Since I can't vote for the Mod, I'll
Mini 579 - The Plagues of Egypt Mafia - Over
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
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).lord_hur wrote:Well, I have the feeling, because of this rule and this food system, which implies that there are several types, that this will be a very complicated game
No pity for us newbieslord_hur wrote:Also, with 10 plagues (so I assume, 10 nights) and 12 players, the probability of at least one resurrect role is pretty strong.lord_hur wrote:
I was thinking about a poisoner role, who can poison one type of food, maybe with a delay on the death.PyroDwarf wrote:I wonder how our lunch will come into play? Maybe "XXX is dead and there are pancakes everywhere!" I just picked pancakes at random, it isn't mine, who has pancakes for lunch, anyways?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:FoS:Mr Stooferfor trying to add more weight to an already suspicion laden person. Not that there is anything wrong with that if the suspicion is merited...unvote: lord_hur
vote: thevampireofdussledorf
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 Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
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?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Nothing at all. Anyone can question anyone, as far as I am concerned. I'll answer any questions you have.lord_hur wrote:Please tell me what gives you the *exclusive* right to questioning people ?
I don't understand where you got the idea that I claimed the *exclusive* right to question people.
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.lord_hur wrote:Okay, I think the reason Mr Stoofer thinks I know more than him about the setup if that there is extra info in undo's introductory post in the queue thread, including the reference to 10 plagues. So I was thinking maybe he didn't read it.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Well I am very happy with my vote at the moment. TVoD's early posting looked like he was firing out any old accusation's he could to see if something stuck, without any serious attempt to think about whether his accusations had any merit. Now post 83 looks to me like he is just picking up the best bandwagon he can manage, without any conviction at all. His tone just doesn't convince me that he has any belief in any of his accusations.
What question? And when are you going to answer my question?Anyways my second suspect at the moment is Mr Stoofer, whom hasn't posted in a while I do believe. And I think somewhere back in the thread there was a question for him.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Yes and No is not an answer. Either you thought I was making a good point or you did not. You can't have it both ways.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:I believe you asked this three times....
Which I answered eventualyMr Stoofer wrote:I ask you again: tell me - yes or no - was my suspicion merited?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.
What I meant was this: Scum inevitabley know more about the game than the Town. They are thethevampireofdussledorf wrote: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.
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).informedminority. 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:
.Mafia generally have more information than other players, so whoever picks up on tells/hints easiest is more likely to be mafia
Perhaps the most significant thing in lord_hur's post was his statement that we were going to have 10 plagues in 10 nights. That is not something which I got from reading undo's posts and made me think that he knew more about the setup.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Re: Guardian's post 92: I agree that hasdgfas has been rather light on the contributions, even though he has a number of posts; but if this is an accusation of "lurking in plain sight" then I think 4 posts is too small a sample.
However, more significantly, this post will lookvery interesting indeedif thevampireofdussledorf comes up as Scum...-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I think I am just going to start ignoring what thevampireofdussledorf says for now because he is talking such nonsense. 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. 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.
My vote stands.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Now that you have discussed your speculations, I think that they are so way off target (e.g. 12 plagues = 12 nights) that I no longer think that they are based on "extra" information. I tend to believe you when you say you were merely guessing. If your guesses turn out to be accurate, however, then you can expect me to be very suspicious. But at present I see it as highly unlikely that your guesses are right.lord_hur wrote:@Mr Stoofer : do you still think I know more than you ? Also, you said something that leads me to think you know more about the setup than me : you only said that scum would know more than the others, but why do you seem to be thinking that eventual town special roles do not know more than vanillas ? Why did you only associate my alleged superior knowledge with scum ?
I am not sure that I understand your second/third questions. Generally, giving away extra information is a Scum tell, rather than a Power-Role tell (did you look at the wiki link?). That's because Scum are super keen to appear helpful, while Power-Roles tend to want to stay hidden. That is why I normally ascribe extra knowledge of the setup to scum, when it comes out day 1. But you make a fair point -- pro-Town Power-Roles may also be able to work out the setup more easily.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
No it doesn't. Assuming that he was killed by Scum, it just means that the Scum picked him out for a kill. Some Scum try to target experienced players/good scum hunters because they are the most dangerous foes; others target Newbies because they are unlikely to get Doc protection Night 1; while others kill players against whom they have a grudge.lord_hur wrote:@all experienced players : does the fact that kabenon007 died first night give us any hint on his scummyness? (never faced night 0's myself)
Also:thevampireofdussledorf wrote:gibberish-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
It's not rocket science Guardian. We were in the middle of a discussion about tvod, when out of nowhere you built a very confident case on hasdgfas based on (IMHO) not very much. It just struck me when I read that post that it could be an attempt to divert attention away from the growing tvod wagon (especially since I think tvod is scum). So if tvod turns up as scum, then that is what I will think.Guardian wrote:tvod, I hope you are scum because then my comment would be very interesting indeed.
