Thanks for providing your reasoning, but I just disagree. What you're arguing against is saying very much in general -- so you're being consistent with your philosophy, I just don't think there would be a game without us giving our opinions. And I think saying townreads gives away about as much as any other opinion."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
@Maxous -- I'm kind of teetering between the two right now. If the end of the day were now, I'd be comfortable voting for either.
And I apologize for calling you out earlier for not posting for a bit. After more time has passed, it's become clear that there are people in this game much more inactive than you. And work/sleep/real life is certainly a valid reason for not posting in a while."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Slandaar -- this is the post of mine where you think I'm overexplaining, correct?
Then, you say thisIn post 33, toolenduso wrote:EDBWOP (thanks Garmr for the definition)
I guess what stage of the game it is would matter a little bit.
What I'm saying is, at this stage in the game there's very little logical reasoning a mafia could give to bus their partner. So I think you'd have to see something pretty convincing at this stage in the game to think something is bussing. Otherwise, you could say any post of one person voting for another was bussing.
Unless I'm missing something. Why did you think it looked like bussing, outside of the fact that one voted for the other?
If you're asking for a conclusion in my post, then what you're really saying is that I was underexplaining my argument by leaving out a point.In post 167, Slandaar wrote:
Uh no. My example was more accurate because yours ends with a conclusion and his posts did not.In post 142, Thor665 wrote: You point was still complaining that he wasn't succinct enough when the points you said should be cut were explanation of why he had his belief;
basically he did this;
The fruit is round, red, has white pulp, seeds inside, came from a tree, and has a sweet flavor with some tartness.
I believe it is an apple.
Anyway, here's the point of my post:
I was explaining that I didn't think anybody could have a very good reason for claiming that somebody was bussing somebody else at that stage of the game, andIn post 33, toolenduso wrote:So I think you'd have to see something pretty convincing at this stage in the game to think something is bussing.thus casting doubt via my argument on Sir Bastion's vote.
That was the point of my post. I don't understand why this is the most important thing in the game to you."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Garmr, if you can't remember why everyone has voted for you then here's the list right now:
ABR
Axxle
Macros
TCold
zakk
You can isolate their posts using the "display posts by user" thing at the bottom of the page and see why they voted you."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Whoops. Didn't see Bastion's post before I posted mine."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
By the way, Slandaar, you forgot to unvote before you did this. So I think if N were to do a votecount right now you would show as not voting for anyone.
"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Sorry, I am wrong. Please ignore that last post of mine.
"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
My vote might not be counted because it wasn't at the start of a new line, though. So to do this right...
VOTE: Albert B. Rampage"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I kind of agree with this since we have several players who haven't posted much and therefore have a ton of stuff to cover when they come back. So I'll post once more today. Still have to go through the meta links myself.In post 231, ICEninja wrote:Alright I virtually never say things like this, but I think the activity level needs to take a tiny step back. We have several players with fewer than 5 posts, and Thor with 41. Some of which being fairly hefty posts.
That being said...
UNVOTE:"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Except for this post in a game where he was town:In post 264, Albert B. Rampage wrote:All in all, if you look at your early Day 1 play in those games, it showcases exactly what I've pointed out about your play.
There multiple other examples I found in those games of Thor calling for other people to lynch his suspect after D1. I'm also seeing other behavior from Thor consistent with this game, including one moment where he defends a player like me by using an analogy, just like he did with the apple example in this game. Not saying this means he's town, but it's definitely consistent.In post 340, Thor665 wrote: I'd like to lynch Z7 or thenewearth right now.
Let's do this and see if Z7 backs up his claimed desires.
Unvote: Aeronaut
Vote: thenewearth
Let's speed wagon this up to L-1 in 12 hours or so. Go, go, go!
Now, ABR's general style was consistent in that meta link he posted as far as him not wanting to give a lot of reasons on people and not contributing much in the way of reasoning for why he voted the way he did.
But now I'm seeing ABR jumping on Slandaar's bandwagon with pretty lame reasoning:
"Thor thinks somebody is scum, so he's trying to lynch them -- that's scummy!"In post 219, Albert B. Rampage wrote:I think Thor is serious about trying to lynch Slandaar. He read the situation, weighed his options, and decided that he could lynch Slandaar.
