What is speculation on roles at this time going to do to help town?
Also
If you are town and have an explanation that wont hurt town or help scum then perhaps you should explain. If not your explanation for not explaining is unsatisfactory.lord_hur wrote:I think I know what you're refering to and there's a good explanation, but I guess I can't give it without getting more FoS... this IS public info though.
If you look at the third quote I didn't really see it as a question, more 3 quotes of yours (a large body of evidence) and an accusation. To me it was trying to push something a bit far. I think most were happy to leave this speculating business alone but Stoofer wanted to bring it to the forefront again and has it help us any more since then?lord_hur wrote:About what you said to Mr Stoofer though... Please tell me what gives you the *exclusive* right to questioning people ?
Questioning people for good reasons is an eminently pro-town attitude and should not be denied to anyone.
On the other hand, if you think someone's accusation is undue, it is perfectly fair game to question it. But it is not what you said.
Yes and No, I viewed the timing of the post its lay out and tone all to decide if I found it suspicious. Suspicion can be merited but the person placing that suspicion can also be suspicious.Mr Stoofer wrote:What on earth do you mean "overburdening of him"? What am I supposed to do if I see a player who is behaving suspiciously? Keep quiet about it. What is more, nobody had made the point which I had made so it would have been anti-Town for me not to have mentioned it.
I ask you again: tell me - yes or no - was my suspicion merited?
Well I can only view if it is merited by my standards, likewise Mr Stoofer can do only the same. It was a sort of question is it merited or not... I left this rather ambigious as I wished to see Mr Stoofers reaction, surely he would be the one to know as he made the post if there was merit in it or not.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:FoS:Mr Stoofer for trying to add more weight to an already suspicion laden person. Not that there is anything wrong with that if the suspicion is merited
I dont really see that as bringing up a new point (not points) that you might know more than him, as he explains below that he had read the applicable meterial, so thus "you might know more than me" is throwing suspicion on you as being scum.lord_hur wrote:He was basically asking where I got the informations, because explaining it was the only way I could defend myself. I see what you're trying to say though. But because *you* analyzed something doesn't mean one can't analyze the same thing, especially if the person brings up new points, which Mr Stoofer did (the fact that I might know more than him).
If it is given as MR Stoofer has said he read the information then the "at least: more than me" part is I imagine to be taken as "I dont know things I am unimformed majority aka town"Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
Mr Stoofer wrote:I read the opening post. But I saw no warrant for a resurrection role, or a poisoner. Nor for your assumption that we are going to have a different plague every night.
Which I answered eventualyMr Stoofer wrote:I ask you again: tell me - yes or no - was my suspicion merited?
Now that post of yours in particular I made some coments on which you seem to have not bothered to deem worth talking about. So I will have to re do this.thevampireofduselldorf wrote:Yes and No, I viewed the timing of the post its lay out and tone all to decide if I found it suspicious. Suspicion can be merited but the person placing that suspicion can also be suspicious.
Can you please explain what you ment by this comment as both I and lord_hur have interpreted it and perhaps it would be nice to get the view of the author.Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
thevampireofduselldorf wrote:I deemed the suspicion that was already on lord_hur to be sufficent for his action
I also viewed your overburdening of him with more suspicion suspicious
thevampireofduselldorf wrote:If you look at the third quote I didn't really see it as a question, more 3 quotes of yours (a large body of evidence) and an accusation. To me it was trying to push something a bit far. I think most were happy to leave this speculating business alone but Stoofer wanted to bring it to the forefront again and has it help us any more since then?
thevampireofduselldorf wrote:I dont really see that as bringing up a new point (not points) that you might know more than him, as he explains below that he had read the applicable meterial, so thus "you might know more than me" is throwing suspicion on you as being scum.
I also don't understand your conclusion of how he was asking you where you got your information from.
So yes lord_hur was to be thought of as mildly suspicious and had been told about the speculation and this point was dying down then you post one line implying lord_hur is scum and you are town and use three quotes of his.thevampireofduselldorf wrote:If it is given as MR Stoofer has said he read the information then the "at least: more than me" part is I imagine to be taken as "I dont know things I am unimformed majority aka town"
It wasn't really a good point at all as here it is:Mr Stoofer wrote:The point about lord_hur seeming to have more information was one which no-one had made before I did. Whether it was right or wrong it was clearly a good point to make.
And here is Mr Stoofers comment about it:Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
So from this and what I have said earlier all this is saying is:Mr Stoofer wrote:What I meant was this: Scum inevitabley know more about the game than the Town. They are the informed minority. And they often cannot stop themselves from showing how clever they are by successfully "guessing" aspects of the setup.
Ok I can see why you may have become a little frustratedMr Stoofer wrote:I have asked thevampireofdussledorf to explain why I merited a FOS, and whether he thought my point was a good one or not, but his responses have been incomprehensible.
