raider 450 wrote:raider 439 wrote:I sort of went into that before thinking that Freeko was a sheep or going to claim that.
It seemed to fit the picture I was expecting regarding someone having a sheep role.
I knew that Korts said something sheep like before but I took that originally as he was trying to draw out the sheep.
How?
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:Now snap back over to this game.
We know, or at least don't have any reason to assume
that scum have safe fake names included in their role PM.
This makes me VERY uneasy. Which is it, and why?
Rhinox 485 wrote:So, BSG asks for a flavor name. Why? Same two options as before...
1) BSG wants to compare the flavor name in freeko's and Vi's claim to her own flavor name to see if freeko and Vi's claim is believable (I'm not saying BSG has the same flavor name, I'm saying that she's comparing more the flavor, than the name itself. Does Merchant make sense as a town role, taking into consideration whatever her town role name is?)
-or-
2) BSG is scum, say, a wolf. (Not saying I have any reason to believe all scum are wolves, but then again, I have no reason to believe they aren't). Later in the game, BSG might have to fake claim something to save herself. Without knowing anything about any of the town roles, how would she have any idea of a flavor name to use for her role? Thats why specifically asking for a flavor name is kinda scummy. For a while, scum could only assume sheep were town roles (due to the N0 flavor kill, and Occam mentioned something about sheep on cliffs). Thats why everyone should be suspicious of Korts claiming sheep, regardless of whether or not raider can confirm there are sheep in the game. Now scum also know there are non-sheep town roles, since freeko and Vi are merchant/companion. In other words, before freeko and Vi's flavor names were revealed, scum had no reason to believe there were any town flavor names other than sheep. Now, they have more flexibility in fake claiming later knowing they can come up with something other than sheep.
Now consider BSG's quote above. She flat out denies that she was asking due to option 1. So, its either option 2, or some other role specific option that I can't possibly know since I don't know BSGs role.
I'm pretty sure she flat-out denied Option 2.
BSG ### wrote:And based upon the information I have received in my PM, I can tell you that scum don't have a reason to flavor fish names...
Interestingly, this contradicts what you (Rhinox) said earlier about not being able to assume scum have safeclaims. I think Battlestar Galactica needs to give some input on this.
Rhinox 485 wrote:I want everyone to think very carefully and ask themselves this question: Did my vote on Korts really appear to be made with the intention of lynching korts? Vi, look at my votes in mafia 87
In Mafia 87, I recall you wanted to lynch all the people you voted for... which you should have, given that you replaced in D4
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:In post game discussion, players insisted that it was a valid tell, but based on my own experiences and games, I have nothing to suggest that lynching someone because they were the 3rd vote on (almost) every wagon in the game increases the chances of lynching scum.
I'm going on my extremely limited experience as Mafia here. This is what I have heard (as has everyone) and what I've observed of my own tendencies.
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:I don't think now is the time to consider policy lynching inactives, unless we have reason to believe that every active player is town.
I agree with this, with the addition that I find it very unlikely that everyone present 'n' active is notScum.
(Noticeable caveat: Jebus is correct that Lunar_Tick neglected this game for a while while winning as scum elsewhere.)
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:Hmm... Rhinox... what a pretty name...
hehe
'Mind if I give your kid a much classier two-letter nickname?
Rhinox 485 wrote:Regarding all the non-game discussion we seem to be having: I actually kind of like it, so long as its not distracting us from the business part of the game. It makes the game seem to have another dimension to it, as I feel like I "know" a little bit who i'm playing with. I just hope it doesn't cause any hurt feelings if things get heated later on. I don't want anything to get personal, so to speak.
I'm fairly sure in my case if I were to get personal with you, I would have already
Actually, even people you've never played with have told me you are cool, so I think you're in the clear.
Rhinox 485 wrote:However, you should also know I would replace into any of your games without even having to think about it.
I'll try to make my games notFail then.
Rhinox 168 wrote:Why is it that whenever I play in games with masons, the masons play the scummiest and are forced to reveal themselves D1...
Why is it that whenever I play in games with masons, I wind up being one of them and they're never confirmed... and yes, at least one gets outed D1...
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:I might as well have been talking to my dog... would have gotten more of a response
Woof.
I can understand what you're saying about that freeko vote.
However, that other freeko vote D1 (Page 6) looks like what you tried to pull on Korts just now - big wall about something else, vote someone unrelated, explain shortly afterward. Was that your intention (re: the freeko vote)?