...
Leading the town like that, from an argument you generated from your own line of questioning, it doesn't help you read into the game.
"Thor is voting based on things people said in response to his questions -- that's scummy!"
And then asking Slandaar if he's ready to lynch Thor. Why he asked this, I have no idea -- Slandaar has given no other indication than that he wants to lynch Thor. Slandaar responds with this:
Why say this, Slandaar?In post 256, Slandaar wrote: I don't really understand why you are asking me this though it doesn't feel right.
Slandaar continues to argue without much solid reasoning:
You use logic to demonstrate why behavioral patterns appear to be town or scum. All arguments involve logic, including your own. Your whole argument against arguing logic is basically just a vague critique you use to say that nobody in the game is making good points except for you. Because you are, as per your own claims, great at catching scum:In post 216, Slandaar wrote: Well context is required here; Specifically Thor and I arguing logic is pointless. There is more than logic to find scum though for example behavioural patterns.
In post 133, Slandaar wrote:...I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct...
This is what I'm getting from Slandaar's arguments: "I am correct, therefore there is no point in arguing against me. Any argument you make against me is useless because it is argued based on logic and not behavioral patterns. A behavioral pattern is defined as something that I see and you don't. Logic is defined as something you see."In post 114, Slandaar wrote:... instead of letting me do what I do and catch the scum you are trying to come after me for posting something you think is wrong...
To defend myself against the inevitability that Slandaar will claim I had no conclusions in this post, here is my conclusion:
I am willing to consider the possibility of ABR and Slandaar both being scum.
ALL THIS BEING SAID, I am not going to vote for anyone right now because I don't want a lynch before we allow the following players to catch up and hear some more from them:
TCold
Axxle
zakk"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
You responded to the part of the sentence I wasn't questioning. What I was asking was, why did you say it doesn't it feel right?In post 286, Slandaar wrote:
I feel like noone reads Tool's posts.In post 265, toolenduso wrote: And then asking Slandaar if he's ready to lynch Thor.-- Slandaar has given no other indication than that he wants to lynch Thor. Slandaar responds with this:Why he asked this, I have no idea
In post 256, Slandaar wrote:I don't really understand why you are asking me this thoughit doesn't feel right.Why say this, Slandaar?
Could you please explain what I missed in your pasts instead of just saying I missed something?In post 286, Slandaar wrote:
I feel like Tool has not been reading my posts.In post 265, toolenduso wrote: This is what I'm getting from Slandaar's arguments: "I am correct, therefore there is no point in arguing against me. Any argument you make against me is useless because it is argued based on logic and not behavioral patterns. A behavioral pattern is defined as something that I see and you don't. Logic is defined as something you see.""Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
*posts
So far, zakk has bandwagoned, lurked, bandwagoned again and said pretty much what everyone else has said in his posts.In post 285, zakk wrote:That is pretty much what I'm talking about. He seems to be crashing and burning and resorting to petty insults when he's been caught and tagged.
I still feel like there's scum somewhere between ABR and Slandaar, but I'd like to explore this. And if other people agree, I would be comfortable with this as a D1 lynch.
VOTE: zakk"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
In post 346, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Thor, my case on you is made up. The reason I made it up is because I wanted to teach you that if you go against me, this is what will come of it. It's not wise for you to go against me. I'm stronger. I scumhunt better. I get who I want lynched more often than you do. Remember that. Tell your QT buddies if you're scum.Were it not for this rule, this post would sound much different. Suffice it to say, Albert's post quoted above made me very angry.
But since I can't make personal remarks and insults, I'll simply ask whoever is willing to comment whether they think ABR is scum who abandoned his case against Thor because he didn't want to keep defending it or if he's telling the truth about his reasons -- which say things about ABR I feel it is best not to discuss in the interest of civility."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I don't even care if ABR is scum right now, though I sincerely hope he is for his own sake. It's going to be hard for me to play this game without saying terrible things if he's still in it and continues to say things like this. And honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if he was scum. Therefore,
UNVOTE: zakk
VOTE: Albert B. Rampage"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I'm going to go ahead and agree with Bastion on this one that the misrep thing is pointless right now. The only reason it came up in the first place was because Slandaar was voting me. He's not voting me anymore. If he does it in the future and a wagon actually starts to build on me, we can bring it up again.