Ok so I did deem lord_hur to be suspicious but that does in no way mean I cant be suspicious of someone who also finds lord_hur suspicious. And I did find the way in which and the timing in which Mr Stoofer joined in on the lord_hur discusion suspicious. The comment about "if the suspicion is merited" was to see what sort of reaction I would get from Mr Stoofer, as a townie they would certainly believe that the suspicion was merited but as scum they would know it was not so here are the reactions from Mr Stoofer:thevampireofduselldorf wrote:FoS:Mr Stoofer for trying to add more weight to an already suspicion laden person. Not that there is anything wrong with that if the suspicion is merited
Mr Stoofer wrote:You gave lord_hur a "HoS" back in post 19, so you obviously think he is suspicious, but when I express suspicion of him, that earns me a "FoS".
Also, why is my suspicion not merited?
Mr Stoofer wrote:Please answer my question.
So to me it seems you were very much concerned about if your suspicion was seen as merited or not when in fact I would believe you to be the only person to know if it was or not, to the rest of us it is just perception.Mr Stoofer wrote:What on earth do you mean "overburdening of him"? What am I supposed to do if I see a player who is behaving suspiciously? Keep quiet about it. What is more, nobody had made the point which I had made so it would have been anti-Town for me not to have mentioned it.
I ask you again: tell me - yes or no - was my suspicion merited?
@Everyone I have made a few interesting points about Mr Stoofer who does not appear to be interested in replying, but perhaps others might wish to think and post about what I have said.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Mr Stoofer why do you wish to have on record you want to lynch someone who has not posted yet in this game?
Here I find it odd he states an incorect fact, maybe not paying attention to the game or perhaps needing to throw some created suspicion somewhere. Also I find it a bit strange saying lets move on from this speculation while at the same time casualy pointing out someone who was also speculating. I dont really understand the need to point this out (at least not in a post asking to move away from speculation discussion).Singing Librarian wrote:I think we need to move on, though it is interesting that other early bits of speculation on the setup (e.g. PyroDwarf's) went unmentioned.
This is the reply to my FoS. Ok so SL wished to change the discussion topic. If you wanted discussion to move away from that topic then I would assume you wouldn't want people to comment about PyroDwarf so thus it was pointless posting. As with Mr Stoofer pointless posting I believe to be perhaps a very good scum tell if you can correctly spot it. A scum has to post but he is posting for very different reasons than town, thus he will frequently post to seem active and bring up points which in fact have no benifit to town at all.Singing Librarian wrote:thevampireofdusseldorf, I wasn't trying to hush discussion. it seemed that particular thread of thought had reached the end of any usefulness, and moving on to something else would help a heck of a lot more.
So it seems I am the only possible scum to you. It would be in your best interests (perhaps) and towns to let day one progress further so you can get opinions on other players.Singing Librarian wrote:TVOD is the one player where postings stand out as suspicious to me. Others have not posted enough to allow me to form an opinion either way and the remainder read as pro-town - so far, at least.
The one line of his did not bring up any new points at the time of its posting but if you see this as a valid point:lord_hur wrote:You are wrong. Everyone, including SlySly who is currently attacking Mr Stoofer, thinks that he actually added to the discussion (but not necessarily in a town way, according to SlySly).
lord_hur wrote:if the person brings up new points, which Mr Stoofer did (the fact that I might know more than him).
we have a point made. But alas this to me is something kinda obvious and is why people don't speculate about the game set up and why those that do are told not to and are found suspicious.Mr Stoofer wrote:What I meant was this: Scum inevitabley know more about the game than the Town. They are the informed minority. And they often cannot stop themselves from showing how clever they are by successfully "guessing" aspects of the setup. As JEEP said in the wiki:
Read this as you wish, I have explained my reasons behind "if it is merited".Singing Librarian wrote:I've already said I don't like his style, so I really ought to go into more detail.
***Post 31 - FoSes Mr Stoofer for "trying to add more weight to an already suspicion laden person. Not that there is anything wrong with that" - if there's nothing wrong with it, there's nothing to FoS, surely, and pointing out things that are suspicious is good town play, worthy of (if there is such a thing) an anti-FoS if anything.
Singing Librarian wrote:***Post 39 - "I also viewed your overburdening of him with more suspicion suspicious" makes no sense. If something is suspicious, it should be pointed out, and not necessarily just once. If voicing a suspicion of someone who has already had suspicion voiced about them was suspicious, we'd never have any discussion.
This is what I believe Mr Stoofer was doing.Mr Stoofer wrote:I agree that merely repeating points someone else has made is sometimes a scum tell
thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:If somebody adds to a bandwagon in a way you find suspicious is it then reasonable to find them suspicious also?
