Mini 486: GAME OVER!
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Well, my actual reason for questioning DPF is that there really isnt anything wrong witha day 1 bandwagon. As long as it's kept in hand so as to avoid a lynch, it creates discussion, and allows you to see where people stand on other players, thus making it easier to determine scum. Of course, having only 6 to lynch makes it a little different, which is irritating and seems to be a handicap to the town in my opinion.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Well yes, I looked at it this way. However, it also means that Lynch-or-Lose comes a day earlier, as well as the fact that we cant put as much pressure on anyone because its that much easier to mislynch.TheHermit wrote: I disagree: I see it as both a blessing and a curse. It's a blessing because you need to convince one less person of another's guilt in order to get them lynched; it's a curse because you need to convince one less person of another's "guilt" before you get the lynched WRONGLY. So it really comes down to, "How confident are you of your deductions?"
Ly-lo will not come a day earlier. At deadline, a true majority of votes is required, even or odd. -ModI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
MOD- I think you should prod him now. I think perhaps he didnt notice the game has started, seeing as he's active as a mod in another game currently.
Request denied. Partly because you didn't bold your message and didn't understand my joke page 1, partly because I have a 72-hour policy. -ModI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Um, you can't do that. That is unfair to players who wish to metagame, or to use gambits involving out of game points. In addition to lowering the amount to lynch, you're really hurting the town's ability to win.Albert B. Rampage wrote:Mod Announcement:
From now on, all posts must be game related. Thank you, and that is all.
You can post anything you want as long as it serves some purpose to further the game. If you are unsatisfied, you may ask for a replacement. -ModI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
As far as I can tell, my post talking about Paradoxombies seniority was deleted. That was relevant to the game, since you basically handed him authority in the game praising him in thread as well as telling us he needs distinction. In the case that he is anti town, this is yet another handicap thrown at us.
Consider anything I say excluding vote counts and rules as flavor. -ModI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
That seems to me an overreaction from you. I use everything that a person has done when I consider whether they're suspcious or not. I'm setting myself up to have additional evidence for later in the game.Paradoxombie wrote:
Hmm, and odd thing to say. OJ only made one barely scummy vote. It's been established that he likely made it for no reason wich would nullify that small bit of scumminess. He wasn't technically lurking since he hasn't done anything since then. He didn't even say anything. Perhaps you're setting yourself up to vote me on less-than-strong evidence later?Elias_the_thief wrote:Thanks Paradoxombie, for replacing in this, as well as in the game I'm modding. Though I'm suspicious of you due to the fact that you are now inheriting the PM of OJ, someone I saw as fairly scummy.
Anyways, im suspisious of Hermit and Nelly. Both playing wierdly. For now, the vote is for nelly.vote: NellyI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
What need is there to pull off?
1) If he's actually protown, he'll pull his own vote off when the town requests.
2) Would you expect any protown player to make the mistake and lynch him after your post about how the votecount was wrong and how quicklynches are bad? scum could do it, yes, but scum can't afford the 1 for 1 trade like the town can, so if scum hammered it would be a good thing.
By letting Nelly take off his vote and leaving mine we at least keep some semblance of pressure on him. Furthermore, at the time he put his vote on me, he had not promised any content.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Excuse me, what the hell areParadoxombie wrote:
What are you talking about? Suspicion != scumminess. You can't lynch me later because the player I replace was suspected, you have to show that hte suspicion was warranted. He had alot of suspicion, but show me how anything OJ did is scummy. That was my point. How can I inherit OJ's suspicion when he wasn't scummy?Elias_the_thief wrote:
Para, I mean that will get evidence later in the game, and I will use the previous suspicion in later cases.
youtalking about? If I was suspicious of your predecessor. Did I ever once say I wished to lynch you for just that? No. I said I would include this evidence in later cases.
Ok, now that that is out of the way,
1) excellent work with the vigging.
2) Why am I under so much suspicion? I have no idea where I went from being probably neutral in peoples eyes to being within the top 3 suspects.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Can you give me examples of how he has played in this manner before? I doubt you two have had more than 2 games together, in which case I can hardly say that your metagaming is fair. Anyways, I retain that OJ was suspicious, and I retain that suspicion for you.
Now, could someone tell me how I'm one of the top suspects nowadays?I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Actually, yes. I thought they were both suspicious. However, it's better to put pressure on one person then to divide it among two. If you do that, no one feels pressured, and my vote would accomplish nothing. Also, if Nelly came up as scum, and I had used my vote on hermit, it would have appeared that I was trying to distract from the wagon, and thus protect a scumbuddy. There are two pretty solid (IMO) reasons that I voted for Nelly as opposed to hermit.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Vollkan is not cleared. It could easily be a gambit to make one of the scum appear confirmed in our eyes.Albert B. Rampage wrote:
This is an open setup. There are 3x mafia, 3x masons that win with the town, and1x day-vig that can be amafia, mason or townie.
Anyways, I guess I'll have to defend myself, since everyone seems to think I'm scum.
Here's what I did: I saw a player not contributing, and being suspicious because of it. I put the third vote on them, so as to pressure them into voting. After more pressure was applied, (though it came from a mafiosos, and para) Nelly agreed to post content, and now has. I didnt read that til just now, since when I looked at the thread, we had two more than my last check, and it said something about a dayvig. and now I will take my vote off.unvote: nelly, and respond to nelly's suspicions about me.
Um, no. I was suspicious of both of you. Hermit and you were both scummy, however, hermit was at least contributing to the game. by jumping on your wagon I add to the pressure on you and help force you to add content to the game. By jumping on Hermit, i would have done nothing. There would essentially be no pressure on him, and if you turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully. Anyhow, I've been around this site a year, and I'm 6-1 as scum. I think of myself as a better player then to just jump on random wagons and hope for a quicklynch.Nelly632 wrote: Post 132 comes with a vote from Elias_the_thief and the strange thing in the post is that he finds both Hermit and myself scummy but votes for me instead… My thoughts are he is Scum and he sees us both as scummy but sees a possible quick lynch on me and that is appealing to him…
FOS Elias_the_thief
The question marks were there to show how incredulous I was that this was even a question that needed to be asked. I dont see what's so wierd about my choice of punctuation.Nelly632 wrote:
At this point I take my vote off after being a little stupid and one thing that got me was this post by Elias_The_Thief…
Whats with the question mark… Explination marks maybe but question mark are questionable LOL I made a funny… But no seriously what is up with this…um, yes? we would?
Para, I mean that will get evidence later in the game, and I will use the previous suspicion in later cases.
Throughout that post I was referring to you taking your vote off of yourself. Furthermore, how in the hell is this a backtrack? I stood by my conviction and defended the fact that my vote and my move to not unvote (and let you do it yourself) was the correct protown move in the situation. What I did was the complete opposite of a backtrack.Nelly632 wrote: Elias_The_Thief Wrote:
What need is there to pull off?
1) If he's actually protown, he'll pull his own vote off when the town requests.
2) Would you expect any protown player to make the mistake and lynch him after your post about how the votecount was wrong and how quicklynches are bad? scum could do it, yes, but scum can't afford the 1 for 1 trade like the town can, so if scum hammered it would be a good thing.
By letting Nelly take off his vote and leaving mine we at least keep some semblance of pressure on him. Furthermore, at the time he put his vote on me, he had not promised any content.
First I don’t remember voting for you and if you are under the impression I did then doesn’t that make your vote scummy like the only reason you are voting for me is because I voted for you… Kind of like school yard junk… Secondly this entire post looks like someone trying to backtrack…I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I know very well that my scum record does not preclude me from being caught. I'm trying to say, I'm not stupid scum. Read my other games as scum, jumping on a wagon and hoping for a quicklynch (unless its LYLO already) is not my style.gorckat wrote:
Your record as scum does not preclude you from being caught out here.
I actually havent brought up distancing once. You refer, I guess, to the possibility of Nelly being scum and my vote appearing to be a distraction. My question to you: Is it anti town to try to prevent yourself from committing scumtells? To me it seems that if a townie tries to keep himself from committing common scum tells, it will help the town by not confusing him as scum.gorckat wrote: Why are you playing to help the town by being afraid of a distancing accusation?
Didnt bring it up once. If you get that my vote was for pressure, why are you suspicious of me again? This "distancing"? I just showed how my move to avoid distraction tells (what I actually keep bringing up) is a protown play.gorckat wrote: I get that the vote on Nelly leveraged more pressure, but you are the one who keeps bringing up distancing.
Why do you think he's town aligned? One mafioso dead in return for having one be confirmed in the eyes of the town? Seems like a sacrifice any mafia group would be willing to make.curiouskarmadog wrote: ok, well seems to me that vollkan is a town aligned vig, thus the public demostration of his kill. It is in the mafia best interest to keep confirmed townies at a mininum...there is no point for the mafia to take one of us out, when there is a confirmed townie. the mafia wants to have the most unconfirmed townies voting as possible.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I know, but I was responding to Nelly's point, which was that I was scummy for voting him instead of Hermit, apparently to "hope for a quicklynch".curiouskarmadog wrote:
dont think you are stupid scum, when you voted it wasnt really a wagon...you stated you wanted to pressure Nelly…and you did. Thus you still can be scum, but not be “stupid”.
Where is your vote by the way? I cant find it in the last couple pages. If it's on me, then why am I scum in your opinion?I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Im starting to get tired of people saying I'm the most suspicious without being able to back it up, so excuse me if this post comes across as really pissed off.
Vollkan:
1) I have refuted all the points brought against me that have indicated me to be scummy. But you dont address any of these. Give me one solid piece of evidence that I'm scum.
