Kingmaker II-Game Over
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Gah. What a massive post flood.
This is my first time playing any kind of Kingmaker game, so I won't offer any opinion about what PJ said simply because I have no basis for comparison.
I'm leaning towards the side of box being scummy, because he added the vote after he was voted. However, I need to spend more time reading all the posts, so I'll decide tomorrow. Also nothing about Pab/Glork for now till I do the read.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Box. I'm not buying the newbieness. Playing on emotion is a scum-tell. Claiming when not under pressure is a scum-tell. Giving up is a scum-tell.vote: cardb0ardb0x.
MMOS: no one is asking for you to conform to anybody. All we're asking is for you to vote. If you don't use your vote, we won't know what we're thinking. If you don't care, why the heck are you playing mafia? And why do we have to take notes on what you say? Pro-town players should make an effort to help the town obviously.
FOS: Ameliaslay and Vaughn for trying to overplay what MBL said about PJ.
I meant that I won't comment on the differences between the previous game and this one since I wasn't in it.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
vote: phoebus
Yep, phoebus is the total opposite of MMOS. But while MMOS claims to think that we can look through his posts to make notes anyway (which is something that I do to everyone anyway whether they vote or not), Phoebus claims to play by gut. While I know that isn't a strong scummy behaviour, it makes it easier for him to randomly accuse others to create confusion (because he won't state cases).
MMOS: I'd say that voting in this game is more 'lenient', as in I feel free-er to vote now since there's so many of us, and only the king's vote will execute. Normally, I always hesistate to vote just in case scum jumps on the bandwagon. So I don't see why you are not voting.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I forgot to add something else. I'll try to be as active as I can in this game, but it's really difficult when I post just before I sleep, and I have 3-4 pages to go through the moment I wake up... Blame my +8 timezone. I'll try my best to cope, but I may ask for a replacement if the post flood continues and it becomes a major problem.
To whoever commented on Glork: Glork always plays this way. Whatever game he's in. Kinda like raj I think.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I'm a little confused on who to comment on at the moment, since there're so many of us, and so many accusations + votes. King can you do a list?
I'm just going to comment on what I think were the more imortant ones.
I agree with everything said in the above post of CDB's about box and what Ameliaslay said about him in 181, so my vote on him stays.
@box: Oh. I thought kingmaker and heros weren't townies.
MBL: It's hard to do metagaming in mafia, unless Vaughn ALWAYS lurks when he's mafia and is active when he's pro-town. He could just be adopting a different playstyle. Hence, I don't buy what you said post 179. (Also referred to MMOS post 184).
@Twomz: No lingering questions. But thanks for asking.
About the PJ issue. While I don't think his comments that he's town this game are that scummy, I'm worried that the people who poked at it are using it as an excuse to accuse him.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
MOD: I voted for phoebus, but it isn't in the vote count. Sometime Sept 16/.
Phoebus seems more scummy. Someone said that he didn't post for some time, but that's not true. He posted a vote. I agree he still seems scummy.
I believe PJ is protown. His frustration sounds genuine. One question though: did you know this was mountainous when you signed up? (I sympathise with you over points 3-4. *pats*)
While Glork's comments are irritating, I'm not sure they show that he's scummy. It sounds more like someone being immature.
MMOS: care to clarify why box is protown?Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Wow. I really should start learning from PJ. In most games, after page 10 or so I usually make some big mistake. I finally went to read Kingmaker I, and I admire his analysis.
MMOS: Everyone is assumed to be protown until he/she does something that makes him look scummy. That's the way mafia works. Or else I could jsut go around randomly accusing anyone for the entire game. So the onus is on you to explain why he's scummy, not for me to show why he's town.
Argh... I didn't realise Fritz was here. He's on my blacklist of weird players.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
My take on pab: his play is really weird. I've been in a couple of games with him too, and he didn't play like that.
PJ: can you maybe post a LOE for us? I know you mentioned Bird and Phoebus, but its better to get a list of people we should discuss than go around attacking everyone. (This is one of my first large games where I joined from the start because I replaced in most where fewer people were alive, so correct me if I'm wrong.)Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I asked for a LOE because I wanted to know who you thought were scummy. And also because I thought we might end up being deadlined like what Twomz said.
