Nonetheless, it is now time to place a non-random non-arbitrary
Sincerely,
-Ether
Terrible.Post 114, Dahill (emphasis mine) wrote:for voting assmaster with seemingly no reason,and i found it strange (scummy strange) that he didn't even really comment on xtoxm.
The first part I can possibly see, but I'm confused by the last sentence; if you don't consider it telling of any particular alignment, why did you use it as a reason to vote Tuber? Am I missing something?dahill wrote:meh. i was merely citing it as one of the opposing viewpoints to the situation. i wasn't necessarily agreeing with it, and i have questioned when people do this in other games iirc. i dislike using info outside of mafia games in general, so i don't consider this telling of any particular alignment.
It's not merely about agreement but more that I don't like your stances in either case. The Tuber vote I don't see either of the reasons as any good and I could see it as a move to follow a little momentum, and the Corio thing seems very meh.dahill wrote:i don't see how agreeing with others' cases is a bad thing
Xtoxm claimed vanilla townie in Post 117. Any thoughts on that?dahill wrote:and wait xtoxm, claimed? when/where?
You played with Ether in PYP3, and she's well aware of your meta. She "overruled" me for basically the reason given in your second paragraph, I think.Xtoxm wrote:On Patrick - He said he spoke with Ether about finding me scummy for meta reasons, and Ether disagreeing. I have never played Ether, so I see no reason why she would overrule his opinion on my meta, whcih makes me think they are scum and were infact discussing whether to attack me for my play fitting my scum meta.
And btw, I think it's too early to say whether i'm fitting my town or scum meta, given how little has gone on.
So those we be my top 3 atm. Glork today, imo.
I don't think this sums it up at all. I got the impression EA voted Yos2 because he didn't see how his contributions were helpful to hunting scum. I don't see why EA's not posting much before then should undermine his point, and I see where he was coming from. Although, I'm a little surprised that EA moved so quickly onto Rally Vincent after that.Glork wrote:It's a Pot/Kettle thing. FWIW, I had gotten the impression that Yos2 has been involved in the game, so I'm curious to know how you can justify attacking somebody based on "lack of contribution" when you yourself hadn't done anything but a couple of random-votes up until that point.
Scum tend to want to claim vanilla? Your experience must be very different to mine. On the contrary, I see lots of townies carelessly claiming vanilla because they don't think their role is especially important; it's poor play but I don't see how that translates to scummy, and in my experience scum prefer to wait until a claim is explicitly forced out of them. Why would it be beneficial for scum to claim vanilla before they need to? That baffles me. Premature claims are something I've found to be a reliable pro-town sign with newbies, of course Xtoxm isn't a newbie, so I'm less sure what it means for him, but I can't see any reason why Xtoxm-scum would be more likely to do it.Yosarian2 wrote:Um, I just gave 3 reasons why him claiming vanilla for no reason is a good reason to lynch him. Town should never claim vanillia, at all, but scum tend to want to claim vanillia, so it's a scum tell. Plus, he's a safe lynch now that he's a claimed vanillia (he's either a vanillia or a scum), and if he gets lynched no one else has to claim, which protects the power roles.
I'd also like to know what's scummy about this.Glork wrote:Thirdly, I actually thought exactly what dahill thought about the whole "post restriction" comment... I'll just QFT Post 185 here.
My point there is that I don't see him defending Xtoxm "rather than scumhunting", I see him as doing both. The last two quotes before your smoking gun quote:Glork wrote:That's exactly the point I'm trying to MAKE, Patrick. Corio seems to want to "get more out of the day," butj for the time he's spent in this thread, his actual, real-time scumhunting has been minimal, IMO.
Yosarian2 wrote:Pathetric: Want to explain why you think I'm scummy? You've said so like 5 times, but the only thing you've actually commented on about my play was my vote for Xtoxm, and even there you all you said was that you thought I was "streaching it" (which I really doubt; Xtoxm really just looks like a scum flailing around here to me) or that you didn't agree with me that scum want to claim vanillia townie (which, again, I don't get; isn't it obvious why scum "should" want to claim vanillia?)
This impression comes from the fact that when I played against you and you were scum, you confessed early, and that in games I've read with you as town, you've tended to vote very hastily and make long strings of posts without seemingly putting much thought into them.Xtoxm wrote:How am I sloppy Patrick?
This is odd. It ignores the actual likelihood of this playerlist speedlynching Glork--a likelihood Simenon would be perfectly aware of. If anything, this would have been more scummy from a newbie's keyboard.Post 293, Incognito wrote:Coriolanus's reveal as Simenon really bothers me as I know Simenon is an experienced player and therefore I'm really questioning what it was he was trying to get at earlier when he mentioned that the lack of Glork death "really disappointed" him.
What do you think of the contrast between this and this? What do you mean, "what do I mean?"Post 328, Yosarian2 wrote:Could you explain what you mean?
Like I said, based on meta, I don't really think sheeping is inherently a scumtell coming from Dahill, and I don't have a problem with him following me on Xtoxm. I don't really have a read on Dahill yet, I could equally see him doing everything he's done so far as either town or as scum. If there's more to the case then that, I'd be interested to hear it.
By the second "this," I meant,Post 114, Dahill (emphasis mine) wrote:on that note,unvote vote tuber
for voting assmaster with seemingly no reason,and i found it strange (scummy strange) that he didn't even really comment on xtoxm..