2) In order for me and para to be distancing (as opposed to just two townies arguing a point) then we both have to be scum. What evidence do you have that para is scum?
3) You're actually advocating a lynch based on this little evidence? You are either an idiot or scum.
4)
What? Nelly was scum? what the hell are you talking about?vollkan wrote: Reading over this, Para/Elias looks very much like distancing scum to me. Of course, the fact that Nelly was scum highly suggests that at least one other scum was on the wagon.
5) If by "substantially more on elias than pulse" you mean that the town would probably be easier to convince to lynch me than pulse, then youre right. If you're talking about evidence, then you'd be dead wrong.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Alright. As you later say, this isnt evidence against me really.vollkan wrote:
Typo....substitute Nelly for Oman and it makes sense.Elias wrote:
What? Nelly was scum? what the hell are you talking about?Vollkan wrote: Reading over this, Para/Elias looks very much like distancing scum to me. Of course, the fact that Nelly was scum highly suggests that at least one other scum was on the wagon.
Yup. Though I dont follow your logic as to why one other scum was on the wagon.vollkan wrote: Also, thanks for numbering it all; makes it so much easier.
You voted Nelly. In light of the fact that Oman is scum, this highly suggests at least one other scum on the wagon. This is not exclusive proof of YOU being scum, but it is a foundation.Elias wrote: 1) I have refuted all the points brought against me that have indicated me to be scummy. But you dont address any of these. Give me one solid piece of evidence that I'm scum.
You only address one of my main justifications. One was pressure. The other was the fact that Hermit was contributing, and that I would rather lynch someone who was not contributing as opposed as to someone who was, though i guess I didnt elaborate on this. I thought it was implied by "Hermit and you were both scummy, however, hermit was at least contributing to the game". Also, I hardly call my metagaming feeble. Jumping on a wagon and just hoping for a quicklynch is a stupid strategy as scum. It usually indicates gets people suspcicious of you, and it ends up being a one for one trade, something scum cannot afford against town. As someone as successful as scum as I am, I dont use that strategy.vollkan wrote:
Again, this is no defence in light of Oman's scumminess. Your justification is a pretty easy one "I did it to pressure". Then you go into this feeble bit of WIFOM meta-gaming.Elias wrote: Um, no. I was suspicious of both of you. Hermit and you were both scummy, however, hermit was at least contributing to the game. by jumping on your wagon I add to the pressure on you and help force you to add content to the game. By jumping on Hermit, i would have done nothing. There would essentially be no pressure on him, and if you turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully. Anyhow, I've been around this site a year, and I'm 6-1 as scum. I think of myself as a better player then to just jump on random wagons and hope for a quicklynch.
Just so we're clear, I didnt vote for Oman.vollkan wrote: Just so we're clear, your vote for Oman is a foundation for suspecting you.
How exactly was it contrived? How about using something tangible as opposed to personal opinion to indicate I'm scum? I told para that I would include my previous suspcions of OJ in evaluating him, and he seemed to have overreacted to it, which i was suspicious of him for. That is why we argued, I hardly see this as distancing.vollkan wrote: Now, we then have the several "arguments" between you are Para. The arguments seem contrived. Plus, there haven't (to my knowledge and I could be wrong) been any votes or FoSes thrown between you.
You also refer A LOT to OJ's vote. It is funny though, that you never voted for OJ.
This is the only decent evidence you have against me. However, I hardly think you should lynch based on this.vollkan wrote: Indeed, you expressed suspicion of DFN and then voted for Kerplunk.
Now, we then have Oman's behaviour. Oman, when he was under no threat of being vigged, said his preferences for vigging were:
Para
Pulse
Elias
Up to that point, barely anything had been presented against Pulse. A few comments by Hermit and something from Para (which says something).
Furthermore, Oman APPROVED of my "plan" to vig pulse and then to lynch Para (the latter of which he may well have thought avoidable). The other important detail to this plan, which I have not revealed until now, is the person who was NOT mentioned: You, Elias.
We know that Oman was scum. We can see Oman trying to protect you. At that point, Oman was NOT under threat. Hence, he had no reason to assume his role would be revealed.
Are you kidding me? How bout actually including the request for evidence of Para guilt, as I requested?vollkan wrote:
Well done; have a cookie.Elias wrote: 2) In order for me and para to be distancing (as opposed to just two townies arguing a point) then we both have to be scum.
This is pretty you scummy, that you editted my post so that you ignored my request.Elias wrote:2) In order for me and para to be distancing (as opposed to just two townies arguing a point) then we both have to be scum. What evidence do you have that para is scum?
Vollkan wrote: 3) You're actually advocating a lynch based on this little evidence? You are either an idiot or scum.
Reasons? I suppose. Reasonable evidence? I doubt it.Vollkan wrote: See above. I have my reasons.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I still dont follow you on why this would be true.vollkan wrote:
Okay, it is POSSIBLE there were no other scum on the wagon, but I think it is highly unlikely.Elias wrote: Yup. Though I dont follow your logic as to why one other scum was on the wagon.
Again, this is not true. As I said before, this was a part of my justification, but not all of it. I said that given the choice between the two players I was most suspcious of, I would vote the noncontributor. The entire argument you just made against me is under the assumption that my only motivation was that nelly was a noncontributor.vollkan wrote:
I have two major problems with this:Elias wrote: You only address one of my main justifications. One was pressure. The other was the fact that Hermit was contributing, and that I would rather lynch someone who was not contributing as opposed as to someone who was, though i guess I didnt elaborate on this. I thought it was implied by "Hermit and you were both scummy, however, hermit was at least contributing to the game". Also, I hardly call my metagaming feeble. Jumping on a wagon and just hoping for a quicklynch is a stupid strategy as scum. It usually indicates gets people suspcicious of you, and it ends up being a one for one trade, something scum cannot afford against town. As someone as successful as scum as I am, I dont use that strategy.
1) You are saying that you can justify your vote as being pro-town on the basis that you wanted to off a non-contributor. However, you then later say that it would be stupid as scum. What is preventing you from voting Nelly as scum, but covering with the "pro-town" justification of lynching a non-contributor (for the record, I think lynching someone for being unhelpful is a poor strategy)
You are responding to some of the arguments I had against Nelly, in which he accused me of attempting a quicklynch. Thats where my answer originates. If you dont hink I was attempting a quicklynch, what was scummy about my vote?vollkan wrote: 2) When you voted, the only votes were Gorckat's and Nelly's. You were hardly going for a quick lynch. The fact that you ignore the most likely course of action for a scumElias, which would be to place a vote and then wait for a wagon to stack up over time, is interesting. I never said you were seeking a "quicklynch" and, in fact, I don't think you were. A quick lynch this early would be suicidal for scum.
Three questions actually. And I have no idea. Thats why I feel this is the only good evidence you have against me.vollkan wrote: I have two questions now. They can't be answered definitely, but I want people to think about them:
Why would Oman want Pulse vigged over Elias?
Why would Oman want Pulse killed before Para?
Why did Oman support a "plan" which did not result in Elias dying at all?I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Wait, what? Are you honestly telling me I can't have more than one reason for voting someone? I thought they were both playing wierdly (and by this I meant suspiciously) but in addition I had extra reasons to vote for nelly as opposed to Hermit. I'll outline those later.vollkan wrote: Let me bring something back up, your initial post justifying your vote:
You say now that you were suspicious of both of them, so you might as well off the person who wasn't contributing. And yet, the sole basis of your suspicion of Nelly was him "playing weirdly".Elias wrote: Anyways, im suspisious of Hermit and Nelly. Both playing wierdly. For now, the vote is for nelly. vote: Nelly
This could have 2 meanings:
1) His non-contribution; or
2) His voting himself
Either way, the problem is that you voted him because he was playing weirdly but then proceed to say that you were suspicious of him and you felt that because he was a non-contributor (ie. playing weirdly) you voted him over Hermit.
The circularity to this is incredible and it basically demonstrates that you had no reason to vote Nelly over Hermit.
This screws us if we're town too. I'm betting the town decides to lynch me, finds I'm town, proceeds to lynch para ( i dunno his alignment) and if he's town, suddenly the town just had two mislynches.vollkan wrote: If either/both of you are scum, Oman has really screwed you over with his responses to my probing of him. I deliberately did not threaten Oman with vigging precisely so that he would answer under the assumption that we would not know he was scum. These questions demonstrate that Oman saw the death of Pulse as more desirable than the deaths of you two.
Um, I said several times. There was more than one reason I voted the way I did. All the people who have attacked me attack me under the assumption that the idea theyre attacking is the only reason. I thought that Hermit and Nelly were both looking scummy. This is the original rational for voting either of them. Then, there's the fact that Nelly wasnt contributing, and Hermit was. This tipped the scales in favor or voting Nelly. Also, the vote on Hermit provided no pressure, while voting Nelly accomplished something. Finally, if I voted Hermit, and Nelly came up scum, it would look like I'm distracting from a scum wagon, thus making me appear scummy, which is bad for town, seeing as I'm protown (this is the weakest rationale. So all things considered, I found Hermit and Nelly both scummy, however I had 3 extra reasons for voting Nelly.gorckat wrote:
Sorry if I'm requoting the exact same thing from earlier (I think its just an excerpt of the earlier quote- its been on the clipboard awhile before I finally sat down to break it down)Elias wrote:By jumping on Hermit, i would have done nothing. There would essentially be no pressure on him, and if you [Nelly] turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully.
If Nelly came up scum and you were seen voting Hermit, you'd be looked at as distracting the Nelly wagon. That's what I saw as being afraid of distancing, although distracting is the word you used.