But then again, I've changed my mind because of what PJ said, that people who weren't on it evade suspicion. Also because I realised that I tend to overly focus on just a few people each game, which has led to horrible consequences in my other games, so I'm trying to change that.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
My original reason for voting phoebus.
Then I decided that it might just be his playstyle. But something else came up:spectrumvoid wrote:
Yep, phoebus is the total opposite of MMOS. But while MMOS claims to think that we can look through his posts to make notes anyway (which is something that I do to everyone anyway whether they vote or not), Phoebus claims to play by gut. While I know that isn't a strong scummy behaviour, it makes it easier for him to randomly accuse others to create confusion (because he won't state cases).
.petroleumjelly wrote:
Vote: Phoebus, I am not liking the coincidental nature of his votes.
As it happens, this was the sixth vote on MBL, the seventh vote on Cb0x, and the sixth vote on Pablito. This post was simply jumping on the three people with the biggest wagons, on the basis of "gut".Phoebus wrote:Urgh.
I have not read the first kingmaker.
I do not have cases against these people.
I do not know whether I will be building cases.
I play by gut.
Wake me up when September ends.
And this post was the fourth vote on Mert, which was the largest wagon that Phoebus was not on. Right now, Phoebus' vote is on all four of the largest bandwagons, and all of it on "gut". I would like to hear more explanations for his votes.Phoebus wrote:vote: Mert
So my vote on him stays.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
unvote boxSorry for leaving it for so long, I just forgot I was voting him.
My vote on Phoebus stays, for exactly the same reasons as before.
I can't get a read on bird and CDB, because bird has just not been contributing much, but so have other people in this game.
vote: pablitoI read him as someone who made a mistake, and now is trying to pass it off as a deliberate attempt. It seems insincere to me.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I don't like the way box specially picked out that comment of pablito's to accuse pablito of implying he's a mason. There have been many (way too many) other totally weird comments that some people have said in this game that I can't make sense of.
I am more-or-less satisfied with pablito's latest post explaining his actions. And sounvote: pablito
MBL: I don't get why you're saying that people who are lazy and weird cannot be scum.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I don't get MOS reasons for 'clearing' Phoebus. He says Phoebus has played differently in other games when he's scum or town... We aren't saying Phoebus is scummy because of his difference in playstyle compared to his other games.
Also, MOS sounds like he's accusing random people. Again, giving a crap reason, 'gut'.
I went back as promised. I think bird and Phoebus are currently tied... both are unhelpful, the only thing is I don't like Phoebus's responses too.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I'm saying he isn't scummy due to his DIFFERENCE in playstyle compared to other games (in response to what you said about his playing differently in other games), I'm saying he looks scummy due to his style in THIS ONE. With that said, I don't even know if he's unhelpfulness etc. is a playstyle... I read it as a scum-tellMastermind of Sin wrote:
Then why are you saying Phoebus is scummy, if not because his playstyle is wierd?spectrumvoid wrote:I don't get MOS reasons for 'clearing' Phoebus. He says Phoebus has played differently in other games when he's scum or town... We aren't saying Phoebus is scummy because ofhis difference in playstyle compared to his other games.
I stand by point that 'gut' is a bad reason. You should have good reasons for voting someone. If it's just a feeling thing, you should explain what gives you the feeling. Also what PJ said, Phoebus's gut just so happened to point him to the wagon. In this case, gut sounds like an excuse to vote.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Why 'even Thok'?
Sorry about that, I meant to say you need good reasons for accusing someone. (My defence: vote counts are so confusing this game... I went by tone of posts instead of vote numbers )
Well, yes, his play could be different. But different play does not = scum or = town, it's just a matter of playstyle, not alignment.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
MBL: I remember agreeing with many of PJ's theories day 1 about who he thought he was scummy etc. I was surprised at the lynch of RC though, since I don't think there was that much spotlight on RC before the lynch. However, I'm not sure if that means PJ is a scum-king, because we were at deadline. I also remember thinking that RC wasn't the most scummy of all the people on the LOS. (I can't remember exactly why now, but I'll do a read.)