In the meantime -- Thor/Elyse/everybody else, Slandaar's inability to argue with any amount of reason on this point (the misrep) is as massive and immovable as the Earth itself. Continuing to debate with him about it is akin to trying to stop the world from spinning by running west. We could thoroughly disprove each of Slandaar's points on this subject beyond a doubt and he would continue to pull out meaningless, confused answers just as surely as the sun will continue to rise in the east each morning.
More to come when I get home."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Just ignore him guys. Seriously. He will stop eventually."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Sorry if I was unclear. I meant ignore his blusterings on the misrep issue. I agree he should talk about other things.In post 445, Sir Bastion wrote:
Do you not think there are other issues he needs to address?In post 443, toolenduso wrote:Just ignore him guys. Seriously. He will stop eventually."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
If anyone is really itching for other reasons than the misrep to suspect Slandaar, I will post them when I get home.
But please just let the misrep argument go until it is relevant again."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
How about you respond to this point by SB?
In post 431, Sir Bastion wrote: Cause despite your claims otherwise. I dont see anywhere in your ISO where you have said why you think albert is town.
I have seen no opinion from you about him admitting his case was made up."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Oh well. I tried."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Here's one reason to suspect Slandaar, as I promised earlier when Slandaar was saying there's no case against him if not for Thor's assertion that he misrepresented me.
You keep saying things are "proven" when the people you're talking with disagree with you. You explain your logic by restating it as if it requires no further explanation. You tell people to take what you say as a fact.In post 216, Slandaar wrote:
The context you're referring to is that you're only talking about your argument with Thor. And yet here is your exact quote:In post 157, toolenduso wrote: 4. Something I just noticed after reading some more is that Slandaar is basically just asking us to trust him because he's never wrong. Asking people to basically just follow on faith without reasoning it out themselves.
Context is required again; I am talking about Thor and I's arguments not every argument I ever made on anyone.In post 133, Slandaar wrote:Add to that the fact I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct and it is just a ridiculous strategy from a TownThor plus its always to do with how things are worded so at a minimum a TownThor should have at least tweaked a little.
You use the word always. You even type it in all caps. The word "always" means that what you're saying applies to situations other than the one you're currently in.In post 133, Slandaar wrote:Add to that the fact I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct
It's not just this quote that demonstrates your belief that you're great at this and other people can't question you with validity. You write as though you expect people to know what you're talking about without explaining it, because you're just that awesome. See these examples:
In post 286, Slandaar wrote: I feel like Tool has not been reading my posts.In post 238, Slandaar wrote: Why are you even still voting me Thor when your whole super duper misrep has been proven false?In post 217, Slandaar wrote: Thor is scum therefore it is no 'dumb fight'In post 133, Slandaar wrote: How can someone expect to read me with a method which is proven not to work?
This is why I believe that you are arguing based on the proposition that you are great at this game. Your style of argument and your exact wording paints that picture. To argue based solely on the fact that you're awesome is hardly convincing. At it’s best, what you’re doing is obstructing meaningful town conversation. At worst, it’s a scumtell."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
EBWOP: Whoops, I constructed the quote tags wrong in that last one...
The context you're referring to is that you're only talking about your argument with Thor. And yet here is your exact quote:In post 216, Slandaar wrote:
Context is required again; I am talking about Thor and I's arguments not every argument I ever made on anyone.In post 157, toolenduso wrote: 4. Something I just noticed after reading some more is that Slandaar is basically just asking us to trust him because he's never wrong. Asking people to basically just follow on faith without reasoning it out themselves.
In post 133, Slandaar wrote:Add to that the fact I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct and it is just a ridiculous strategy from a TownThor plus its always to do with how things are worded so at a minimum a TownThor should have at least tweaked a little.