The basic point I tried to make is the same- if you are acting in a manner you believe pro-town, why are you afraid of being called anti-town? By saying a townie should avoid scum tells, you imply they should the do so even if they are convinced that the wrong wagon is being pushed, if making their vote is a scum tell (a distraction).
Because you guys just aren't getting it. My reasons for voting either Hermit or Nelly: They were both playing suspiciously. This presents me with a choice of who to vote for. Now, the reasons for voting Nelly as opposed to Hermit are as follows:
1) Hermit was contributing. I would rather see a scummy player who wasn't contributing to town (nelly) lynched then a scummy player who was contributing (hermit).
2) Voting Hermit created almost no pressure, and thus accomplished almost nothing. Voting Nelly added pressure to an already mounting wagon, and thus accomplished more. Also, in case you people dont know, bandwagons are good. They creat discussion. Bandwagons do not = quicklynches, in case you were confused.
3) If Nelly came up scum, my vote for Hermit would look like a distraction, to take attention away from Nelly. Being a town player, I did not want to appear anti town. Again, this is not the strongest rationale, but simply a plus of the vote I chose.
Now, please stop accusing me like any one of these was the sole reason for my voting path. If you wish to attack my vote, attack all three reasons. Furthermore, why is my vote for Nelly scummy? Because of the logic that has still not been explained that says that a mafioso was on the wagon? The thing Vollkan says is highly likely but has never once explained why that is?I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying it screws me as town as well.vollkan wrote:
Yes, it screws you if you are town; but you are ignoring the fact that Oman favoured keeping you (and Para) alive.Elias wrote: This screws us if we're town too. I'm betting the town decides to lynch me, finds I'm town, proceeds to lynch para ( i dunno his alignment) and if he's town, suddenly the town just had two mislynches.
I never attacked you here. It's the only evidence I will accept without a fight. Why do you keep bringing it up?vollkan wrote: Oman could very easily have rejected my "plan" and then criticised me for making such a ridiculous suggestion. Instead, he approved it.
There was no advantage in Oman approving the plan if Elias, Para and Pulse are all pro-town. Indeed, in such a case there was only disadvantage insofar as he would look scummy for supporting it.
The only means by which supporting the plan would be desirable would be in keeping his scum buddies alive. Otherwise, he would be doing something ridiculously scummy when it offered him no advantages and substantial disadvantages and opportunity costs (the opportunity being the chance to criticise me).
Thats your opinion. Given the two suspects, I chose Nelly based on the contribution issue as well as pressure value and painting myself scummily if nelly was scum. You continue to attack my vote as being decided on just one factor, despite my last post.vollkan wrote: Now, your reasons:
Tremendous contradiction here!1) Hermit was contributing. I would rather see a scummy player who wasn't contributing to town (nelly) lynched then a scummy player who was contributing (hermit).
Okay, you suspected them both and you decided to target the person who was contributing less.
Personally, I think lack of contribution should not be the deciding factor, but this isn't about my opinion.
ERRR! Wrong! I suspected him not because he voted someone for noncontribution, because thats exactly what I did. I suspected him because hevollkan wrote: Hence, you had two candidates:
Hermit: You suspect because he voted someone on the basis of non-contribution rather than scumminess.advocated a lynchbased on noncontribution, a huge difference from a vote. Dont tell me why I suspected hermit unless Ive stated it beforehand, please.
Nelly was acting wierd, aka scummy, and voting himself for no apparent reason.vollkan wrote: Nelly: You suspect because "playing weird" (vague) and then choose to vote for Nelly over Hermit because.....Nelly is not contributing!
ERR! Wrong! This would be true if the reasons youvollkan wrote: In other words, the only reason you could have for suspecting Hermit was the very reason you have now repeatedly used to justify your decision to vote for Nelly.claimI suspected Hermit were the actual reasons that I did. The reason I had for suspecting Hermit was his advocation of a lynch based on noncontribution. The reason I have repeatedly used to justify my vote for Nelly is that he was not contributing. But was I advocating his lynch, or was I attempting to pressure him? Oh yes, pressure, as I've been saying in every post so far. Do you actually read these, or do you just think voting and advocating lynches are synonomous?
Thanks for admitting it. Maybe you should have asked before you simply made a post accusing me of a tremendous contradiction.vollkan wrote: I admit freely that the above analysis fails if your reason for suspecting Hermit was different, but I would love to know what such a reason is.
Are you telling me one vote would pressure you? It sure wouldnt pressure me. Again, voting for Nelly accomplished more because it created more pressure.vollkan wrote:
Hang on! You say that you suspected Hermit. If you were just voting to pressure, wouldn't it make sense to vote Hermit so to at least have SOME pressure on him.2) Voting Hermit created almost no pressure, and thus accomplished almost nothing. Voting Nelly added pressure to an already mounting wagon, and thus accomplished more. Also, in case you people dont know, bandwagons are good. They creat discussion. Bandwagons do not = quicklynches, in case you were confused.
When did I once actually advocate lynching Nelly based on his actions? If you find me one time I posted that, I will be fine being lynched. Otherwise, why are you even suspcious of me?vollkan wrote: Also, you are making a false dichotomy. It is not either a bandwagon OR a quicklynch. Nobody has suggested you sought a quicklynch; a slow lynch would have had the same outcome.
Yes, other people were criticizing him. Was anyone else voting him? It would stand out later when people were searching through in the late game.vollkan wrote:
So part of your motivation for voting was that it would protect yourself? Interesting.elias wrote: 3) If Nelly came up scum, my vote for Hermit would look like a distraction, to take attention away from Nelly. Being a town player, I did not want to appear anti town. Again, this is not the strongest rationale, but simply a plus of the vote I chose.
But this also fails because other people had criticised Hermit's action. It would have been perfectly reasonable for you to vote Hermit and, if Nelly came up scum, I really can't see you being lynched for not voting Nelly because there was a sense of suspicion against Hermit.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
What? We're talking about my reasons for voting. Theygorckat wrote:
This is no defense unless you show how all 3 things cannot be true at the same time. Then its up to us to decide which exclusive option is most likely.Elias wrote:All the people who have attacked me attack me under the assumption that the idea theyre attacking is the only reason.areall true at the same time, I'm saying people have been attacking each reason independantly as if it were the only reason I voted the way I did.
Huh? Explain in your own words how any of the reasons I used were scummy.gorckat wrote: What it looks like is you have done 3 scummy things and are getting called on them all.
I just refuted most of his points...could you come up with your own ideas before mirroring someone elses? And especially, at least listen to a persons defense before agreeing with the person attacking them.gorckat wrote: volkan's post makes a great deal of sense, and lays a good case for voting elias. In xombie's favor was oman approving a plan involving his lynch, although oman could have been counting on a townie vig to collapse the plan (which I think volkan has said himself).I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Um, alright. I dont understand whats going on with this point.vollkan wrote:Now, onto Elias's most recent posts.
See the post above.Elias wrote: I'm not ignoring it at all. I'm saying it screws me as town as well.
This is in response to one of your first points, in which you said that you wouldnt use contribution as a rationale for choosing who to vote for. thats what this is in response to.vollkan wrote:
I addressed all 3 of them. I don't know what you are saying here.Elias wrote: Thats your opinion. Given the two suspects, I chose Nelly based on the contribution issue as well as pressure value and painting myself scummily if nelly was scum. You continue to attack my vote as being decided on just one factor, despite my last post.
While it's true he made that post after someone pointed out his mistake, his original post is as follows:vollkan wrote:
Let's see Hermit's rationalisation of his vote:Elias wrote: ERR! Wrong! This would be true if the reasons you claim I suspected Hermit were the actual reasons that I did. The reason I had for suspecting Hermit was his advocation of a lynch based on noncontribution. The reason I have repeatedly used to justify my vote for Nelly is that he was not contributing. But was I advocating his lynch, or was I attempting to pressure him? Oh yes, pressure, as I've been saying in every post so far. Do you actually read these, or do you just think voting and advocating lynches are synonomous?
Hermit CLEARLY says he would unvote once OJ posted. It was a pressure tactic. Even if he said OJ should be lynched, this makes it pretty clear he was willing to take it off should OJ respond to the pressure and post properly.Hermit wrote: Yes, I realize it's a scummy thing to do. No, this won't change my opinion. I don't want some lurker coming in at the eleventh hour to drop a stupid, senseless vote that the scum all jump on for the win, or even worse, stay hidden so that it's impossible for the active towns to get a lynch on the active scum for want of a single vote.
My vote comes off when he contributes something meaningful or he gets replaced. Not a moment before. Unless somebody does something very scummy.
As such, the contradiction stands.
So this is why there is no contradiction. While I have always stood by my vote was for pressure, and NEVER said it was for advocating a lynch, hermit only said that after his first post, which advocated him being lynched pretty strongly. It's wierd you try to pass off this off as his original stance, seeing as you've quoted his original post before.TheHermit wrote:I'm starting to think we're best off killing ojpower immediatelyso his lurking, random-voting self can't kill us later when we're at LyLo. At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not, I want him gone.
Vote: ojpower
Um, here you contradict yourself. You said just a while ago there was already suspicion on him, aka pressure. Anyways, what part of "voting for nelly created more pressure than a vote on hermit wouldve" are you not getting?vollkan wrote:
One vote is still pressuring. If you suspected Hermit and he had no votes, it would make sense to vote him so that at least some pressure was there such that he wasn't getting away.Elias wrote:
Are you telling me one vote would pressure you? It sure wouldnt pressure me. Again, voting for Nelly accomplished more because it created more pressure.