He posted an excuse, but it's pretty obviously bullshit, considering the context of the second quote. I'm taken aback by the number of people who dismiss Dahill's scumminess without acknowledging this contradiction at all...the way that youMD, Five things you hate most thread, dahill1 wrote:take it away, glrok!animorpherv1 wrote:4. stating "X is scum" and giving no real reason why.Glork wrote:Originally I was going to post something along the lines of "because I said so" to draw this out and further illustrate my point, but I don't really feel like doing that, so I'm just going to explain very bluntly.
A few underlying principles:
1) Players -- especially when scum -- like to be comfortable. Bringing pressure that is difficult to respond to pulls them out of their comfort zones, making them react in a way they normally wouldn't react. This makes it significantly more likely that they will say or do something particularly telling of their alignments.
2) In the long-term, players often reveal the most about themselves when acting on limited information. While this maxim generally applies to the notion that D1 and D2 are the most revealing parts of a mafia game, it also applies when dealing with "unexplained votes."
2a) Let's look at the general case of an unexplained vote from a player of unknown alignment. The motivation for a protown player is to discern the intent of the voter, generally in order to obtain their alignment. The motivation of an anti-town player is to discern the intent of the voter (which sometimes involves seeking alignment) and to best utilize the situation to their advantage. There is an important, if subtle, difference. By cultivating our exploration of these differences, we can find new tools to seek and destroy the scumbaggoes amongst us.
2b) Now consider the case where I am a confirmed protown player making an unexplainded vote. In this case, my motivation is very clear. In some way, I am seeking to find scum. Here, I'm actually going to dip into one of my trade secrets and note that protown players tend to have a broader picture of our voter's intent, whereas scums tend to focus more on themselves (or, sometimes, their allies). If the person I'm voting is more concerened with how everyone else reacts than with deflecting my attack, they are usually more likely to be protown. If they immediately seek to bury someone else in accusations, wildly reject my vote/claims outright, or blame-shift, they're more likely to be scum.
3) Taking an alternate approach to scumhunting allows one to take advantage of "weak points" in other players' gameplay. Most mafia is played in the public arena. Players openly debate and discuss who is scum and why. Thus, most people tend to focus most of their attention on growing and evolving as players in this realm of open banter. A couple years ago, I learned that the vast majority of players didn't know how to react to certain circumstances. One such circumtsance was a completely irrational, yet intensely focused onslaught from an established player. This was a very noticeable chink in the mafia community's collective armor, and while you had your Internet Strangers and your Baby Jesuses (the paragons of this style of play), people who effectively played without explanation were very few and far between. Thus, very few players put the necessary time, thought, and effort into ensuring that they new how to interact with these playstyles. Over time, parts of the community evolve, and playing such playstyles shifts and changes just as the overall game meta does. Not only do they not know how to react, and not only do they give more information about themselves, but their weaknesses are actually exploitable, allowing the attacker as an individual to crack other players' shells and expose their soft, fleshy interiors, thus opening the game up for everybody.
And FYI, Xtoxm is a poor benchmark for erratic behavior. It has to be used in moderation, and is really only useful after one has established oneself as being able to consistently find scum using traditional methods. If I had been wild and erratic immediately after joining Scum in 2005, I don't think I'd be anywhere near where I am today. The biggest issue with seemingly :nothelpful: play is that far too many players have no idea when, where or how frequently to utilize it.... so they really do end up just being :nothelpful:. It's awfully hard to explain... something you more have to see and experience over time.
Keep in mind that like these behaviors are also very case-specific. I will not treat Thok the same way I would treat an Oman or a Vollkan or somebody I've never played with.
Now.
Did you know that unexplained votes are the best things ever?
Do you typically skim over large parts of the game? Genuine question, because this quote really gives me that impression. Your sum up of the dahill case in particular is clearly wrong.EA wrote:I don't feel like the cases against any of them are substantial. Maybe it's just me, but I can't really read xtoxm the way he's been playing, in the same way that I can't really read natirasha ever. I don't think that Coriolanus's "i'm in the business of scumhunting" post implies that he can't talk about anything else. And that idea that dahill is scummy for agreeing with Yos and Glork on Coriolanus's alt defense being strange is just beyond stupid.
What would you suggest? I'm uncomfortable to lynch someone who's not around to defend themselves or claim, and I don't see you trying to persuade anyone to lynch Glork or Yos2. We've tried more than once to get the deadline extended, which seems more than reasonable, but mod isn't receptive to it since the contract was written in stone in the sign ups thread and there's literally no way it can possibly be changed.Xtoxm wrote:That is a pathetic reason. Was calling me town jsut an attempt to look good?
Oh, I find that extremely easy to believe. It's the Corvote I dislike.Post 356, Glork wrote:That said, having known dahill from scumchat and having met him in person, you're saying you still find it unreasonable to believe that he quoted me to debunk the "unexplained votes suck" comment for the lulz?
How does Post 351 fit into this theory? You seem to be just slinging mud here. Based on what's just happened I'm thinking Xtoxm might flip town, but if he's scum, this comment is definitely noted.Glork wrote:Anyway, Xtox is obv the play of the day, Dahill is probably the convenient distraction, which would be serious minus points for both Erratus and Pathetric.