Of course, phrases such as "tvod turns up as scum" kinda assumes we will find out his alignment if/when we lynch him-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
My point about lord_hur was not pointless.lord_hur wrote:
Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.It was a point that nobody else had mentioned before. That is why tvod's FOS of me was so stupid. I agree that merely repeating points someone else has made is sometimes a scum tell, but my point wasbrand new. That is why I got so annoyed with tvod.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I can see you don't agree with the point, but it is a recognised scum tell that Mafia tend to know more about what is going on, and tend to be able to work things out, more easily that the Town.SlySly wrote:@Mr. Stoofer
How is it a scum tell that lord_hur appeared to have more information about the setup than others? I totally disagree with your statement about this topic in Post 152. In fact, I get the feeling that your statement is a scum tactic trying to get lord_hur to reveal more about his role to your scumminess.
Let me drum up a hypothetical for you...
Let's say lord_hur's role is Bugs Bunny and Bugs Bunny is a power role of the town that has night actions. Wouldn't lord_hur's role give him more information about the setup of the game than some of the other players in the game without lord_hur being scummy for having such role information?
Would he not know that Bugs Bunny existed where the rest of us didn't?
I'm sorry, I don't find having that kind of info as scummy.
Click here to read "Rules for Finding Mafia", written by JEEP, whom I think everyone would agree is one of the best Scumhunters that ever lived. He said:
Now of course this not a cast iron rule, no-one suggests that it is. I even said so myself:Mafia generally have more information than other players, so whoever picks up on tells/hints easiest is more likely to be mafia (+10%). There are some notable exceptions. Experience and skill should be taken into consideration.
So by all means disagree with me and JEEP, but what I pointed out was a recognised scum tell.Mr Stoofer (emphasis added) wrote:Generally, giving away extra information is a Scum tell, rather than a Power-Role tell (did you look at the wiki link?). That's because Scum are super keen to appear helpful, while Power-Roles tend to want to stay hidden. That is why I normally ascribe extra knowledge of the setup to scum, when it comes out day 1. But you make a fair point --pro-Town Power-Roles may also be able to work out the setup more easily.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Guardian , are you voting for me for agreeing with you on SlySly, or for "overburdening" (bearing in mind I accepted I was wrong about lord_hur ages and ages ago?)Guardian wrote:Stoofer, I don't insist.
unvote; vote: Mr Stoofer
I actually agree with the overburdening. lord_hur seems honest to me. I'm also really not buying tvod suspicion atm, and no one likes my thoughts on cow..-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I've just done a read through on everyone and one thing leaped out at me that I hadn't spotted before, namely the fact that hasdgfas is posting regularly elsewhere on the site but hasn't posted here for 3 days. In my book that is more than enough to warrantunvote; vote:hasdgfas.
I still think thevampireofdussledorf has to die, though (if he is not scum he doesn't deserve to live).-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
You realise that I changed my mind about lord_hur, and agreed it was innocent speculation, about 5 pages ago?Guardian wrote:Let me be clear: the overburdening doesn't bother me as much (I am using the term because you used it), it is that it doesn't seem to be a reasonable interpretation that the guy knows or knew more about the setup than anyone else. it seemed like innocent speculation to me.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Well, I just wanted to make sure you knew, and that you weren't voting for me under a misapprehension. (Although to be honest I'd rather you weren't voting for me at all.)
@SlySly: you have understood my post about tvod correctly. But it is not anti-Town to want to kill a player who is hurting the town regardless of their alignment. Click here for a thread where lots of people express the view that killing players who are hurting the Town is a good idea regardless of their alignment. See posts 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, 20, 21 -- all of which agree with me that sometime you have to have a lynch of the player that is not helping the Town. See especially 20 and 21, made by me before I got my role PM in this game.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
What I meant was this: there is a big difference between (a) making a point about another player, listening to the guy's defence, thinking about it, and then saying "OK, I don't think my point was a good one"; and (b) making a point about another player and sticking to your guns even when it becomes clear that you are wrong.Guardian wrote:
stoofer, could you have a shot at answering this again? like, what are the differences in what I should be thinking if I did know vs. if I didn't? Why is it significant my analysis that I knew you took it bacK?Guardian wrote:Like I said, I was not thinking that at the time I posted it, but I do now remember you saying you were wrong; however, how does that change anything?