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:Are you saying you've never voted for/wagoned someone with an intention to get reactions from other players, without intending to lynch the person being wagoned?
Well, I have, actually.
As scum
Usually I want to get a reaction out of the person I'm voting for. But I digress; I see your rationale. The question is, are scum more likely to set these kinds of traps?
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:1) How was I putting words into BSG's mouth?
2) What words was I putting into BSG's mouth?
3) What is scummy about it?
4) Also, explain in what context was a backpedaling. Yes, I voted korts, then backed away. Explain to me the context of whats so scummy about that.
1) 2) 3) Now that I see where you're coming from, I... actually have no idea what I was talking about.
4) It comes down to WIFOM. Were you really fishing for reactions, or were you interested in Korts' lynch? Did you expect to get called for your baseless vote, or not? What kind of pressure comes from a baseless
? Your explanation seems to be a cop out. But because of how unlikely it was that you could actually get away with that, I'm willing to let it go by as a null-tell for now.
Do you think Juls was fishing for reactions as well?
-----
Rhinox 419 wrote:I don't remember L_T saying he had mod-giving info about the choices, I think L_T incinuated that there might be mod-given info in some people's roles (I.E. RS) about picking paths, and he said so in a scummy role fishing kind or way.
L_T 66?
-----
Rhinox 485 wrote:This sounds an awful lot like asking for a mass claim, while saying you're not asking for a mass claim. You figure you claimed, so everyone else might as well?
Not quite. I'm sick of the airs of mystery around the sheep and the other sheep and the shepherd and the merchants and the role-given information about safeclaims(?) and the lions and tigers and bears (oh my!) and so forth. It's getting annoying quickly.
At the same time, that sounds like a personal problem I can get over. But I still like complaining, because, well, complaining. Having already claimed just adds a twinge of bitterness to it~
-----
Juls 486 wrote:I missed this in Vi's post. I have little nuggets of suspicions on several people and there are a couple of people that I haven't found anything to be suspicious at all. I would say my post 283 is still a fairly accurate indication of my suspicions more or less.
So... everyone is scummy, at best neutral, or absent?
-----
raider 487 wrote:This is part of why I am looking towards you as possible scum. I have said my case as to why I think Kort is town and all the people that have not acted apon it are the people I am looking towards as possible scum. I can understand why people are not taking what I am saying as fact because I am sure I do not seem like the most townie person to them and that Korts does not either. Also yes your vote did seem to made with the intention of lynching korts.
This doesn't seem to flow well.
Rhinox is scum because he voted Korts with the intention to lynch him... in spite of the fact that you defended Korts...
after the fact
.
-----
Welcome TonyMontana. I like this new avatar better than the last one, btw. And interesting gimmick with your game; reading through the first few pages I wish I was in it.
Now post. *kick*
-----
Rhinox 498 wrote:Either way, I suppose I should take a closer look at juls, since she is the only active player I haven't looked closely at - mainly for what I thought was a town tell in one of her first posts. However, this tell was contradicted in one of her recent posts
So what's the tell?
Rhinox 498 wrote:most of the town is hungry for blood
rawr
(Now to put that in context~)
Rhinox 498 wrote:I did think that the quick growth of the wagon was odd... but it tells me some things... either most of the town is hungry for blood, there really is some basis for the wagon, or there are scum on the wagon. I find it more odd that the player who unvoted and admitted that he didn't think there was much basis for the wagon going to claim/lynch territory (me) is the one everyone is finding scummy for doing so... Korts, do you think there is justification behind the wagon that formed on you?
After Korts answers this question, I would like for you to narrow down which of these options you think is most likely.
-----
Juls 503 wrote:Freeko, this is like the third or fourth time you have requested role information. Do you realize that doing so is anti-town? Do you realize that scum can read this board too and thus get to see the role information as well? Why are you so determined to get others roles and how do you think doing so benefits town? And how do you think this information will help you find scum? I would appreciate if you could answer all these questions.
Where are you going with this?
-----
freeko 507 wrote:Ok. I will answer them all.
1)blahblah
2)shocker
3)look up at my last post
4)look up some more at it.
Hey Shepherd Guy. Can I borrow that crook so I can beat someone over the head?
Seriously, I don't follow what you (freeko) are saying here.
Alternatively, what Juls 508 said.
Everything you say and do matters. People will respond in ways you may never see. May those responses be what you intend.