I won't vote any new lurkers yet, I'd prefer if we give them more time to get back after the crash. However,vote: stalling champ, ubertimmyfor the same reasons as 557.
About Twomz: I can't remember what he said and what happened...Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
On MBL and Glork: I'm not getting MBL's case on Glork at all. It's ridiculous to expect a vote to be as important as it is in an ordinary game. However, votes are still important because they confirm a person's stand on someone. Votes should also preferably come with some kind of explanation. Note the case on Phoebus early yesterday, where he voted without explaining. With that said, I don't think MBL is right to assume that Glork sees only votes. I don't think I have a long playing history with Glork, but from some of his other games, I read him as a pretty analytical player. Also, there's no evidence to prove MBL's accusation in this game. I also think MBL is wrong to not take note of discrepancies, it could be a scum slip.
On Pooky: Hm... I thought it was obvious exactly what game Pooky was talking about. This IS the game we're playing after all.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I think so. I've skimmed through a little of his games. But he does occasionally post analysis.cardb0ardb0x wrote:Aaand I suppose since someone brought up Fritzler, it's fairly apparent that he's just clinging onto a character theme- i.e. vote crashtextdummie ARR ARR ARR CAPTIAL LETTERS. This is neither helpful nor, um, productive. I really wanted to use a neither/nor sentence there. If he does this in every game, it's probably a good strategy for *him.*
To anyone who's been in these players' games, do they always do this...?Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I think you misrepresented Yos here. He saidGlork wrote:
You seemed awfully wishy-washy in this post. Saying that you thought he didn't look good, but couldn't commit to such an inkling (even rejecting your own feelings by saying "I'm not sure if it's a scumtell") feels very uncharacteristic of you.Yos2 wrote:Phobus: I really can't get a good read on him at the moment. His shameless bandwagoning dosn't look good, but I'm not sure if it's a scumtell at this point. More suspicious is his refusal to contribute in any real way, with helpful comments like "still nothing to add at this point".
A: he can't get a good read on ph on the bandwagoning issue, because he's not sure if his bandwagoning is a scumtell.
C: he thinks phoebus not contributing to this game is 'more suspicious'.
This explains pretty clearly what Yos thinks of Phoebus, and why. I don't see how this makes him wishy-washy. And there's nothing wrong with not having a 100% confirmed stand on someone. (I got this from the 'not commiting' point.) For example, just look at what some people, myself included, think of bird and MBL's accusation (was it MBL?), especially the uncertainty involvled.
Take note of my sig addition.
For the blatant misreprentation,vote: GlorkI know this is Kingmaker, but this makes it clear where I stand.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I see Yos's earlier post as someone pointing out things that could be scummy, but not committing whether he has scummy. Butunvote glork. Even though I still disagree with you, you've clarified and I don't think it's a misrepresentation.
Forgot about this one. You're assuming pablito and Glork are of the same alignment, and that Glork will be king. I don't see grounds for this assumption.pablito wrote:Yosarian2 wrote:Oh, and vote:pablito. Yesterday I had the feeling he was trying to get on Glork's "good side" so that he could manipulate him when he became king, and today it seems he's trying to manipulate Glork into killing a good guy by just saying "I agree with everything Glork said and disagree with everything Yos said" without actually responding to anything or giving any reasons.
Phoebus: I believe most people have repeated their various stands that were lost, and you should do the same.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
What is +K?BrianMcQueso wrote:
MrBuddyLee (0+K): UberTimmy, Fritzler
Nightson (0): Twomz
pablito (1+K): UberTimmy, CrashTextDummie
Pariah (0):
petroleumjelly (1): PookyTheMagicalBear
Phoebus (0): bird1111
PookyTheMagicalBear (3+K)
spectrumvoid (0): StallingChamp, ubertimmy
StallingChamp (2):
Twomz (5+K):
UberTimmy (4):
Yosarian2 (0+K): TwomzBlank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
What a nice way to plant the idea that I'm scum into people's head. I anxiously await your reread for me to have reasons to respond to.pablito wrote:King Glork wrote:As for spectrumvoid, I tend to find her scummy all the time. I don't remember what she's done in this game specifically to have garnered any attention. I really found that last vote to be suspect though. It seemed alright and justified, but it really surprised me. And the subsequent unvote was more alarming to me. I would require a re-read on spectrumvoid to get a better read on her because I don't remember her well in the context of this game only.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I'm finally back after a horribly long absence. I was having some weird problems on MS.net logging in and posting (I was posting from the future), read the 2 threads devoted to my problems in the help forum for details. Thanks to those who have alerted people to my problems. I'll respond to everything tomorrow.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Hi luckayluck. I'll make my own summary of your posts to make it clear.