You use the word always. You even type it in all caps. The word "always" means that what you're saying applies to situations other than the one you're currently in.In post 133, Slandaar wrote:Add to that the fact I have ALWAYS (when town) been correct
It's not just this quote that demonstrates your belief that you're great at this and other people can't question you with validity. You write as though you expect people to know what you're talking about without explaining it, because you're just that awesome. See these examples:
In post 286, Slandaar wrote: I feel like Tool has not been reading my posts.In post 238, Slandaar wrote: Why are you even still voting me Thor when your whole super duper misrep has been proven false?In post 217, Slandaar wrote: Thor is scum therefore it is no 'dumb fight'
You keep saying things are "proven" when the people you're talking with disagree with you. You explain your logic by restating it as if it requires no further explanation. You tell people to take what you say as a fact.In post 133, Slandaar wrote: How can someone expect to read me with a method which is proven not to work?
This is why I believe that you are arguing based on the proposition that you are great at this game. Your style of argument and your exact wording paints that picture. To argue based solely on the fact that you're awesome is hardly convincing. At it’s best, what you’re doing is obstructing meaningful town conversation. At worst, it’s a scumtell."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Fair enough. But could you explain what makes you think it's playstyle and not purposeful obstruction/distraction?"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I agree, and I know you're right. I thought about replacing out. But fortunately it's Day 1 and we can afford to mislynch. ABR is still on my list of scumreads, so it's win-win for me.In post 379, Thor665 wrote:
You should.In post 378, toolenduso wrote:I don't even care if ABR is scum right now
Never let annoyance at a player affect your vote...or at least try not to.
On the plus side he *is* scum, but you shouldn't make a stance that 'Player X is obnoxious...let's lynch them'
If that attitude gets too big in a game I actually suggest replace out and then blacklisting them for yourself so you never have to play with them again. But don't harm the game over it.
Also, if I replaced out I think it would also hurt the town -- I think it would be hard for a replacement to catch up with the pace of this game, and I've been one of the players keeping up and consistently posting.
If we don't lynch ABR today, I can at least hope that either he will stop acting like a dominatrix in some bizarre sexual fantasy or, if he continues to, that I will cool down and be able to ignore him."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Hear hear!In post 469, Thor665 wrote: And then lynch ABR."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Not necessarily. We don't know how many power roles/vanilla townies there are in this game, but if Albert were town he could also be a power role and not want to claim it so he could avoid being nk'd.In post 491, Garmr wrote:Thanks ABR for giving scum a better chance at hitting a power role
Also, I'm going to start skimming Slandaar's posts until he starts saying things that are useful again. Given his patterns all game, I estimate a low chance of this happening.
To everyone who's replaced in -- thanks! Let us know if you need any summaries or anything like that."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
There's three votes on Garmr and three on Thor right now. Do those not count as wagons?In post 567, ICEninja wrote:Logic is pointing to ABR as scum but this wagon is developing too easily without enough counter."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
ABR: "Lynch Thor! Or Garmr! No, wait, lynch Elyse because she didn't unvote when I asked! No, wait, lynch Thor again!"
Garmr, let's add this to the pile for examples of flailing.
@Maxous:
You kind of went into why you'd want to vote Garmr before, but could you summarize your case against both Garmr and Thor please?In post 614, Maxous wrote:Barring something dramatic, i'll be voting Garmr or Thor at the end of the day period.
I'll wait and see where the replacements vote etc."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Not sure what "gimme" defamation means, but if it's something scummy then here's some more examples I think fit into that category:In post 644, zakk wrote:
This is exactly the kind of "gimme" defamation that I'd expect scum to stoop to. It's too easy. It's too obvious.In post 638, toolenduso wrote:ABR: "Lynch Thor! Or Garmr! No, wait, lynch Elyse because she didn't unvote when I asked! No, wait, lynch Thor again!"
In post 151, Albert B. Rampage wrote:#147 is literally a piece of crap.In post 587, Albert B. Rampage wrote:Nope. You're too bad. You are way, way too bad to be town. Oversimplification. Flat. Detached.In post 29, GuthrieGov wrote:Bastion I'm sorry, but thats just plain stupid.In post 415, ICEninja wrote:Can I just...not read any of Slandaars posts anymore?In post 598, Sir Bastion wrote: contradicting yourself much?