Thats not what I intended. I was under the impression that my vote was being suspected for being on a bandwagon, and thus I tried to indicate why bandwagons are good and different then quicklynches. That was the intention of my point. So I guess you can throw out the discussion on this point.vollkan wrote:
I included both quotes there for a reason.Elias wrote:
When did I once actually advocate lynching Nelly based on his actions? If you find me one time I posted that, I will be fine being lynched. Otherwise, why are you even suspcious of me?Vollkan wrote:
Also, you are making a false dichotomy. It is not either a bandwagon OR a quicklynch. Nobody has suggested you sought a quicklynch; a slow lynch would have had the same outcome.
I never said YOU wanted a lynch; I did imply that if you were scum, a slow lynch would be as effective. I said that you were drawing a false dichotomy by listing the only possibilities as Pressure Bandwagon or Quicklynch
When I voted most people had already listened to hermits second post in which he claimed pressure purposes. So I wasnt going with the popular opinion. Most people were beginning to turn their eyes towards other areas, and thus my vote would have stood out.[/quote]Vollkan wrote:
...going with the majority opinion.....Elias wrote:
Yes, other people were criticizing him. Was anyone else voting him? It would stand out later when people were searching through in the late game.
My point was in response to gork who seemed to have misunderstood that point of mine. What I had said was that people were attacking each one of my points as if they were the only rationale for my vote. Like "You say you did it because of noncontribution. trying to lynch them based on just that is bad" which is very similar to something I heard. its faulted in both the apparent reasoning and my apparent goal.Vollkan wrote:
I attacked all 3. Each is fundamentally flawed. What you appear to be saying is that they were all interdependent and, hence, that (apparently) we can't refute them all in turn, which is complete garbage.Elias wrote: What? We're talking about my reasons for voting. They are all true at the same time, I'm saying people have been attacking each reason independantly as if it were the only reason I voted the way I did.
No it isnt! Hermit voted to kill another player based on lack of contribution, READ HIS FIRST POST. I voted for pressure. READ MY FIRST POST. There is a big difference.Vollkan wrote:
No you didn't!Elias wrote: I just refuted most of his points...could you come up with your own ideas before mirroring someone elses? And especially, at least listen to a persons defense before agreeing with the person attacking them.
1) is a massive contradiction.
You mean besides adding to pressure and creating discussion?Vollkan wrote: 2) is no good reason to vote on a wagon
Explain to me why its scummy of a townie to attempt to appear as protown as oppose to scummy.Vollkan wrote: 3) is just plain scummy.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Unless of course my suspicion from a long time ago was true, and that this was in fact an elaborate scum gambit. Not only would your dayvigging of scum make you appear confirmed town, but if you arranged with him this way, it makes a townie appear confirmed scum. Farfetched, but it's the only explanaiton I can come up with, because I am town.vollkan wrote:
In the post above (the one on oman) I proved Oman's actions only make sense to protect a scum partner.Elias wrote:
Um, alright. I dont understand whats going on with this point.Vollkan wrote: See the post above.
Um, no, stfu. I dont care what you seem to think it implied, he wanted nelly gone regardless of alignment.Vollkan wrote: Yes. Hermit was someone blunter than you. But read what he said more closely, he want OJ's "lurking, random-voting self" killed. This pretty much implies very strongly that Hermit only wanted OJ lynched if he continued to act like he had. ie. Pressure. You seem to be suggesting that Hermit should have said: "Voting Oj to pressure"; that would be completely ineffective.
For the second time, the contradiction is there and it is solid. You can keep digging for evasive little responses if you want, and I will just keep rebutting them.
In case you didnt get that,hermit wrote:I'm starting to think we're best off killing ojpower immediately so his lurking, random-voting self can't kill us later when we're at LyLo.At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not, I want him gone.
Vote: ojpower
Did you get it that time? HE WANTED HIM GONE, LOLZ. I really dont give a shit what he said in his next post. Of course he tried to take it back, ITS CALLED BACKTRACKING, and its considered a well known scum move when caught in a mistake. I'm not saying that he should have said he was voting for pressure, but he shouldn't have come out and said "LOLZ I WANT NELLY DEAD". Look at my vote. I did it for pressure, I didnt go to either extreme, I just voted. I dont know how you can say I'm making evasive responses, its right there in the bold text. So, you can clearly see that I was suspcious of Hermit for wanting a player dead for noncontribution (regardless of alignment), not just wanting to pressure them. But wait, there's more! It's not as if you can even compare Hermits vote to mine, because Hermit's vote was based PURELY ON THIS.hermit wrote:At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not,I want him gone.
Vote: ojpowerIt was Hermits primary reason to vote Nelly. My use of contribution was my secondary reason to vote Nelly, and I was still not using it to lynch! My actions and the actions of Hermit are different. Accept it, and stop giving Hermit excuses like, "oh he implied this" how the hell would you know what HE was trying to imply? I don't care if can't see through his backtracks, I can, and that's why I'm suspicious of him. Unless you can get in his head and find out his original motives, then I dont think you can argue with me fairly on this point.
Now, I'm not trying to misrepresent you on the pressure point, however, when there are several people putting fosses on you and questioning you, its pressure of some sort, whether you like it or not. Pressure in my opinion is just as its defined in the dictionary, not some special mafia term that has to have a vote or fos to count. It's still barely any, and my vote would still have not accomplished much, seeing as Hermit had already backtracked his way out of it and people were turning in other directions, but he had already recieved some pressure (bringing about the famous backtrack). That's also why my vote would still stand out, people were beginning to turn in other directions, and I wouldve been the only person to vote for him.
Um, no? I said that a single vote is barely any pressure. I agree that an fos and a couple of questions from others is barely anything substantial, but it's still pressure.Vollkan wrote:So, first one vote is not pressure, but then suddenly suspicion from a few people is?
No I'm not. By voting for Nelly I added pressure that led to Nelly eventually complying and adding information. Who knows whether the wagon wouldve been effective if I hadn't jumped on. If I vote for Hermit, it pressure him into backtracking, which he'd already done. If I pressure Nelly, it forces him to contribute. See why getting a player to contribute is accomplishing more than forcing a player to repeat their backtrack? ya see that?Vollkan wrote:Elias wrote: Anyways, what part of "voting for nelly created more pressure than a vote on hermit wouldve" are you not getting?
I have already addressed this; you are pulling us round in circles.
That's why my vote for hermit would accomplish less pressure and accomplish less as a whole.
I thought I had made it clear through this entire debate that noncontribution was the secondary issue which made the most difference in my choice. I probably would've written a case and voted hermit now but I keep being pestered by you and your idiotic accusations.Vollkan wrote: If you genuinely suspected Hermit, you should have voted to apply some pressure on him.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not going to quote you on the next point. My foundation was not fundamentally poor. I saw a player voting themselves, (something that is decidedly scummy in my book), and I saw another player who claimed to want a player gone without regard to alignment. However, one was at least posting and contributing, one was not. Plus hermit had already backtracked, what more did I expect my vote to do on him, pressure wise? In addition, it would look bad to vote for him with the mounting Nelly wagon anyhow, so I voted Nelly.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for the dichtomoy I drew, I have no idea what you're talking about. I was trying to explain how bandwagons and not quicklynches, and how bandwagons are actually good for the town. What issue am I supposedly ignoring? Why bandwagons are good for town? Of course you can say I'm avoiding the issue if you never tell me what the issue is.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This point is pure BS. How can you accuse someone of not going with the majority while not voting someone? Unless the person is about to lynched, the majority of people are always not voting for someone. I never said most people were beginning to vote Nelly, I said most were turning away from Hermit. I was only the third person on the Nelly wagon. For my vote on Nelly to be joining the majority, you'd have to call 2 of 12 a majority.Vollkan wrote: Yes; your vote would have stood out...that's precisely why I accused you of going with the majority by not voting hermit. Thankyou for reiterating what I said.
Vollkan wrote:
Already addressed. If you are actually suggesting that Hermit wanted OJ dead , irrespective of whether OJ started playing well, you are being very silly indeed.
You call me the silly one?hermit wrote:At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not, I want him gone.
Vote: ojpower
Firstly, no it wouldnt. Hermit would repeat his backtrack, no pressure would really be on him. The discussion surrounding Hermits vote had already been covered. And, um, dumbass, anything can lead to a lynch, a single vote, an fos, anything. As long as you keep wagons in check, a mislynch never occurs. Never, in my experience as town, has a wagon gone awry and lead to an unwanted lynch. Never. It really rarely happens at all. Before you say things, get experience to back it up. Look at some games, you'll see it's true.Vollkan wrote: Firstly, a vote on Hermit would be just as effective in generating pressure and discussion. Secondly, your logic is poor because a wagon can lead to a lynch.
I dont care how easy of an excuse it is. Jumping on the Nelly wagon to add pressure to it is the proper protown play in my situation.Vollkan wrote: A justification of "pressure" is a very easy excuse and one which, when we consider your other motivations and Oman's slip-ups, looks very interesting.
This is true, except you leave out the final point, Mislynch = Bad. That's why I always keep wagons in check. If I feel a mislynch could occur, I unvote. And look, the wagon got to -1, Nelly is now contributing, and no mislynch. Would you look at that? It's almost as if my 12 games of experience were right.Vollkan wrote: Pressure = Good
Bigger wagon = More Pressure
Therefore, Bigger Wagon = Good
Yup.Vollkan wrote: You are openly professing that you voted Nellypartlyon the basis that other people were voting Nelly.