People leaning on the side of town:
MoS, MBL, Nightson, Pablito, PJ, box, dead rikimaru, fritzler, glork, mert, SV,
People leaning on side of scum:
bird, stallingchamp, uber
?
Pooky, Vaughn, Yos, CTD
You find a very large number of people pro-town. I'm not saying I disagree with any specific person on your list, but a lot of how what you use to judge people on is based on your feelings. I agree with MBL on that you generally think people who post analytically are pro-town. But thanks for jumping in so quickly.
I don't understand this line: bird1111: You didn't have the posts to go of... fishy. I know you find bird scummy because you voted for him, but I'm not sure why.
Side-note:
How do you do links in the posts?
I'm suffering from yet another error message, check it out in help forum. If I get another one I'm getting out of here permanently.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I feel that MBL's case on Glork not airing his views directly before the execution doesn't make sense since there were many other people who didn't do so. I also remember that Glork had told us what he thought of the people already before that time.
Note: I only mean that this particular MBL's point is wrong. I still find the king vaguely scummy for reasons I've mentioned earlier and MBL's other reasons. Picking up specific people to do homework also draws attention to those specific people, for the king's own reasons, which may be scummy. However, since it's obvious the king won't die today, I'll bring this out again tomorrow, since it's a useless discussion now.
I've already mentioned what I think of the PJ killing RC issue.
I didn't mean that you didn't have a case on bird, I meant I didn't understand your case on bird... but now that I've spent some time going through your post, I got it.
Your humble servant at your service... do I have an assignment?Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I missed some interesting discussion.
Skimming through, I caught pab's comment about my change in king. For the record, I believe that the king is slightly scummy. For many reasons, e.g.: the one MBL and Yos said about he's already decided etcetcetc. In response to Glork's earlier question, I also think picking out specific people is scummy.
I don't think we should discuss this today, since he won't be executed today. Mainly because I predict the discussion going around in circles, and I think it's more productive to discuss someone who may be executed. It is something I will bring out tomorrow if I'm alive after night.
I've done my HW, just let me go dig up my word doc.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Oh I missed this. Zindaras: i think you missed out on a couple of posts when you say I didn't give opinions. Before you replaced in, I've discussed Phoebus when he was under fire, the people on the LOE, the ex-king, bird, the current king.
Here's my read from day 2 onwards to page 25, more to come later. I've grouped discussions by issues instead of timelines.
Glork doesn't want to be king. He votes Pooky, MBL Pablito. And reads CTD.
Here's an interesting bird/pablito interaction.
pablito votes bird for lurking.
Bird posts:
Ameliaslay, glork, nightson, box, twomz, yos = protown. Mert, pablito, Phoebus = scum.
? = MOS, MBL, PJ, pooky, sv, sc.
Lurkers = CTD, Dead Rikimaru, Fritz, MOS, Pariah, UT, Vaughn
RC = scum.
pablito unvotes.
Looks to me like a day nut-kicking.
Responses to bird:
Twomz says he normally bandwagons day 1.
Pooky says he has nothing to respond to (in response to bird's accusation).
MBL makes the nut-kicking post.
SV sits on the fence re bird.
Nightson fos everyone on the bird wagon.
Yos votes Twomz for jumping on the wagon. Suspects people on wagon.
PJ + Phoebus: bird = scum.
Mos: bird = scum, but not lynch today.
General:
DR votes pablito.
Nightson votes Twomz
CTD: vote PJ for lynching RC, vote SC for missing post, vote Twomz for bird wagon + logical fallacy, vote UT for lurking. SC responds MUCH later in post 597, saying he thought PJ made a good decision, but did not understand the RC execution.