We lynch you and you flip scum *oh noes who's town and who's scum the possibilities are endless, hell Thor might even be my partner bussing me to control town*
We lynch Thor and he flips scum *Well obviously we are town cause we told you so*
....and countless others from Slandaar.In post 573, Slandaar wrote: 'I think this post should have just been a question'
'NO WAY YOU SCUM YOU CANT POSSIBLY THINK THAT'
Are we lynching Thor now or what?
In post 592, Thor665 wrote:Oh, and my favorite;
"When I said I 'made up' something it is scummy for Thor to call that 'lying'...because, y'know...those are different things...also, there was no lie."
...and many more from Thor. And then there's this one from you:In post 591, Thor665 wrote:"I barely remember Thor"
"Thor is so good at scum he can make me have doubts"
"Thor is being so bad and oversimplifying, he is obv. scum."
Flail more.
Now, zakk, I have a few questions for you. You first voted Thor over 400 posts ago. Since then, quite a bit has happened. Do you still think Thor is scum? Why or why not? Who else do you suspect and why? Any townreads? Why?In post 285, zakk wrote:He seems to be crashing and burning and resorting to petty insults when he's been caught and tagged."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Actually zakk, could you specifically talk about Albert? I'd like to hear about your thoughts in general, but mostly I'd like to hear what you think about ABR."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Do you mean that ABR said he's a bad lynch because of a lack of info we'd get by lynching him, or he's a bad lynch because we lack info about him? And if it's the latter, could you provide a quote, because I didn't see that in Albert's ISO.In post 663, Thor665 wrote:the contradiction that immediately springs to mind is that he says he is a bad lynch due to lack of info while also advancing the idea we should lynch a lurker (the definition of a non-info lynch)"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Meh. Doesn't really matter if we don't lynch until deadline. And if we don't reach 7 then ABR will be lynched anyway because he has the most votes right?In post 676, ICEninja wrote:4 days until deadline, and fitz probably won't post until Monday."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Well nevermind then. Thanks for the rulecheck, F-16.
"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Albert, there is a good reason I voted you. And that's because even if you're town, I didn't agree with a thing you were saying. So no, I won't automatically think Thor is scum just because you say so.
Thanks for calling yourself the best town player, calling yourself better than other people and trying to control people's emotions without any solid arguments. It's really going to help town figure this game out."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I INVENTED THE PIANO KEY NECKTIE! I INVENTED IT! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE, ALBERT?! NOTHING!!!!! YOU'VE DONE NOTHING!!!!!!!"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Uh, could you elaborate please?
"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Ah, I got it. Good catch, Elyse. Didn't know what a hider was. Here it is for anybody else:
http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=Hider
VOTE: Thor665"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
This'll be quick because I'm at work right now, but I'll post a bit more when I get home.
IMO doesn't matter a whole lot whether we quicklynch Thor or not. So for now, in the interests of digging through what we have, I'll
UNVOTE: Thor665
That being said, Thor is a good scum player. But he's been backed into a situation where he has very few options for what he could do. So yeah, everything he's doing right now -- including trying to get people to take his "vow" -- is basically the only options he has left. The vow is pointless and designed to create suspicion between townies.
@zakk: Well, thanks for posting your thoughts on everyone. Unfortunately, looking at playstyle is far more suited to day 1 activity unless it's something very telling. We now have three confirmed townies and a vote record at our disposal to determine who is scum.
Also, it's a fallacy to think that just because somebody who died is confirmed town that they actually knew who the mafia was."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Holy crap. ICE was saying he's never encountered a real hider, but has encountered people claiming to be hiders, so he's lynched them. He never said he lynched a real hider. Stop misunderstanding/misrepping him, fitz. There are other issues at hand."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
In post 801, Thor665 wrote: Consider this - if I flip scum...will anyone hold anyone else to my vow?
No.
In post 801, Thor665 wrote:Now...what happens if I flip town?
Then ICEninja would be suspect regardless of people taking or not taking your vow -- that's why it doesn't matter whether anybody signs up for it or not.
But it does have an effect on the conversation right now. Assuming you're scum, I think you're using the vow in an attempt to create some conflict between townies, direct the conversation in a certain way and create some doubt about whether you are scum.