Case (b) is well worth a vote (even a lynch on Day 1) while case (a) is much less lynch-worthy. So I wanted to make sure you realised my point about lord_hur falls into case (a).
On the tvod debate, I want to make myself clear. I think he is scum because, amongst other reasons, of his (1) awful logic (which he simply says is "quirky") and (2) When he FoS-es people, I don't think he is being honest (i.e. he doesn't sound like he is convinced by what he says, he sounds to me like he is just trying to find any reason to cast suspicion on whomever he can. That is a strong scum tell, because whenever scum FoS/vote someone, they know that the person they are voting is not scum.)-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
The difference is this. When a Townie says "I think X is Scum", then he is saying something which hebelievesis true. When a Scum says "I think X is Scum" then (unless X is his scumbuddy) he is saying something which heknowsis false.
So if you see a person saying "I think X is Scum" but he doesn't sound convinced by his own argument, then that is a strong Scum tell. Townies might be wright or wrong in their suspicions, but they ought to be convinced by their suspicions before posting them.
The vibe I get from tvod is that he is not convinced by his own arguments. This is a point I made ages ago.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Well I don't agree I was pushing crap logic. I made a perfectly valid point, pointing out what appeared to me to be a recognised scum tell. Remember, we were on page 1 or 2 and one has to look very hard for scum tells at that stage. And it's not as if I said "OMFG, I've found scum!!!". I just pointed out a known scum tell.Guardian wrote:tvod, I want you to quote and respond to post 203.
Stoofer, that's nice and all, but between scenarios a) push crap logic on a townie and later retract it and b) push crap logic on a townie and keep pushing, the person is pushing crap logic in both cases.
Do you think that you were pushing crap logic? Do you think you fall under a), then? What, in your own words, made you retract it? Feel free to link me to a post where you explained this, if you have.
It was following further discussion and thought I decided that it was not a particularly strong scum tell in this instance: see Post 111 where I explained why. Basically, I believe lord_hur when he says he was making wild (and inaccurate) guesses.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
OK, here goes:
It's day 1. What else do have to go on but hunches and such-like? What Guardian said is perfectly reasonable. It applies to me too.SlySly wrote:
To me, this sounds like another way of saying, "I don't have a good reason so I am going to take a shot in the dark."Guardian wrote: I'm playing by sense of smell at this point.
Again, a perfectly reasonable thing for Guardian to say; I don't even understand what SlySly's complaint is about it.SlySly wrote:
It seems to me that you are saying that you know you don't have a good reason for your action and you have the sense that your action is going to draw a negative response from the town.Guardian wrote: 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.
Well, imo, if you are going to do something that will cast you in a negative light to the town, you better have a good reason and be able to answer when called on for it. If you don't do the reasonless act of negativity in the first place, the town would not have been forced to confront you for it.
I don't have a problem with the above; although it misses the point that Guardian thinks hasdgfas is scum on instinct. SlySly's argumentSlySly wrote:
You have posted more than 20 times since you last mentioned, hasdgfas. Are you talking about the extremely flimsy case you presented in post 92?Guardian wrote: Nevertheless,
unvote; vote: hasdgfas
I just have a strong intuition he's scum, I still like my case I proposed (and if you don't you can just eat it), and I don't particularly want to lynch my previous top suspects.
That case basically said hasdgfas was scum because he used pronouns in the random stage and answered a question that was addressed for someone else and that he supposedly lead tVoD.
Well, the first 2 parts of your 'case' are a joke, at best. The 3rd part of your 'case' is an opinion that I don't share. I don't see how hasdgfas was leading at tVoD at all. Maybe I missed a post, though I doubt it. If you are not pro-town enough to quote it, you could be pro-town enough to point out the exact post number you are referring to, when making claims about others questionable play, so it is easy for the town to understand what you are talking about.
You have popped in and placed a vote on a person that I believe to have contributed many pro-town posts throughout the game, using a very old case against him, that you have not mentioned in a long time, while knowing that you are going to be V\LA for some time.
rather approaches the matter as though Guardian is putting forward cast-iron evidence, when he has said the opposite.
I think this is way over the top. "VERY scummy action"!?! "you go and pull this"?!? I just don't see what is so scummy about what Guardian has said.SlySly wrote:
This to me is a VERY scummy action. You had almost cleared yourself of any suspicion in my mind and then you go and pull this. Mr. Stoofer's consistent scumminess is the only thing keeping my vote off of you.
FoS:Guardian-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
OK, I'm back.
First up, saying things like like "X, you haven't answered my question" is unhelpful because (in my case at least) I always try to answer questions, so if there is one I haven't answered I have obviously missed it so you need to repeat it.