Pablito: vote UT, vote CTD for voting PJ.
MBL: votes all lurkers. discusses what PJ scumking would do.
SV: thinks RC wasn't the most scummy day 1, votes old lurkers.
Yos: Thinks PJ breaking the rules is townish.
Pab: defends PJ.
Mert votes Twomz, Pooky, defends MBL for his bird theory.
Glork: Bird = ? but maybe no, votes pooky + twomz scummy for jumping on wagon.
Bird: votes pooky for wanting to execute him and wagoning, MBL = town.
Interaction between Pooky and Glork.
Pooky brings up wagoning, makes a specific/general game slip, Glork is accused of ignoring context.
Glork summarises: Pooky says wagoning is useless in kingmaker
Glork gives an e.g., pooky says wagoning with king glork is useless. Pooky brings out context, Glory says it wasn't clear, pooky is sarcastic again, questions when, glork says kingmaker in general VS a specific game.
Post 592: Pooky says Glork assumed he was talking about another game, which is dumb, says it's only 1 e.g. etc.
Post 595: Glork says Pooky's doesn't show he's talking about a specific case, says metagaming is okay, brings up more examples.
There are valid reasons for both, but I note that Pooky played with little content and little logic till Glork pushed him for it. Also that pooky was very sarcastic, which might have led to the confusion. I'm not sure if that was deliberate. On the flip side, it's weird for Glork to keep assuming Pooky is talking about some other game. I think he harped on Pooky's so-called slip too much, as I see no reason for pooky to be talking about kingmaker games in general rather than specific. (I have mentioned this in post 598).
Interaction between Glork and MBL:
MBL says Glork has bad judgement. After some posts, Glork votes MBL for raising theory and not voting.
MBL says votes aren't important, and he has stated his stance clearly.
Glork: MBL didn't clarify stand on bird till pressured, says votes are important.
MBL: says kings are lazy if they rely on VC (agrees with MoS), wagoning is useless, glork is a bad king.
Glork: defends himself nicely, says he doesn't take VC to be the sole measure, saying he pays attention to the background, mentions possibility of false reasons for execution. Says if king loses either way whether he goes with wagon or against it.
MBL: says Glork thinks he's hiding his position on bird, says Glork is pretending to have poor judgement ie scummy.
Glork: thinks MBL was presenting a theory, but wanting to claim nonresponsibility.
MBL: Says all his other posts save his 1st one showed his opinions clearly.
I think MBL comes off looking scummy in this one. Note that MBL insults Glork. Also note that MBL made a bizzare accusation when he accused Glork of relying only on VCs, when nowhere has Glork said that. It's also true that MBL didn't clarify till Glork pushed for it, so MBL's accusation isn't true. And I believe votes are important in this game to make your stand clear, so Glork's accusation is true. (I've explained this in 598.)
Pooky + PJ + Glork:
PJ votes pooky for inconsistency + his attack on Twomz for saying nothing + defending PJ (because pooky knows PJ reciprocates) + being too sarcastic and defeatist. Twomz = town.
Pooky defends himself. Says it's consistent because he knows he's town, he wasn't attacking Twomz but shaming him, says he was being sarcastic, he loves PJ, says he made a post about winning it he's king.
Glork: says Pooky criticised PJ's early gameplay, yet defends him D1 in another game. Asks Pooky who else he suspects.
Pooky: says he didn't criticise his play.
On this exchange, I think Pooky was trying to deflect PJ's accusations and not responding to them properly. The shaming response is wrong because he was obviously attacking Twomz, his consistency response doesn't make sense because only he knows whether he's town or not, and it's true he was defeatist, bringing up 1 post does not show his overall attitude and tone. Pooky also did not adequetely respond to Glork (It's true he criticised PJ).
box:
says he doesn't like PJ for executing the person who thought he was the most scummy, but yet he's getting a lesser scumvibe, due to the amount of thought PJ put into it.
DR + UT lurk, but DR says more.
Fritz is unproductive.
Asks about metaming.
SV responds to the point of Friz, says that's Fritz's normal play, but he does post analysis occasionally.
About Yos:
G votes Y for being something scummy, asks about his change in opinion re phoebus.