If you're town, it doesn't make much sense for you to try to get people to make a vow that will pretty much automatically get carried out upon you flipping town. You could point it out, make sure people know about and ask them to address it...
But asking people to actually vow that they would do it? That's controlling the conversation, and one of the last options you would have as scum.
That being said, I won't address it again unless I feel it's really necessary, because it is the least necessary thing to discuss right now."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
What's more important is discussing who the other scum might be based on voting actions.
While I highly doubt that all three scum were on ABR's wagon, it's hard to collect any real evidence against any of the surviving people who weren't on the wagon -- most have very little posting history or voting record to go on.
Looking at the remaining people on the wagon, I'm going to point my finger at Garmr.
Garmr was the one who put ABR at L-2 (which was essentially a confirmed lynch since by that point F-16 had said he was going to vote for ABR too). This in itself is not necessarily scummy. But it took him a while to do it. He declared his intention to vote for Albert after being accused of not commenting on the situation (although he had, a little). But he said he wanted to "milk day 1" for what it was worth.
Personally, I thought that sentiment was fine. The ABR wagon was confirmed to succeed at that point. But then Thor challenged it in this post:In post 691, Garmr wrote: I'm on everyday and I already declared my intention to vote ABR latter. The reason I don't do it now is because I'm milking what I can out of the day. So his at a imaginary L-1 now.
...which didn't really say anything at all. I mean, what was Thor's challenge to Garmr wanting to wait? Essentially what Thor was saying in the post was "I don't understand why you want to wait to vote for ABR."In post 694, Thor665 wrote: So, just to work out this outline;
1. You are here everyday.
2. You have no questions or issues to present.
3. You want us to "milk" the remaining time because...you want to spend the time...not voting...so that time passes...
Garmr responded with this:
...basically caving to nothing.In post 699, Garmr wrote: I never thought of it that way.... I usually just stretch the day as long as I can then something unexpected happens out of no where that changes the game. I am guessing this doesn't happen every game by your tone?
Then in this post...
...he's back to supporting the idea of "milking" the time we have to further the conversation.In post 790, Garmr wrote:Slandaar while I do agree with your case shouldn't we wait till the other players place say something. We have to get a response from TCold and havingfitz now. Then I think we should go for that lynch after everyone's spoken Thor's 100 percent getting lynched today so we can milk the week.
My guess is that Garmr, who's pretty much admitted that he hasn't done his best in this game, took a cue from his scumbuddy Thor, who is an experienced leader-type player, to hurry up and lynch ABR already.
To recap, here is what I think happened from scumGarmr's point of view:
1. He is pressed to comment on the ABR situation, giving him an excuse to hop on a bandwagon against town.
2. To avoid looking too eager, he posts a couple of times making a case for Albert, then says he is going to vote for him. He uses the "milking day 1" thing to avoid seeming eager as well.
3. He takes a cue from his more-experienced scumbuddy, Thor, to jump on in.
4. Having been given a reason to and having established a case, he does so.
Thoughts?"Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Slandaar is the only one who's taken the vow so far. So why is Bastion the only one you're suspicious of for not taking it?In post 836, Thor665 wrote: Exactly.
So why is Bastion fighting signing up for it?
Take your time.
This isn't rocket science.
Lol. I'm a dude btw. Was it the kitten avi that threw you off?In post 828, Skelda wrote:Why don't people want to lynch toolenduso? On my skim she had a pretty bad excuse to vote ABR.
Also, I had two reasons for voting ABR:
1. He really, really pissed me off (I acknowledge that this isn't the best reason as far as the game goes).
2. He wasn't being productive and started doing stupid, irrational stuff (see his "test" of Elyse, which was ridiculous) -- thought this was a scumtell.
I'm not sure what you're referring to. Could you elaborate?In post 828, Skelda wrote:And the prod-dodges (I'm a hypocrite, I know) gave me a very early scumread."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
Translation: But would they have seen had I not brought it up? I think they would have eventually, because people would've looked into F-16's posts once they realized he was a hider.In post 844, Garmr wrote:But would they of saw it. I think they would of eventually because people would looked into his posts upon seeing his role. Also you've only answered part of my post. You still haven't explained why your posting style has changed to a slack one once you thought you were getting town reads.