Now, to answer tvod's question: a bandwagon consists of more than just votes. When I said that you were joining lor_hur's bandwagon (or whatever I said), I meant that you were joining in with those who were attacking him.
I also think that comments such as this are silly and reveal a lack of understanding about how this game works:
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).thevampireofdussledorf wrote:The line of well all we got day one is hunches is BS to me. You can work hard to try and get good reads and find information to come to a reasoned opinion abut who might be scum. But both Gaurdian and Mr Stoofer seem to be very flippant about who they lynch and for what reason. I can only see this as irresponsible and not very pro town at all.
On that note, I still think that tvod is is insincere scum, but since that is going nowhere, I'm going to move to my no. 2 target.unvote: thevampireofdussledorf, vote: SlySly.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I hate the fact that he was posting in other games and did not post in this game; and he is on my radar. But I don't think he is in the same league as, in particular, you, tvod.
And BTW: I think tvodisscum -- and not just a pain in the ass (although he is that too). His constant claims that I only voted for him because he is hard to understand are BS and make me even more suspicious. He never addressed my real points against him (and I've given up trying), instead simply saying that he would try harder to be understood and that I was voting for him for being hard to understand.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Here is a question for you: list every question I have failed to answer.SlySly wrote:
You have repeatedly 'obviously missed' questions from multiple players. It is not our duty to keep repeating questions for you to avoid. It shouldn't take 3 reminders to get you to answer something.Mr. Stoofer wrote: I always try to answer questions, so if there is one I haven't answered I have obviously missed it so you need to repeat it.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
If you really wanted an answer to a question you would repeat it, because it vastly increases the likelihood of getting an answer. If on the other hand you are simply trying to smear other players, then I could see why you would not do that... Your response makes me think you are in the latter category.It is not our duty to keep repeating questions for you to avoid.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
That must have taken a lot of hard work, SlySly, but is in fact a load of crap. First, I made clear that I couldn't/wouldn't answer questions from tvod because I was finding him incomprehensible. Taking the questions out of context as you have done is wrong. In context they formed part of incomprehensible drivel. Second, many of your questions were not questions at all but rhetorical flourishes (e.g. 241 and your own 160). The fact that you claim that I ignored these questions just shows what a scumbag you are. Thirdly, on the Guardian questions (e.g. 172, 184), I have made my position absolutely clear.
I am not the only one who thinks this:
I am sure you will agree that lord_hur has hardly been pro-Stoofer in this game, so I think it fair to let him be the judge of your list.lord_hur wrote:Answers I'd like answered by Mr Stoofer : 275
Uninteresting/rethorical questions : 114, 279, 241
Questions that have been answered (in my eyes), and as such, I don't care about an answer to them : 153, 197, 232, 160
That leaves the matter of the presumed extra info Mr Stoofer has (110, 165, 172, 184). As I said earlier, I am unsure if I should press the subject, because more info can be bad for town, and anyway Mr Stoofer said he would talk about it only if Guardian told him to (which the latter did not).
The one question he thinks you have a point about is this:
In fact both you and and he missed my answer:thevampireofdusseldorf [275] wrote:Also where did hasfgad stand on your list when you voted for him and where does he stand now?
"He" in this post referred to hasdgfas -- sorry if that was not clear from the context.Mr Stoofer [276] wrote:I hate the fact that he was posting in other games and did not post in this game; and he is on my radar. But I don't think he is in the same league as, in particular, you, tvod.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I can see how the second paragraph can be interpreted as meaning that lord_hur agreed with everything in the first paragraph. That is not what I meant -- sorry.lord_hur wrote:Mr Stoofer is trying to twist my words in this post : nowhere did I say or imply anything about SlySly's scumminess in this post,
What I was trying to say was that lord_hur agreed with my "First" "Second" and "Third" points:Mr Stoofer wrote:First, I made clear that I couldn't/wouldn't answer questions from tvod because I was finding him incomprehensible.Mr Stoofer wrote:Second, many of your questions were not questions at all but rhetorical flourishes (e.g. 241 and your own 160).Mr Stoofer wrote:Thirdly, on the Guardian questions (e.g. 172, 184), I have made my position absolutely clear.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I am annoyed that you virtually claimed Cop at the start of this game and you are now backing off from that.
Guardian usually starts off the game messing about a bit, posting in haikus. Instead he started straight in with this:
Then Guardian's next post is this:Guardian [5] wrote:vote: SlySly
When lord_hur pointed out in [54] that the game had only just started, Guardian responded by saying [55] "It seems longer".Guardian [52] wrote:I find it interesting that no one has mentioned me or SlySly, and also that SlySly hasn't posted at all in the game.
mod:prod?