Singing Librarian wrote:***Post 51 - appears to find Mr Stoofer even more suspicious for repeating a question which tvod had not answered. (i.e. does tvod view Mr S's suspicion of lord_h as merited?). One thing you can almost guarantee in this game is that if you do not answer a question, it will get repeated either by the original questioner or someone else, so that shouldn't be surprising. Also, "I find it strange he needed me to coment on this first before he could say for himself he believed it merited." What? No, Mr Stoofer wanted a response. It was quite evident that he already believed the suspicion was merited, or he wouldn't have voiced it. What it looks like he wanted to know was whether tvod thought he was throwing out baseless accusations or jumping on a pointless bandwagon. It was evident to me that right or wrong, Mr Stoofer believed his suspicions had a basis in reality.
Yeah I'll give you this one.Singing Librarian wrote:***Post 63 - Twists my hope to move discussion on to something fruitful into an attempt to stop it completely. Ditto for Musher333, who explains his reasons better than I did.
Ok I 'll give you this one tooSinging Librarian wrote:***Post 83 - Among the reasons for his vote on lord_hur is "asking for prods". Prods can only benefit town, not scum, as more involvement in the game means more information for said town and a better chance for discussion, debate and accurate lynching.
I'm just going over an issue I have with one of Mr Stoofers posts, funnily enough the one I FoSed him for. I believe it is still in conversation right now. And what questions "pointed" my way did I not answer?Singing Librarian wrote:***Post 99 - Certainly seems to be suspecting Mr Stoofer more than lord_hur, even though he's still voting for lord_hur. Talks without actually answering any of the questions pointed his way.
By Mr Stoofers own quote:Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
So my analysis with the help of Mr Stoofer of the comment goes:Mr Stoofer wrote:What I meant was this: Scum inevitabley know more about the game than the Town. They are the informed minority. And they often cannot stop themselves from showing how clever they are by successfully "guessing" aspects of the setup. As JEEP said in the wiki:
This suggestion is as good as saying he is in the informed minority or scum. Also this suggestion has no merit unless there is evidence that the person has more information, and this evidence that he had more information was because he was speculating. Mr Stoofer has admited that part. So why sould I believe that saying he appears to have more information to be adding a new point. Most reasonable players would know that scum like to speculate about game set ups because they have more information.Singing Librarian wrote:The suggestion is that Mr Stoofer pointed out that lord_hur seemed to have more information about the set-up in general than was public knowledge
Basicly this is scum bait as I expected scum to react a little stronger than town to an insinuation that there accusation appeared not merited. So that is what I mean about his reaction, asking me if I viewed it as merited or not.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Not that there is anything wrong with that if the suspicion is merited
Well considering this is your defence I find you fall short of this mark.what Mr Stoofer was refering to in 195 wrote:There are some extreme examples where if a person hurts the town badly enough, and is likely to do so again, then no matter what his alignment, it's best to just lynch him off right away, for the good of the town. But for the most part, I'm more interested in pressuring a person who's hurting the town to stop doing so, and only lynching him as a last resort if he absolutly refuses to change.
respond.lord_hur wrote:Re-read post 200 :
- in part 2, I say I agree with his reasoning, NOT his conclusions (not now, not later, unless you go lurking for a long time or your posts' quality decrease in a substancial way).
- in part 1, I say this should only be used as a last resort. If Mr Stoofer tried to use it right now to get you lynched, I'd be on his back like a rabid dog. At the moment though, he's not trying to actively influence people, he is just answering questions.
Guardian wrote:I'm playing by sense of smell at this point. I feel like this is going to come back and bite me in the but later, and people are gonna be like "well if you were really town why weren't you trying so hard to be really townie and good and stuff?" and I don't have a good answer for that.
Sounds like a decent statement but from my very brief experience scum can be very genuine and honest and town can be dishonest. I completely agree that all we can do is our best but by my standards playing by sense of smell is not the best way to go about things, nor is trying to lynching someone who is hard to understand (anti-town) when minimal effort has been put into trying to find scum.Mr Stoofer wrote:It is very difficult to lynch Scum on Day 1. The best you can do is to do the best you can. But in the vast majority of games the Town ends up lynching Town on Day 1. That's just the way it is. I don't want to spend forever on Day 1 hoping that something concrete will turn up -- because it just won't. [And that sort of game is sooooo boring.] You have to try to read between the lines of the other player's posts and get a feeling for who might be genuine and honest (Town) and who is not being honest (Scum).
I think Guardian wants to be lynched, hence my comments lynch bait. Since then Guardian has done wonders to try and get himself lynched. I also suggested that he could be some sort of Jesus Jester role. I believe he thought I was catching on to him and has tried to finishes his life off before anyone else could cotton on.Guardian wrote:I realize it seems very tempting and good to lynch me right now, but that won't result in dead scum.
That was egging someone to vote for you so you could self hammer.Guardian wrote:I'm fairly sure I'm at lynch -2.
I also urge no one to vote me, but not for fear I'm a jester.
Whatever you may fear, I'm not a jester.