I covered this. Theyre not.Vollkan wrote: Your other reasons are complete garbage,
No dumbass. You're drawing false connections. Wagons are good for town. They create more pressure then a single vote, especially since Hermit had already done his backtracking. The fact that it would stand out, as I've already said, was the least important reason for my vote. The fact that other people were voting Nelly is not only connected the the "standing out" point, but also to the pressure point. If you're accepting that more votes is more pressure, and you're accepting that there were more votes on Nelly, then guess what? You just accepted one of my points, not just the one about standing out.Vollkan wrote: so this boils down to you saying that you voted Nelly because everyone else was and you didn't want to stand out.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I thought several times before this post, but you know what? I'm pissed off. I'm a vanilla townie, and if anyone here had more than about 3 months of experience they would realize my play and reasoning was not suspicious in the least. I'll use any type of language I choose to, since at this point my words are falling on deaf ears. Maybe a little extra enthusiasm will get it through their thick skulls. Thanks for your time, mister mod. And have a happy birthday.
-Edited by the moderatorI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Are you kidding me? Each one of those massive posts takes about 15-30 minutes to write. I've barely had any time to look for scum. I need to reread before I say anything, but I'm suspicious of Hermit, because I dont believe his backtrack for one second, and Vollkan, since I'm town, the fact that Oman indicated me last on his list seems to be too convenient to be a coincidence. I seriously think that Oman and Vollkan (mafia aligned dayvig) had this worked out as a planned gambit. But I need to reread some to get my ideas cemented.curiouskarmadog wrote:
You have spent a lot of time defending yourself, but little time actually looking for scum...why is that?
As to where my vote is...I'm pretty sure I'm not voting anyone. I unvoted Nelly when I responded to his attacks, and I've been defending myself from various players since.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
What part of my previous statements "In addition" and "This was my weakest reason" do you not understand? Despite all my posts on the subject, you still attack this reasoning as if it were the only rationale I used when determining my vote.gorckat wrote:
You continue to say not looking bad is a reason not to vote someone you are suspicious of.Elias wrote:In addition, it would look bad to vote for him with the mounting Nelly wagon anyhow, so I voted Nelly.
Why is that? No one has once explained to me why it is bad for a townie to be consious of appearing protown. My record as town is 1-4, I'm always very concious of appearing town, since I do say badly at it usually. If this is your rationale for lynching me, you had better come up with some reason as to why trying to appear protown is a scummy play.gorckat wrote: After voting Nelly, you go round a little with xombie, then address Nelly's suspicions where you first said (as I've quoted before):
I just don't like the whole 'avoiding scum tells despite suspicions is a good thing'. Townies should play fearlessly.Elias wrote:and if you turned up scum and I had in the heat of your wagon voted for him instead, it would have appeared that I was simply distracting from your wagon purposefully.
Extreme loss of temper? Reason doesnt work? I hardly call my anger extreme, and I consider it to be well warranted. I only namecalled once, and that was to call vollkan a dumbass over one point. Please do not go over my latest arguments and say "ZOMG! he name called, now i can disregard everything he says. Not once in that post did I abandon reason. How bout actually reading about how it wasnt a contradiction on my part? How bout addressing my arguments?gorckat wrote: The extreme loss of temper also doesn't ingratiate me. What you basically said is, 'Reason doesn't work, so let me name call.'
And now you vote for me. What are your reasons? You are simply jumping on because you can. First, you have not responded to any of my arguments, and let Vollkan do that work for you. Second, Vollkan hasnt even responded to my most recent proof that I didnt make a contradiction. Thus my first and most prominent reason for making my vote stands. I have no idea why I'm being voted by practically everyone. I want an explanation from Gorkcat and the hermit as to why theyre voting me.gorckat wrote:vote: Elias_the_thiefI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Alright, my suspicions/opinions of everyone
Vollkan:Despite all of your arguments against me, and the fact that I feel you're ignoring me in key places and having key misunderstandings, I actually do think of you as protown, due to your behavior in respect to Nelly's actions, as well as the fact that you vigged Oman, which does count for something. Wow, That was a long sentance. I think of you as misguided town.Official Opinion: Probably Town.
DeepFriedNinja:The beginning of the game was dominated by his wierd scenarios, and by what I saw as an overreaction to some pressure. However, his interaction with Oman gives me a town feel, although it could have been an attempt at distancing.Official Opinion: Undecided, leaning towards town.
SPAG:All his posts have given me a town feel, though no one post stands out.Official Opinion: Town
Paradoxombie:I retain my suspicion for OJ unto him, which he didnt like and tried to argue with me. And he seemed to overreact to it. However, he attacks Oman when no one else was really. This makes me feel that he's probably town. So I am conflicted on him.Official Opinion: Undecided/Conflicted
CuriousKarmaDog:Throughout the whole game CKD has been opportunistic. He also thinks DFN is scum, and jumps on him for his drama, but it also seems that this is just following Oman, who also said that DFN was likely scum for his drama and editting of a quote (not that big a deal in this case). I also dont like this post, where he tries to control the towns conversation:curiouskarmadog wrote:
right now, you and OJ are the discussionThe Deepfried Ninja wrote:alright i realize that my 3 page manifesto followed by no vote looks really dumb. I have no answer for u Im sorry I screwed up. Anything else I do or say is only going to have you asking me more questions. lets just watch the discussion unfold and try to find some scum.
Official Opinion: Probably Scum
Hermit:It was a plus in my mind that he thought OJ and DFN were town, but a big minus that he wanted OJ lynched regardless of alignment. Especially since he never even mentions the possibility of replacement. I think of his second post as a backtrack. Furthermore, he opportunistically jumps on me without responding to any of my points, simply saying that I misrepresented him. However, I was simply stating the exact thing he said in his original post.Official Opinion: Probably Scum.
So most of my suspicions are currently on Hermit and CKD, though I need to finish rereading, because I missed some players in my reread. (gorkcat, nelly, sirtornado)I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Thank you so much Vollkan. I am also getting really irritated about people jumping on me for your arguments. I understand a vote from you, but gorkcat and CKD seem to have just jumped on. Also, when looking over the post from Oman, do you think he was just posting a scumlist that he thought would fit in with the town? that what his post looks like to me:vollkan wrote:My point is that I don't like the fact that 4 people (Gorckat included, though his current behaviour changes that) have raised suspicion of Elias entirely on the basis of my arguments; none of whom actually explained HOW Elias was wrong.
Each person was vague about it.
What bugs me is that I don't think my arguments against Elias are powerful enough to warrant the agreement we have seen. That strikes me as very odd and I can't help but wonder if scum are following me on the basis that I look pro-town in light of the vigging of Oman.
Also, Vollkan, do you care to respond to my last post in my defense? I know it came across pretty rude, but I think my points on the contradiction issue should clear me on that account. I find it kind of odd you never addressed it in your latest post. However, I am in no means asking you to make another giant post. I think these are only losing the rest of the town, it's probably hard to keep up.Oman wrote:Would you prefer that I vig pulse?
Para
Pulse
Elias
I didn't want you to misinterpret a "yes" as "more than Paradox"
I would, right now, prefer you didn't vig anyone just yet. I would want most if not all players to re-read and post a scumlist.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
So apparently you're voting me based off of the fact that Vollkan makes better arguments? If you're conceding the OJ thing, you're conceding the main reasoning I had for voting nelly over hermit, because he's been falsely calling it a contradiction. If I won that point, I dont think it matters too much if Vol wins the small points.gorckat wrote:I thought I'd said something like this earlier, but I ahve felt volkan's arguments were stronger than your defenses. A few points you are correct on, such as Hermit's initial vote post saying he wanted oj gone. But the sum total seems to work against you.
At the end of this post, I'd like to add that I need to add Nelly to my list of people that need to comeup with reasons for voting me, and pulse to my list of people that I need to reread on.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I thank you only because the town refuses to listen to me, but will listen to you. By bringing it up, you have ensured something actually is done about it.vollkan wrote: Don't thank me. I'm not doing this to help you in any way; it's just that I am being wary of what looks like opportunism.vollkan wrote:
Also, unless I am missing something, CKD has not voted you.
I was talking about this post. I'm just saying that he accused me of suspicious play, but was very vague. In retrospect, this post wasnt nearly as scummy as I though, since the purpose is to turn conversation towards Para, who has seemed to have faded.curiouskarmadog wrote:For what it is worth here, I think Elias and Hermit (will provide a PBP if needed) has had some very scummy play here, Day 1. However, I do not think either should be the lynch today. I think Para would be the play for today.
I forgot to add him to my official list of people, he belongs there. But I mentioned the way he jumped on me in my analysis on him and I called him one of my top suspects. Hardly ignoring him.vollkan wrote: I am a little intrigued by the fact you are representing CKD as being as opportunistic as Gorckat, whilst ignoring Hermit who gave the least reasoning of anyone.
Alright. This doesnt change the fact that he jumped on me for no reason. The unvote seems like backtracking to me.vollkan wrote: Gor has unvoted you.
I divided this section into small parts to better refute.vollkan wrote: Hermit said he wanted Nelly gone. Yes. That is suspicious, and is one of the things that makes me wary of Hermit's latent opportunism.
However,1) such a vote also has the effect of pressuringand, hence,2) it is implied that he will unvote should the votee begin posting. I know you don't think I can look for implications, but the thing is that3) if you use Hermit's vote as a foundation for suspicion and then do something very similar yourself (even though you don't explicitly say: "I want you dead"), there is a contradiction.
1) Yes, it had the effect of pressuring. But as you have admitted, it was not intended to pressure, it was intended to lynch. You're accusing me of having a contradiction in terms of the reasoning behind my vote, not what the overall effect was. Therefore, it shouldnt at all matter what happened as an inadvertant effect.
2) What are you talking about? A player could be sure that someone is scum, and vote them, with complete intentions of lynching them. Even though this hypothetical vote is intended purely for lynching, it still puts pressure on the recipient. So how does the fact that the votecausedpressure possibly imply that the vote would be taken off?