In his next post, Guardian set out his infamous case against hasdgfas. But he also wrote the following:Guardian [92] wrote:SlySly is also probably scum.SlySly had not even posted at this point. What possible explanation could Guardian have for saying this -- other than him being a cop with a guilty on SlySly?
HackerHuck obviously noticed that something was up because he asked Guardian how why he thought SlySLy was probably the other scum in [100] and [102]. His response:
This struck me as very odd when I read it the first time. What was the "or something". And anyway, how could he have a hunch about a player who had not even posted, even at that stage? So I went back did a "View All Posts by Guardian". It was fascinating. It struck me that the only explanation for the "or something", and for his post [92], must be that Guardian was a cop with a guilty result on SlySly. What other explanation could there be?Guardian [103] wrote:and yeah, slysly is a hunch. or something.
That is why I made my infamous post:
I was trying to do two things with that post: First, I wanted to try to take the heat off Guardian because I thought he was being so blatant that the Scum would be able to spot that he was a Cop. Second, I wanted to signal to Guardian that I had picked up on the deliberate tells he was dropping. That also explains why I refused to explain post 105 unless Guardian insisted: I didn't want to out him unless he wanted to be outed.Mr Stoofer [105] wrote:Also, I want to put the following point on the record:
If we do not lynch thevampireofdussledorf today, we should lynch SlySly.
However, in light of Guardian's recent posts, I have to say:Guardian, what the hell are you playing at?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
@SlySly: I'm not sure at the moment what to think about your recent posts. But could I ask you to think a bit more deeply about the interaction between Guardian and me.
Guardian's plan was to breadcrumb as a Cop (with a guilty on you) right from the start of the game. He admits that, and if you look at his first ~8 posts you can see that it's true.
You can also see that I picked up on it very early in the game.
Now Guardian subsequently backed off from his breadcrumb. He stopped acting like he had a guilty result on you -- which confused me enormously.
Finally he said "Stoofer thinks I'm something I'm not". As a result I exposed him and he is going to be lynched as a result of the pressure I put on him.
Is that the way two scum buddies would work together? Surely I would have ignored his Cop breadcrumbs -- as everyone else did -- allowing him to either (a) claim Cop at a convenient moment, or (b) back off if he preferred? I would not have gone on the offensive the moment he backed off his breadcrumbs, would I?
I would also never have linked myself so strongly to his Cop claim (as I did in [105] and [168]) if I knew it was false (as I would do if I were his scumbuddy).
I would quite like your response to this, because at the moment I don't see you as being a partner with Guardian-scum; but I am also having severe doubts about you as a result of some of the points you are making.-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
I'm having trouble understanding why Guardian hasn't been lynched yet. How much more evidence do you need than someone admitting that they pretended to be a Cop, tried to make people think they were a Cop, when they are not? And when challenged, claims Miller and says "don't investigate me tonight because I will come up as Scum"?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
This is the wiki description: Jester. A Jester is someone whose aium in the game is to get themselves lynched. Normally they lose if they are lynched Day 1.
The thought hadn't crossed my mind that Guardian was a Jester, but it would explain someone pretending to be a Cop and then admitting that they were not.
A Jester wins if he is lynched Day 2, and loses if he is nightkilled or endgamed.tvod wrote:I had the question of do they win if they are lynched day two and how do they lose?
This is the problem with Jesters. First, you can never trust them. 99% of players who claim Jester are Scum. Imagine this: if the game gets down to you, Guardian and one other player, are you going to trust Guardian enough to vote the other guy? Secondly, Jesters hurt the Town because they will not help the Town to lynch Scum. On the contrary, they have to make sure that they do not appear to be a threat to the Scum; because if they help the Town to lynch Scum then the Scum will kill them at night and then they will lose. Instead, they have to try to hurt the Town so much (e.g. by attacking pro-Town players) that the Town lynches them.tvod wrote:Also is it of any value to keep them around as they appear to be of no use to the town or scum, and is the only value of keeping a suspected Jester around to stop them achieving their win condition?
Yes, that certainly is a strategy that has been used before. As I say, 99% of Jester claims come from Scum.tvod wrote:And lastly is it a possible stratergy of mafia to try and have people believ you to be a jester so that you are not lynched?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil
Perhaps I should have said "often" rather than "normally". An example is Thespival Mafia -- see the Jester's win condition in this post.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Where does the jester losing if lynched day one come from?-
-
Mr Stoofer Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Less than scum
- Posts: 3827
- Joined: February 25, 2005
- Location: London Alignment: Lawful Evil