Right, this has taken longer than i thought. I'll give my d1 thoughts now, and return for the remaining six pages (seriously, a 20-page d1 and six pages for the following two?)
__________________________
First scummy thing I notice is frelaras placing a vote for 'running up a random bandwagon'
Something about Pie's 58 makes me uneasy, but I can't really put my finger on it.
Nudude wrote:
So why be so beligerant if you feel that their just inexperienced? It would be far more productive to explain in a nice manner what you feel is wrong, rather than making posts that consist 50% of caps and speaking down to them.
Lol someone hasn't played with ZONEFACE before. Not game relevant, but amused me.
CallMeLiam is VERY lurky.
CallMeLiam wrote:Jebus, my vote was random but you're not doing anything that makes me want to remove it.
First major beeping of scumdar. If a random vote makes the transition to a serious one, the reasons for it need to be clear. Leaving the vote on there implies you would have been willing to switch from a randomer on someone else to that player, in which case why bother emphasising the randomness?
Pie wrote:I agree that Jebus comes over at scummy and one can say that could've been newbie mistakes, but as he/she says that he/she isn't a newbie...dunno
Mega-hedging.
pie wrote:
I still feel that Zone's "You have dishonored your family." is scummy.
Firstly because it was in klingon, secondly, it may have reference to his character of which i probably don't know about since i havent seen much of the series.
thirdly, it just sounds scummy to me.
?????????
118 kinda makes me surprised sekinj came up town.
Pie's 119 is much better than her previous efforts. There's actually a good point there.
I don't however like the way she backtracks under pressure in 123.
CallMeLiam wrote:Fos: Tim
for slapping down the claim idea without actually discussing it.
I hadn't thought about the fact that some of our players won't know all the characters though L-K, good point. I wasn't gonna push for it or anything, but I'm happier not claiming now.
This is scummy. Seems kinda have-cake, eat-cake.
137- (freralas) I could totally see this as scum quietly pushing a townwagon from the margins.
No-one seems to have commented on the point that it's unlikely Jebus suggests that a WC claim could be useful as scum. Me no likey.
Jebus wrote:I'm new to mafia-scum games. I'm not new to the game of mafia. And voting someone because you don't like their play-style makes no sense.
This, however, is laughably wrong.
CallMeLiam wrote:I also enjoy speculating about potential power roles in-thread! -_-
I also like making throwaway comments that throw out blanket condemnations!
This is looking awfully like a default lynch.
Man, sekinj was noobish.
Timeater's 202 makes me *headdesk*, just FYI.
frelaras' 213 makes me uncomfortable. It reads like 'well, he could be town. Or he could be scum. He's still probably our best lead.' Reads like pre-excusing a town lynch.
Timeater's 217 draws another *headdesk*.
I hate ZONEACE.
275: Ozy, having lurked like crazy, shows up, and doesn't really contribute, just jumps a hypocritical lurkerwagon.
I really start to wonder whether half the game are ignorant of the concept of safeclaims.
Light-kun wrote:[
However, when it comes down to a decision between a player who looks scummy and someone who is heavily lurking, I will favor the one who seemed scummy.
Vote: CallmeLiam
And this is why people lurk.
305: OMG, is this ever getting anal.
I actually like Liam's 318.
324- *HEADDESK HEADDESK HEADDESK*
Seriously, if I'd have been in the game, i'd have pushed a Tim lynch just for recurring stupidity.
334- Farside takes an original position here. Town point.
By my logic, the fact that I am Quark is worthless information and as such I have no problem whatsoever in just stating it
HUGELY disagree. That any role could conceivably be a scum safeclaim, does not mean that *IF YOU ARE TOWN* it is not a horrible idea to give away your rolename, from which scum may be able to work out your role.
Farside 349: I don't see why top threes are necessary.
CallMeLiam wrote: I checked the case you made against me was based entirely off my stance that character claims aren't a useful tool in townie's analysis.
This somewhat understates the Liam case. I'm actually expecting a cop or mason claim from Liam eventually, since i don't see how he lives this long otherwise. Don't know how those fit Quark though.
361: <3 <3 <3 You know, it's just a shame you're always scum, really.
M4yhem wrote:
frelaras wrote:
Yeah, I definitely think this is a good point. Bandwagons serve a very useful purpose, especially in the early game to get reactions and responses. When someone looks scummy, I don't think you need to invent new targets just to avoid the label of "following." I think that will show up over time as a tell in itself, which is useful in itself. But getting on a bandwagon day 1 to get some action going is hardly awful in itself.
I never said you should invent new targets.
Fos:
frelaras for misrepresenting me. What I said was, if you think the target everyone is talking about isn’t scum, you should look elsewhere, even if nobody follows you. Town should never vote for someone they don’t think is scum. sekinj was already making excuses for why lynching jebus was a good thing even if he came up town when she voted him- it’s this I objected to; if she thought there was a good chance jebus was town, she shouldn’t have voted for him at all.
I think both players in this dispute are actually not saying anything contradictory, yet both are accusing the other of misrepresenting: Frelaras' point seems to be that, if you think someone's scummy, or useful info can be gleaned by wagoning, you shouldn't be afraid to vote them just because you will be accused of bandwagoning. M4yhem's is that if you don't think someone's scummy, you shouldn't vote them just because others are.
385: Oh, right, yes, Ozy was playing.
387 is a good defence of Fre's play to date. Makes me somewhat happier about him.
398: Seriously, remind me to run a don't be stupid mafia.
td wrote:
It's not so much the listing of whom you suspect, but the fact that listing the suspects also gives away whom you
don't
suspect. Listing anything more than the top two suspects on day one is not helpful.
Wahoo, something i agree with my predecessor on!
Farside, would you care to elaborate on your reasoning for the vote switch in 404?
Liam's points in 407 are generally pretty weak. I mean, the 'lynch all non-DS9ers' thing never really had any chance of happening, did it? And if we lynched people for calling out lurkers without checking V/LA... all we'd ever do is lynch people for that, it happens so freaking often. Doesn't mean it doesn't annoy me, but it's not lynchworthy for a second.
Of course, td pushed the same kinda line so...
424: Coming out against LAL is a quick way to make me hate you. Of course, this wasn't a LAL situation.
Timeater wrote:1. FoS: Two of them are from you for worthless reasons.
A FoS is never worthless.
An FOS is ALWAYS worthless, where it is not scummy.
440 is pretty good. Real conflicted about Liam right now.
frelaras wrote:I'm voting for sekinj because of her erratic voting pattern, which seems to skip around, following the town around for convenience reasons.
This isn't a bad reason in itself, but possible hypocrisy angle?
I can see, post-claim, that sekinj pretty much had to die. Unfortunate, but meh. It sounded incredibly contrived. miller doctor?
sekinj wrote:
I'm just really sick of being seen as scum in every single one of my games.
It's not everyone else, it's you
Everyone knows how i stand on self-voting town. Let alone self-voting DOCTORS.