3) Again, I don't see how What I did was the same. I used the fact that hermit was contributing more as a way of choosing which of two suspicious players I would vote. He used it as a sole rationale for lynching a player.
The fact that in this particular case Nelly was just attempting to pull votes does not change the fact that my move to pressure Nelly was the correct play in this situation. Read other games, it gets people to talk.vollkan wrote: You can't justify your vote by the fact that Nelly began to contribute, because Nelly's actions were a ploy to pull votes (one voter of which is a confirmed scum).
How does that ignore it? I never specifically say "slow wagon" or "fast wagon" in my post. Thats a distinction you seem to have drawn on your own. I dont see what your problem is with this supposed slow lynch anyhow. If it is how you make, having case in between adding votes, then whats wrong? If there is a lot of convincing cases involved, its probably a good, informative lynch.vollkan wrote: Okay.
You say:
Pressure Wagons = Good
Quicklynches = Bad
The problem here is that this ignores the possibility of a slow lynch wagon. As in, you put a vote on, raise a case, a few more votes, a bit more case, then a lynch. That is the dichotomy. You raise only 2 options: Pressure or Quicklynch whilst ignoring a slowlynch.
No I dont. I justify it on the basis that it almost always turns out alright. I used Nelly as an example of this.vollkan wrote: You then say that you keep wagons in check and justify it on the basis that Nelly turned out alright. Nelly, however, was ALWAYS going to turn out right; it was a trap.
Check my games. I keep wagons in check regardless of alignment. This boils down to WIFOM, since I believe if I can keep a wagon in check and effectively gain the towns trust as mafia, why not do it? I could easily find a better case against someone and advicate that lynch. Since I keep wagons in check in both alignments, my point stands. Go ahead and read my games as scum, as shown in my wiki.vollkan wrote: Saying that you "keep wagons in check" is appealing to a meta reason which doesn't work because it only functions if you are town. As in, you are basically saying: "There was no problem because I wouldn't have let a lynch happen because I am town." The fact it is a defence which is dependent on alignment makes it dubious.
It's good that we have this boiled down to a couple of key points. I'll address another one now. Why bandwagons are always good.
Reasons bandwagons are good:
1) By bandwagoning a player, you pressure them into possibly making a mistake as scum, and revealing a major scum tell.
2) By bandwagoning, you can find oppurtunistic players who just jump on, and when later questioned, come up with no reasons for their vote.
3) By bandwagoning, you find a reliable record of who defended who, which becomes vital later in the game, when you have the alignment of a few players known for sure. This works with the opportunistic players who jump on with no reason, if you find that the player wagoned was town.
4) It will usually start other conversation, giving scum more opportunities to mess up, and/or contradict themselves.
Reasons bandwagons are bad:
1) There is a slight possibility of there being a mislynch, if the wagon gets out of control. Even if this happens, you still get good information since
-A) You can question the much later arrivals to the wagon for reasons to their vote, and especially hammering, and possibly find scum in this manner,
-B) You still have the info from the wagon that you would've had even if the mislynch hadnt occured. You still have a crapload of info.
And again, a bandwagon going awry is very unlikely, since most of the protown players will be keeping it in check. Also, if this supposed "slow lynch" occurs, so what? If there are good cases involved, I would support the lynch. If there weren't any good cases, I would pull off when I thought a mislynch was imminent, just as with any other bandwagon.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
1) Ok, here's the thing. I did not use the noncontribution as a way of determining who was more scummy. The noncontribution was the sole reason Hermit wanted Nelly gone, and his sole basis for any suspicion he had on Nelly. Now, if I had said, I found them both scummy, but the noncontribution of Nelly made her more worthy of a lynch, or more suspicious, then I would be guilty of a contradiction. However, I did not think the noncontribution made Nelly more worthy of a lynch, or more suspicious in any way. I simply said that her noncontribution made her a better place to vote, not based on additional scumminess, but based on the fact that voting for a noncontributor over a contributor would help the town more (getting the noncontributor to have more pressure, and begin talking). This is why it is not a contradiciton. I simply said that Nelly's noncontribution made my vote on her more useful to the town than a vote on hermit.
2) This maybe so. However, much like the bandwagon point, this is degenerating simply into opinion on a matter that neither of us can determine, since neither of us actually are Hermit. Neither of us know what he was actually doing. Perhaps you are even right, but at the time of my decision, that's not how I read Hermits play. Again, this is all opinion.
3) I covered this up there. I did not think that Nelly was any scummier then hermit based on noncontribution, I thought that a vote for her would better help the town by forcing her to contribute. So this really doesnt undermine my reasons at all.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I said very early on that I felt Nelly was suspicious for his wierd play. You never really asked me for details on this. First, Nelly seemed to be playing normally for 4 pages, and then suddenly decided to vote himself for no reason. Then, after only 3 votes, Nelly claimed vanilla townie. Claiming with 3 votes? Seemed wierd to me. I guess you could say that the noncontribution was a very small part of it, but I didnt find it suspicious that he wasn't contributing. Specifically, I thought it was suspicious that he was contributing, and suddenly decided to stop, without reason. The main reason I saw him as suspicious was that he voted himself midgame, after the random stage was over, and since he claimed without necessity.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
This is the big deal I supposedly made? You already accused me Hermit of outlining it for scum, and me of making a big deal, but already I did was mention it. I find it interesting that you fos me and not Hermit, when you could have easily fossed us both.Elias_the_thief wrote:
Vollkan is not cleared. It could easily be a gambit to make one of the scum appear confirmed in our eyes.Albert B. Rampage wrote:
This is an open setup. There are 3x mafia, 3x masons that win with the town, and1x day-vig that can be amafia, mason or townie.
Further, youre suspicious of me because I made a play which is (in your opinion) the wrong play? Thats ludicrous. The fact that someone makes (what you think) is a bad play, does not prove they are scum.
This marks a sharp rise in my suspicion of you, since you make most of the post as if it were a case against hermit, not me, yet fos me and neglect hermit. Given that I am highly suspicious of Hermit, this makes me think of you as a possible scumbuddy to him.
And then you fos me, and not him. Now, I plan to finish my read on the players I originally missed, but I can tell you right now my vote will probably land on Hermit.Paradoxombie wrote:You may be giving ideas to scum.Hermit basically laid out the entire plan for the scumwhen I see no need to, atmI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
The rest of my opinions....
SirTornado:None of his posts seem scummy to me. His posts agree with many of mine, and he seems to have town's best interest at heart.Official Opinion: Probably Town
Nelly:Nelly starts out playing normally, then suddenly stops contributing, actually refusing to, and then votes herself for no apparent reason. Very wierd behavior, and thus I found Nelly scummy early on. But wait! It was all a trap. Ah, it is all explained, hurray. Though later, Nelly jumps on me for no reason. However, after his explanation, I don't think his choice to vote me was as suspicious as I at first thought. I'm getting a slight noob vibe more than anything from him.Official Opinion: Probably town (semi noobish)
Gorckat:I've thought of Gork as town most of the game, though his vote for me is wierd. He misreads me three times, then attacks me as if one of my 3 reasons was the only reason for my vote, though I've repeated told people this is unfair. He unvotes later. Besides that, he appears town.Official Opinion: Undecided, slightly scummy looking
Pulsewidth:Um, barely enough posts to analize.Official Opinion: Undecided, slightly scummy looking
So yeah. After analizing everyones play, I still find CKD and the Hermit to be the most suspicious. A new entry is Paradoxombie, who is made suspicious by his nonfos of hermit. My vote will come on hermit, the most likely scum in my opinion.
In addition to my previous analysis hermit now continues to backtrack when he unvotes me and says he needs to reread things, and never addressed his bad reasons for voting me. in the case of para, he now fosses me and not hermit, though we did the same thing. This leads me to think of him as much scummier. Although I'm not a fan, I can easily sum up all my suspicion as such:I wrote:Hermit:It was a plus in my mind that he thought OJ and DFN were town, but a big minus that he wanted OJ lynched regardless of alignment. Especially since he never even mentions the possibility of replacement. I think of his second post as a backtrack. Furthermore, he opportunistically jumps on me without responding to any of my points, simply saying that I misrepresented him. However, I was simply stating the exact thing he said in his original post.Official Opinion: Probably Scum.vote: Hermit.
FoS: Paradoxombie, curiouskarmadog
minor FoS: Pulsewidth, gorkcatI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
In your opinion. When a player has been playing normally for some time, then suddenly decideds to vote themselves and shut down, its suspicious. You may not agree, but I see it as a scum tell. Furthermore, at the time of my vote, Nelly had not revealed her little trap.vollkan wrote: 1) is not suspicious. It is weird and pointless, but makes "sense" in light of the intended trap.
Claiming prematurely is suspicious. Again, I made my vote before the trap was revealed. My reasons for voting were invalid when the trap was revealed. But beforehand, they were perfectly fine reasons for being suspicious.vollkan wrote: 2), as I have said, is not suspicious but just part of the trap.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Wow. I'm not going to try and argue that I mentioned it more times then I thought, but I am going to argue that I didnt make more of a big deal out of it then was necessary in my opinion.
Paradoxombie wrote:
Already covered, barely anything.Elias_the_thief wrote:
This is the big deal I supposedly made? You already accused me Hermit of outlining it for scum, and me of making a big deal, but already I did was mention it.Elias_the_thief wrote:
Vollkan is not cleared. It could easily be a gambit to make one of the scum appear confirmed in our eyes.Albert B. Rampage wrote:
This is an open setup. There are 3x mafia, 3x masons that win with the town, and1x day-vig that can be amafia, mason or townie.