Also, you've only answered part of my post. You still haven't explained why your posting style has become more aggressive now that a few people have townread you."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
So....did everybody just skip over my case against Garmr? Or is everyone ignoring it because they thought it was dumb or something?
It's right here, in case you're interested."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
I will respond to both of you when I get home around 6:30 p.m. PST."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437-
-
toolenduso Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2594
- Joined: April 10, 2007
In post 886, zakk wrote:Your case assumes Thor is a)town, and b)not a manipulative person. Which means it is a bad case.
My case explicitly assumes Thor is scum. Half the case is that Garmr took a cue from his scumbuddy Thor, as I state right here:
@Fitz:In post 822, toolenduso wrote: My guess is that Garmr, who's pretty much admitted that he hasn't done his best in this game, took a cue from hisscumbuddy Thor, who is an experienced leader-type player, to hurry up and lynch ABR already.
In post 887, havingfitz wrote:Sure Tool....re: your case in Post 822:
You thought the milking D1 sentiment was fine. Check
Then you provided a D1 exchange between Thor and Gamr (where I think the summary is that Thor is suspecting Garmr for wanting to wait?)....but then you put in a quote (Post 790) from D2 where Garmr is being consistent about "milking the day". Why does his consistency wrt milking the day on D1 and D2 make him suspect? Or at least...what does his D2 comment have to do with anything? As for Thor coaxing him to vote sooner...why does the timeliness of Garmr's ABR vote matter when he had stated his intention to vote ABR already? It's not like Thor talked him into voting ABR out of the blue.
My point is that it wasn't consistent. Garmr was fine with "milking" at first, then as soon as Thor challenged him on it, Garmr decided "milking" wasn't a good idea, then in day 2 he's back to the idea of "milking."
The day 2 part isn't even really that important. What's important is the way Garmr reacted to A) being pressured to comment on ABR; and B) Thor challening his "milking" sentiment. Both examples show Garmr perfectly willing to be pushed toward a town lynch.
And I don't think Thor saw any advantage in lynching ABR sooner rather than later -- or if he did, it doesn't matter. But Garmr took Thor's cue, which does matter if Thor flips scum. ScumThor was just challenging things he didn't agree with with equal opportunity, which he's been doing all game. Garmr thought Thor was trying to provide some subtle direction.
As for ICEninja, I have no more opinions that haven't been expressed already, so let me see if I can make it even more clear for you.
Post 794: "How can you typically lynch hiders if you've never encountered one?"
Post 817: "“Typically' would imply you have lynched a hider more than once."
Post 881: "you lied about typically lynching them"
Post 881: "you lied about encountering hiders before"
My answer: ICE never, ever, ever, ever said he had encountered a REAL hider. He said he's encountered people who CLAIMED to be hiders, who turned out not to be. The link you posted to the 2010 game is an example of this.
Here's what ICE is saying: "I have never lynched a real hider. I have lynched fake hiders."
Here's what you're saying: "ICE said he's lynched a real hider!"
Post 817: "You realize until you know the hider is real or not it’s all the same."
My answer: That would be true during the game in question, but ICE is talking about games that have already ended. Therefore, he can look back now and know with absolute certainty that the people who claimed hider were not hiders.
Post 881: "you lied about not knowing how they work."
My answer:
I feel like this pretty much explains everything.In post 891, ICEninja wrote: That post you linked was years ago and I have no memory of it. By the looks of things, before making that post I read the wiki about what hiders do.
I remembered encountering fake claim hiders before. They're uncommon and therefore unlikely to be counter claimed, and a hider surviving the night is a lot less suspicious than a cop surviving the night. I had no memory of them having informational powers, I always thought it was a survival role (like bullet proof, except requires you to pick the person NOT getting shot).
If you insist on pursuing this line of reasoning, I challenge you to quote the post where ICE claims to have lynched somebody who actually turned out to be a hider -- NOT a post where he says he's played a game where somebody CLAIMED to be hider, but in fact was NOT A HIDER."Half of the game is figuring out who the scum is. The other half is convincing everyone else that you're right." -- PlaysWithSquirrels, in Newbie 437