Y asks why did G follow him if G thought Y was scummy. Explains why he didn't have a change of opinion: he didn't have a good read, but his lurking is suspicious. Y votes in 423 because he doesn't think people on the LOE are really suspicious, Phoebus is just the more suspicious one.
Glork: he did not follow Y. says Y was non-committal till deadline, and says someone with Y's experience should be suspicious of someone.
Y says he thought G was following him, says he thought he should say something due to deadline and stagnant activity, says he voted due to deadline, says Phoebus didn't respond to poking.
Pablito votes Yos, he doesn't like the defense, but says Yos might be misguided, and that pab's biased. (Pablito is off. He votes Yos, admits he doesn't have strong reasons for voting, and says he himself was biased... I don't see why he voted in the first place if he wasn't sure. Why did most people harp on Yos for around the same reason, and not on Pablito?)
[BREAK HERE to make the timelines less mixedup.]
Glork asks for prods on Amelia and Pariah and VC.
Unvotes pab, MBL, Twomz
FoS: MBL, Twomz.
bird asks for the reason for the unvotes.
Pab + Glork:
Pablito unvotes CTD because the attacked was well-intentioned but the reasons weren't there. He thinks CTD had no scummy motive, but his actions are suspicious.
Glork: asks which actions.
pablito: CTD's vote on PJ, because a pro-town voter would have done the same thing. And Fritz's accusing him. He adds that he unvoted, but unvotees will still be suspicious for him.
Twomz pops in and says non-content.
Bird unvotes Mert because poor logic was the reason, and his logic has improved. (I think Mert hasn't even posted... where did the improvement in logic come from?)
Back to Yos:
Yos asks what arguments of Glork's.
SV defends Yos, saying his stand was clear, says Glork misrepresented, votes Glork. (post 615).
Glork explains why Yos was wishy-washy, says Yos brings up 2 things that are scummy and yet finds Phoebus not suspicious.
Phoebus votes yos + pablito on gut. (This was after the pablito and Glork exchange.)
bird votes yos for Glork's reason, and for contradicting himself on birds's wagon. Yos explains that he wasn't contradicting.
Phoebus votes bird.
Yos explains that he wasn't sure if it was a scumtell, and that he couldn't get a read on Phoebus.
Yos votes Pablito and foses phoebus,
PJ votes bird, defends Yos, votes UT for lurking.
Summary as of page 25 (+ my HW assignment):
I think mbl, pablito, bird, phoebus, pooky, glork is scummy (in no particular order). They are currently scummy individuals, I haven't picked out pairs yet.
I think Twomz is slightly scummy for disappearing once the spotlight is off him + the wagon issue.
I think Yos isn't scummy, based on the reasons people have brought up against him.
I have no clear read on PJ other than the RC issue, no read on Mert, CTD, SC and whoever else is lurking.
This is of page 25.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
I have a couple of problems with this post specifically.
What do you define as scum-hunting? It sounds more like an attempt to accuse them of being scummy for not posting enough... in which case there are other people who are guilty for that.bird1111 wrote:Pooky: Hasn't contributed a whole lot, but his contribution isn't that bad either, and has shown pretty much no interest in scumhunting, thinking he's likely scum.
Yosarian2: Has contributed a good deal, but hasn't shown a whole lot of interest in scumhunting, leaning slightly towards scum
MBL: Has contributed a lot and has clearly been interested in scumhunted, looks very protown to meBlank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Zindaras wrote:spectrumvoid (unless I'm missing something, she hasn't answered Yos's questions yet)
You missed the part in Yos's post where he says he knows enough about where I stand on certain players. You also missed my somewhat reorganised PBPA. I think I've aired enough of my views.
Phoebus is irritating me again. While he may not be on the LOE for today, his behaviour has generally not been pro-townish.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Here's why I was less harsh on LL: He replaced into a 37 page that has been running for nearly 4 months... considering how hard it's been to find replacements for all the other games, I thought it'd be nice if I didn't jump in and yell at him immediately.