Even though, you admitted that the original reason, wasnt that huge, and also that this is based on your opinion of what was the protown play, and you admitted it warranted a minor fos. I dont see any reason that finding the quote that you originally wanted to use against me in the case should actually move a minor fos up to a vote.Elias_the _thief wrote:
Why do you think he's town aligned? One mafioso dead in return for having one be confirmed in the eyes of the town? Seems like a sacrifice any mafia group would be willing to make.curiouskarmadog wrote: ok, well seems to me that vollkan is a town aligned vig, thus the public demostration of his kill. It is in the mafia best interest to keep confirmed townies at a mininum...there is no point for the mafia to take one of us out, when there is a confirmed townie. the mafia wants to have the most unconfirmed townies voting as possible.Elias_the_thief wrote:clear him. I think this was justified.
Elias_the_thief wrote:I dont think we should lynch, im just saying he shouldnt be cleared. I'm not necessarily talking to only you when I say that, but the whole town.
This was response to CKD's stupid false dilemna post.
Um, no. Oman may not be good at appearing town, but if he thought he was going to be dayvigged, (and I think he realized) he wouldve created a list that would hurt the town.Paradoxombie wrote: And then this is the clincher:
(this time the bold is just for accentuation)
In the part I italicized you suggest that Oman mentioned you as a way to get you lynched. Well this admits that you think Oman mentioning you is damning evidence, SO damning that he must've been out to get you. This is BS, Oman was confused and acting slightly sycophantic to volkan.Elias_the_thief wrote: I need to reread before I say anything, but I'm suspicious of Hermit[.....] and Vollkan, since I'm town,the fact that Oman indicated me last on his list seems to be too convenient to be a coincidence.I seriously think that Oman and Vollkan (mafia aligned dayvig) had this worked out as a planned gambit.
Basically, yes. Maybe vollkan was involved maybe he wasnt. At the time I suspected it, though I dont anymore.Paradoxombie wrote: He could've just been making up suspicions and prefferences. Maybe he actually realized his own suspect status(it's not that hard to see that volkan was out to get him) and want you to get mislynched later.
"Seriously think" in that post is being used to mean "seriously suspect". By making a big point of the "seriously think" you're really blowing this out of proportion.Paradoxombie wrote: But you go as far as to use Volkan's unconfirmed-ness as a defense. It's stupid. You think Oman's preference of you is so significant that you now suspect Volkan. Volkan has done nothing seriously suspect! There's no reason to "seriously think" that the whole thing was a plan to get you.
I also did it to bring up the point with CKD. The only reason that I brought it up more is because CKD argued with me on the topic, and not with Hermit.Paradoxombie wrote:
Hermit is a newb and while he did lay out the plan, it was to try and explain the possibility to ckd. He didn't actually bring up the topic, and he didn't bring it up again.
Yet now you vote for me. Interesting how quickly that minor fos became a vote.Paradoxombie wrote:Yes, I only made a minor FOS on you for it.
Paradoxombie wrote: Well it's a good thing you called me on this because now that I remeber and look at that last quote, I'm willing to upgrade my FOS
vote:Elias_the_thief
btw, my vote is based solely on the things I've mentioned. Most of the things people have been attacking Elias over before haven't bothered me much.
Furthermore, by bringing up the issue again in day 1, you're doing the exact thing that Hermit and I did. You're drawing attention to the fact that we are unsure of Vollkans alignment, the very thing that supposedly makes me suspect. But even more telling then this is the fact that you ignore my analysis on other players, ignore my case on hermit, ignore my huge conversation with him, nor even willing to address those points. No, you dont do any of the possible protown things you could do. You search through the thread for an excuse to vote me without having to piggyback vollkan, and you come up with this tiny little playing mistake on my part which you somehow turn into a scumtell. A scumtell, which you are now in fact guilty of. Excellent work Para. In fact, not only are you attacking me on this, but neglecting to attack Hermit on the same point, as well as neglecting to even look at any other scumtells that anyone else have given.
Now, let's look at this. We still have time before a deadline is set. There are other players who have just been sitting back and letting this unfold. What reason is there to attack me, when I've been under pressure the whole day, instead of trying to attack the people who have been sitting back? That a playing mistake on your part, because what more can you pressure me into doing? I've defended myself all I can. Unless of course you seriously plan to lynch on this little piece of evidence, your vote on me is definately a playing mistake (if youre protown). I suppose according to your logic it deserves an fos.
Anyways, what I'm trying to say here, is will you people lay off me? I've been responding to your attacks all day, I'm probably the second biggest poster and contributor to the town, and I've posted my thoughts on every single player, something no one else has done. I assure you that if you lynch me I will turn up protown.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Your avatar is male, and you have a female name. It is confusing. In a game where I've been under constant pressure, I really dont have time to worry too much about which it is, seeing as it is COMPLETELY unrelated to the game. Also, you're attacking me and not at all the actual points I make, which is in fact an ad hominem logical fallacy. And after the big deal you make about it, you don't even happen to give clarification, ensuring that this kind of mistake will be made again and again. Not only that, but there is so much to discuss in the game, yet you choose to attack my choice of pronouns. Thank you Nelly, you are the most protown player I've ever seen.Nelly632 wrote:
And I am the NOOB, I wonder if your opinions on this game matter at all you might think someone is scum but how reliable is that if you cant even make up your mind as to if you think I am a MAN OR WOMAN...Nelly: Nelly starts out playing normally, then suddenly stops contributing, actually refusing to, and then votesherselffor no apparent reason. Very wierd behavior, and thus I found Nelly scummy early on. But wait! It was all a trap. Ah, it is all explained, hurray. Though later, Nelly jumps on me for no reason. However, afterhisexplanation, I don't think his choice to vote me was as suspicious as I at first thought. I'm getting a slight noob vibe more than anything fromhim. Official Opinion: Probably town (semi noobish)I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Bold is Para.
"Why then, but not now? What changed?"
What changed? I had three pages worth of debate with Vollkan. Thats a lot to analize. I get a town feeling from him now which I didnt have before.
"You can replace it with "seriously suspect" all you want, you still had no real reason to believe that Volkan was involved. "I felt that the conversation and move to dayvig was too fast, and didnt seem natural. Thats where most of my suspicion that it was a scum gambit came from.
"Whatever. I haven't cleared the Hermit or anything. But if it will make you feel better.
Fos: Hermit"
wow. Backtrack much?
"You haven't refuted. Do you want to argue that bringing up Volkan's unconfirmed status was necessary or a good idea?"
I was arguing with CKD (someone I was suspicious of). Since he was trying to clear someone, and I was suspicious of him, I wanted to make sure that the point was not accepted. Also, as I said, I thought the move to dayvig was not natural, and thus I wanted to point out the possibility of a gambit. Maybe it wasn't the best idea, but at the time, I felt it was necessary.
"It's a pretty damn scummy quote"
However you claim that it was the original quote the fos should have been based on. If you already had said quote in mind when fossing me, why did finding it turn the minor fos into a vote?
"You did it for no reason. I did it to find scum. I specifically pointed out that if you had a good reason I'd have had no problem"Ahem? I did it pursuit of finding scum to a much higher extent then you claim to now. I was refuting the claims of someone I found scummy, then the later times because CKD was arguing with me on the point.
"I owe it to you to address your suspicions when I attack you?"
No. But a protown player would, however, look at other peoples suspicions and address them, not just one persons, especially when that one person has been pressure all day.
"I don't know what's more protown than trying to find scum"
How is what you're doing going to find scum? What more do you expect me to do, say "golly gee, I guess I've been had" and stop arguing? I've been pressured like hell, the only thing that attacking me here is doing is giving further oppurtunity for those that arent contributing, (or those that are suspicious but werent really pressured) an opportunity to remain in the shadows.
"Conjecture"
yet you do not refute it.
"Already adressed. But my primary attack on you is beyond simply suggesting it"
Its not already addressed. You claim I did it for no good reason, but thats simply wrong. I already said it was to refute CKD's point. That is my reason. If you claim its "no good" then fine, but that doesnt prove that it is "no good".
"Not helping. In fact, none of this paragraph is helping."
Huh? Thats because this entire paragraph was an attack on you. You basically just said "OMGUS! This paragraph is an attack on me so now im more suspicious!"
"Volkan wanted to know why I suspected you"And I want you to know that its a BS tell. You honestly think that this little playing mistake is more suspicious than hermits repetitive backtracks and his notion to lynch based on inactivity? Especially when Hermit did all that in addition to doing the same thing youre attacking me for doing?
Now let's weigh this one scumtell that you have against the protown things I have done, which you conveniently left out of your response:
I checked. I am the top poster, plus I, unlike some other players, respond to every point that is brought against me. And I'm calling it right now, I will be the lynch at deadline. Despite the fact that I will probably be lynched, I typed up all my suspicions and feelings, so that when I'm dead and cleared as town, you guys will just maybe take them into account. After all that protown behavior, you want me lynched, because I made a possible playing mistake by mentioning that Vollkan wasnt cleared, for two good reasons? I dont get how you work.I wrote:I've been responding to your attacks all day, I'm probably the second biggest poster and contributor to the town, and I've posted my thoughts on every single player, something no one else has done.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Bold are previous points, with their authors next to them. Italics are my new points.
me - wow. Backtrack much?
para - Not really, I can choose to indicate my suspicion of the hermit whenever I want. You've just decided to make a big deal about it in this argument.
Calling people suspicious in a selective manner is suspicious, since it suggests something about your alignment/relationship with the other person. The fact that you now fos Hermit, who you said wasnt suspicious in your original post, indicates that you're only doing it because of suspicion against you. If I hadnt brought it up, you probably wouldve never changed it. Thus, it is a backtrack, and suspicious.
para - Conjecture
me - yet you do not refute it.
para - I can't refute a statement
I dont see why not, unless of course, the statement is true.
Para - I made a massive post explaining how it clearly benefitted scum. If you want to say it was more worthwhile to argue with Ckd, go ahead and say it, but I think I'm closer to proving it wasn't than you are to proving it was.
Alright, I'm not refuting that it benefits scum. However, it was a playing mistake, and I do feel it benefitted town at least some by questioning CKD. I guess we'll have to disagree on who it benefitted more.
The rest of your points are you not believing me, so I won't address them. I'll take the point about finding the quote giving renewed scumminess to my actions, and the fos to vote transition seems less odd to me now. I'm glad to see some one say "Elias is right", for once, and I'm glad you have actually agreed to look at other suspects.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
Yes, it shows that it is not necessarily scummy. However, the fact that this one time it turned out to be a trap doesnt change the fact that usually play like that is a scumtell. You can either except or not, but in my experience it is usually scum behavior.vollkan wrote:
It doesn't matter that the trap wasn't revealed. My point was that, hypothetically, play like Nelly's is not necessarily scummy.Elias wrote:
In your opinion. When a player has been playing normally for some time, then suddenly decideds to vote themselves and shut down, its suspicious. You may not agree, but I see it as a scum tell. Furthermore, at the time of my vote, Nelly had not revealed her little trap.Vollkan wrote: 1) is not suspicious. It is weird and pointless, but makes "sense" in light of the intended trap.
Because it's very anti town. The only scenario possible in which it would be a protown play would be Nelly's trap. But this barely ever happens, and I didnt think it was a trap when it first happened due to the fact that Nelly is new to the game. Any other scenario, it hurts the town. I find that any behavior that very subtley hurts the town is likely to be a scum tell.vollkan wrote: Nelly demonstrated that himself with the trap. There is nothing suspicious about it; saying you see it as suspicious is no justification either. It just leads to another question: why do you see such play as suspicious?
Again, this boils down to experience. In my experience, those that break down and claim prematurely are usually noob scum. Again, accept it or not, it wont change that it was a scumtell in my opinion.vollkan wrote:
But WHY is prematurely saying "I am vanilla" suspicious? Odd, yes indeed, but it is not a scum tell.Elias wrote:
Claiming prematurely is suspicious. Again, I made my vote before the trap was revealed. My reasons for voting were invalid when the trap was revealed. But beforehand, they were perfectly fine reasons for being suspicious.Vollkan wrote: 2), as I have said, is not suspicious but just part of the trap.
Vollkan, niether side will ever win a battle of what is a scum tell. We will continue to argue back and forth on the subject, but it boils down to personal opinion, and personal experience. I suggest we stop arguing on this topic now, because we're never going to get anywhere, and it will only hurt the town, when the more important duscussion in my opinion will be:
1) What Hermit has to say for himself,
and
2) What paradoxombie says when he looks into other scum possibilities, as he promised to.
Though I'm perfectly open to arguing it with you if you wish. I just fail to see a point in doing so.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
1) I still dont see how Vollkan made me look bad in that argument. It mainly came down to an issue of opinion in the end.TheHermit wrote:1) You spend three pages making someone look bad, and2) then wonder why people people vote for the guy you're yelling at?Most people would take that as a sign that you're doing your job well. Either that or you're very skilled at propaganda. Point is, I briefly skimmed the contents of your diatribes,3) picked up the relevant points (those being, "Elias is being shifty and suspicious as heck"),and acted on them only to find you biting and4) snarling at my heels for reasons I'm still not entirely clear on.
2) This is perfectly reasonable. Jumping on with bad reasons is very suspect in my opinion.
3) I dont think that Vollkan made any points to that affect.
4) Because you didnt actually make any arguments of your own to attack me, besides the supposed "misrepresentation", which was in fact, only me choosing not to believe your second post (which you only made when pressure, I doubt you would have made it otherwise).I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
1) It's even worse than basing your suspicions. You said you didnt care about alignment. So you werent even suspicious.
2) No argument here.
3) Excuse me? I responded to every fricking point that was brought against me, and never evaded a question once. How exactly am I "dodgy" or "shifty"?I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I dont recall him calling his points bad. I recall that he said the they werent quite strong enought that people should be using them as a basis to advocate a lynch, which is what it looked like when basically the whole game was piling on.TheHermit wrote:When you yourself admit that your points are garbage, what else am I supposed to say? I thought they were compelling at the time, but they lose a lot of weight when you yourself say, "By the way, I don't believe in that".
How did I misrepresent your vote? Look back at your original post. Then look at you second post and tell me thats not a backtrack. Then tell me that my interpretation of your vote, even if it was wrong, was a bad interpretationTheHermit wrote: My explanation for the Elias thing remains as such: I did not have the time to fully read the interrogation bit by bit, and I didn't like how he was constantly misrepresenting my oj vote (you understood my reasoning at the time; what changed there?).
You know, instead of reading incorrectly and posting poorly, then having to cover with this appeal to emotion, you couldve told us that you were having RL troubles before you posted your thoughts. If you had RL issues, no one would have minded if you sat out and got caught up later.TheHermit wrote: Your entire argument with your vote is, "If you were town you'd play perfectly and you would automatically notice everything and it's not my fault if you've been looking for a job and had dentist appointments and a death in the family, you should read four pages of posts that appeared overnight without getting bleary-eyed and resorting to skimming because only scum would do that".
I dont care for Vollkans interrogation style either. He seems to force contradictions on you even when you havent made them (through all too literal interpretation). However, I feel you are scum for several reasons, and I think his investigation is correct this time. If you cant handle it, get replaced and dont play with him again.TheHermit wrote: For that matter, being on the receiving end of your witch hunt has given me a new perspective on your investigation style. Now that I am forced to read it in detail, I have become disillusioned of it and find it lacking. I suppose next you'll say, "Changing your mind when you receive new information is scummy"? And if I'm noticing it for the first time, YES, it's new to me.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
You did not say they were good points. You said that I was dodgy and shifty. I was openly addressing his points, and you should not have got that impression. I dunno, I just really think youre scum.
I see your point about Vollkans "contradictions", however, he is right in most of his attacks.
"I thought that's what you said."
"I briefly skimmed the contents of your diatribes, picked up the relevant points "
Is not a contradiction. He skimmed it, but thought you said something you didnt. Its the result of skimming, and still suspicious, but not a contradictionI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
he couldve gotten the general impression off of something he thought you said. *shrugs*. I dunno. Even if he didnt contradict himself, its probably because of the way you're pressuring him, and it doesnt seem too major to me. This is why I dont like your form of scumhunting, Vollkan. I think the evidence against is enough for a lynch anyways, butt I really dont like how Nelly has gone back to sitting in the shadows. I sure hope he posts that theory soon.I play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
I'm pretty sure you dragged at least one of you supposed contradictions out of me. Only through reiterating my true meaning repetitively did you back down.vollkan wrote: As for my scumhunting, you say yourself that you think the evidence is strong enough. In that case, don't you think my probing tactics work well in drawing out contradictions from the people who have evidence against them.
CKD: I agree about Paras lurking. I totally forgot about him. But I'm curious as to why I'm more likely scum than hermitI play the games rul gud.-
-
Elias_the_thief He/HimNot Statistically SignificantHe/Him
- Not Statistically Significant
- Not Statistically Significant
- Posts: 3194
- Joined: August 15, 2006
- Pronoun: He/Him
- Location: Maryland.
TheHermit wrote:
*rubs temples*B) You constant back tracking and vote shifty during the game in order to prevent heat from coming down on you for your vote.
The only time I have backtracked in the entire game is when vollkan informed me that he did not actually say what I mistakenly attributed to him. Yes, that was my bad. I accept this. I fail to see how this makes me scum.
Backtrack one:
After Pressure:TheHermit wrote:I'm starting to think we're best off killing ojpower immediately so his lurking, random-voting self can't kill us later when we're at LyLo. At this point I don't even care whether he's scum or not, I want him gone.
Vote: ojpower
You did change your opinion, actually.TheHermit wrote:Yes, I realize it's a scummy thing to do.No, this won't change my opinion. I don't want some lurker coming in at the eleventh hour to drop a stupid, senseless vote that the scum all jump on for the win, or even worse, stay hidden so that it's impossible for the active towns to get a lynch on the active scum for want of a single vote.
My vote comes off when he contributes something meaningful or he gets replaced. Not a moment before. Unless somebody does something very scummy.
Holy cow, I just found this:
Before Nelly posted! Huh?TheHermit wrote:Unvote
Alright then.
Backtrack two:
After being pressured:TheHermit wrote:I don't like the way Elias is trying to misrepresent me. It's good that the town's not buying it (as I clarified my position seconds after voting oj), but I get the feeling he thinks if he repeats an argument often enough people will believe it. I find the points against him logically sound given the information we have.
Vote: Elias_the_thiefTheHermit wrote:Okay, there's a lot here for me to digest. MAN, you guys post novels. After sleeping on it I'm not as confident about my vote; I'll need to read through the latest developments in the thread. If my opinion remains the same I'll put the vote back on, but I don't want the day ending before I've finished catching up.
UnvoteBacktrack Three:
Three backtracks. I'm thinkin' you're scum.TheHermit wrote:The only time I have backtracked in the entire game is when vollkan informed me that he did not actually say what I mistakenly attributed to him. Yes, that was my bad. I accept this. I fail to see how this makes me scum.I play the games rul gud.