I'd actually like to get rid of Phoebus. I see him as dead weight, and he himself that he'll post little, but won't be replaced. I also think he's less likely to get NKed because he confuses town. Phoebus is someone I definitely do not want to see in endgame, reason being I'll have no read on him whatsoever.
bird111: I don't like meta-gaming. I'll only use it in cases where a player's playstyle extremely consistent. I've skimmed through bird's, and I don't think he's consistent enough to meta-game.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
This is out of point but: BMQ!!! You're around and didn't answer my prod!!!
PJ: I don't like how you're disagreeing with CTD on the basis on you having played with Mert. That's blatent meta-gaming. And you've only played one game, I don't think it's sufficient to get a good grasp on a person's playstyle.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
Gah. I had a power outrage yesterday while I was posting.
I won't discuss the kingmaker strat bit that Lowell brought up since I don't think I'm experienced/smart enough to have anything worth saying.
About Mert:
I'm not sure if someone has pointed this out, but Mert has kinda gone missing in all his games, and he's stated that he won't be coming back. Unless I missed it, I don't think we've gotten a replacement for him, so no one will answer the attacks against him.
I'm kinda neutral about this, and here's why:
1) This is pure strat without taking Mert's possible scumminess into account, but should we be lynching someone who won't respond? I think lynching someone else might give us info for tomorrow.
2) Again, pure strat.
We haven't managed to get a replacement for Mert yet. And if we get one, will the replacement just pop up and get lynched? It's also tough to find replacements for a 40+ page game I think, and it's unfair for the newbie to defend himself. With that in mind, I'd say we lynch Mert purely to get rid of dead weight.
I haven't really decided which option I favour, but I thought I'd at least post my thoughts about it. Of course, both are void if 1) if we get a replacement soon (unlikely) 2) If there's someone more scummy on the LOE.
About LL: I think I've understood LL's logic, and while I disagree with it, I think it's more of a difference in opinion rather than something that is a scumtell. However, I disagree with what someone said about the thinking more people are townie = town tell bit. Thinking more people are townie could also = lousy scumdar, which may be a scum/town tell.
About Lowell: No handle yet on Lowell, but there was some interesting analysis there that I didn't think about. What do you mean by the meta-game in a scummy way bit? Considering I generally dislike meta-gaming unless there is a very good reason for doing so.
From here on, it's going to get a little confusing. Here's why: I don't want either Yos or Pooky to get executed, but I don't have a better candidate to recommend. Pooky first: he came back after being inactive. He was inactive across mafiascum.net, I did a quick check, so he wasn't lurker-scum. I don't see anything wrong with Pooky reviving himself here, considering he was under pressure to do so. I agree that this is a completely different situation from bird (whom I'm neutral about and I've explained why earlier), since it's been some time since day 2 started.
About Yos
The king seems to be banging on Yos a lot. He accuses Yos, but as yet I haven't seen a reason for why the king is doing so. King claimed that he will attempt to be more coherent and actually posts reasons, but they haven't appeared yet, though he's posted since then. It smells a lot like an attempt by the king to frame yos, since Yos has nothing concrete to defend against. I feel that the king could be deliberately not posting reasons hoping for someone (like lowell) to fill in the gaps. I also think that yos response to lowell's reasons are satisfactory.
I think we're missing a few people. What happened to phoebus? I remember voting him, but I completely forgot he's even in till I read lowell's 1013.Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006
As I promised, here are my reasons for voting Glork.
- already 'deciding' who he was going to lynch.
- choosing Yos without a reason. (Glork chose pooky with a reason.) I elaborated about this in post 1030. But as of post 1037, he still didn't provide a reason.
I read backwards, and the only thing I found was in my PBPA post 839, where I summarised Glork of accusing Yos of being scummy because of his change of opinion regarding phoebus. In the same post, Yos responded adequently. Later on the game, Yos again asks Glork for his reasons, Glork explained that Yos was wishy-washy. Yos responded by saying that he didn't contradict, and explained that he wasn't sure if it was a scum-tell. Glork did not respond. (As a side-note, I accused Glork of misrepresenting Yos in post 615, and Glork clarified, I responded in 630.)
I will be doing the same for other people I find scummy (ie, going backwards to get a better look/reasons.)Blank.-
-
spectrumvoid Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Problem Child
- Posts: 3998
- Joined: June 9, 2006