Well, I think you're probably scum, so keep posting and giving us more evidence.BridgesAndBaloons wrote:1) To everyone: It turns out I don't have enough evidence yet to back up my opinions, and many of you believe that I am distracting the town, changing my opinions constantly, and acting horribly inconsistent. I have been alternating between different styles of play because I'm trying to figure out how I play best. I've been using this game as a learning opportunity, and I'm sorry if it has lowered our chances of winning. Cerb especially seems to think that I'm not mafia, but that I am not helping this town at all. If the general consensus is that I can help the town best by hanging in the background, I will do so. I know that this isn't an individual game, it's a group game, and I've been trying to help the majority with everything I do, but if I'm actually not helping (if the rest agree with Cerb) then I'll quiet down.
Let me know if I should do this, but I'm going to write this post first.
I don't really think so. If anything it would be scummy to go super-defensive on a minor FoS.BridgesAndBaloons wrote: Amor: Is it scummy if someone FOSes you and you ignore it?
Is this about the WLC thing way back on page 2? I still do think it's scummy to put someone in serious lynch range when there's so little to go on. A small mistake could result in a quicklynch. There have been scummier things happening since then, but it's still suspiciousBridgesAndBaloons wrote:Is it scummy to encourage L-2 early on in the game?
Aggressiveness?Bridges wrote:... attack had reached it's peak in "attacking-ness." (I feel ashamed for not knowing a proper adjective to fit there) ...
Hugely so. Usually, April Fools Jokes tend to be believed at first (until we remember the date).Bridges wrote:Another side note: i was seriously considering "quoting" a mod pm saying I was some crazy role that didn't exist as an April Fools Joke, but then I realized It'd be stupid.
I don't like how your explanation for this changed from "I wanted to get a reaction" to "I mixed him up with someone else." I'm inclined to believe that you mentioned this excuseBridges wrote:To everyone: There was no contradiction that CKD made. I was mixing him up with someone else, and that contradiction got resolved.
There were a few times on Page 8 where CKD would attack or ask a question, and you would respond with an entirely different attack.Bridges wrote:2)Amor (201): I'm not sure what you mean when you say I have been
"ignoring a lot of what CKD is saying." I missed only one of his posts, and then I wrote a change. This was a couple of pages ago.
It depends. If the FoS is based on a substantial case and may soon turn into a vote, ignoring it could be read as "trying to make it go away." --- I wouldn't consider it scummy unless it's a blatant bandwagon vote and/or the reasoning is baseless. If the vote lacks both of these qualities, I'd call it aggressive at most.Bridges wrote:Amor: Is it scummy if someone FOSes you and you ignore it? --- Is it scummy to encourage L-2 early on in the game?
Not really. My belief that you two aren't scum-partners doesn't mean one must be scum. In addition to that, my suspicions on you wouldn't change if BaB was lynched right now and turned up town.CKD wrote:also noted is Jim Sauce's stance that BAB and I are the best two scum suspects right now (if I misread your post, please feel free to correct me). This is a classic set up of, if one turns out to me town, the other MUST be scum.....
CKD wrote:I wonder if anybody here is fitting such a bill.
*sidles out of the room* [Cerb] To answer your question, I haven't found Bab's posts useless. I think he could become a talented player after he gets the gist of the game. To directly answer I've managed to get some information off of his interactions with other players. Yes, he's inconsistant, and yes he overdramatizes things, and yes,I have a problem with how strongly he's gone for things without having much information to go back on, but evenerraticassualts against a player can bring out information.I do however conceed that if Bab makes many more posts like his one verses CDK, with little actual evidence to back anything up with but enough conviction to kill an angel, problems will be had. As it is, I have some questions saved up that may or may not become moot after CDK posts his reply. And no, they won't do much for me if I ask them now
Yes, normally I'd be against such thoughts. It's bad for a town to automatically lynch one player the next day without discussing other options. It's also a great logical fallacy. Just because we aren't scum together doesn't mean than one of uscuriouskarmadog wrote: also noted is Jim Sauce's stance that BAB and I are the best two scum suspects right now (if I misread your post, please feel free to correct me). This is a classic set up of, if one turns out to me town, the other MUST be scum.....now if BAB and myself are two townies bumping heads (as I think is the case), this is a great set up isnt it? BAB your thoughts on this?
To be 100% honest, I would write a post full of embarrassed smiley faces and a overly apologetic tone. In the end I would write (well he could be scum still) just to cover my bases. I would do the same if you happened to be lynched/NKed and turn up innocent. I wouldn't defend myself that much, I would admit that I seriously screwed up and apologize.CKD wrote: If for some odd reason I hang today and when you discover that I am indeed town, how will you defend yourself from this attack?
This is a very interesting idea. VERY interesting. I don't think this is a perfect idea (stupid WIFOM), but I think it does have some merit. There is definitely people who are fitting the bill, and I do have some ideas. Unfortunately this argument conforms (to that one scientific principle I can't remember the name of, where something changes when it is observed or it is aware of being observed) so I can't state names until I actually research it.CKD wrote: This is why (one reason) I think you are probably just a misguided townie (or a VI).I dont think scum would attack this hard and clearly tunnel vision this much on someone they know is town. Most likely they would sit back and comment on how such and such are acting scummy(but so is thier attacker is some ways) but not vote or do anything until they see how the BW starts to form....I wonder if anybody here is fitting such a bill.
I feel that many people were doing the same thing between me and amor as well.CKD wrote: now I plan on responding to your attack..but really it is going to come down to "you are jumping to conclusions based on your misassumptions of actions"...you are clearly tunnel visioning on me, it is not helpful. Now I am not telling you stop attacking me (if you truly think I am scum), but I am saying look for a moment at others..who is waiting for what? Why are they waiting? Why arent they scum hunting? There are some who are asking questions, which is good, there are others who are just sitting back to see who has the better argument between us.
Cerb's post on 162 showed a contradiction thatJimSauce wrote:
I don't like how your explanation for this changed from "I wanted to get a reaction" to "I mixed him up with someone else." I'm inclined to believe that you mentioned this excuseBridges wrote:To everyone: There was no contradiction that CKD made. I was mixing him up with someone else, and that contradiction got resolved.nowbecause I stated that I found it scummy. (I think Amor did as well.) So, may I ask who you confused CKD with, and can you point out the contradiction?
I hope you (or him) could point out questions that I missed. I probably saw them and answered them, but I didn't directly address I was answering the questions.JS wrote:There were a few times on Page 8 where CKD would attack or ask a question, and you would respond with an entirely different attack.Bridges wrote:2)Amor (201): I'm not sure what you mean when you say I have been
"ignoring a lot of what CKD is saying." I missed only one of his posts, and then I wrote a change. This was a couple of pages ago.
I'm not really sure at the moment, and I really haven't thought much about it yet. Your earlier interactions with Occult had me suspicious, and I think that could be a viable scumpair. JS and WLC have almost been sort of disconnected, and it's hard to really tie them to anyone in particular. I could see CKD with Occult despite his earlier confrontation with Boggzie, and maybe CKD with Amor, however that connection is slightly iffy. Cerebus and RI have looked pretty pro-town to me so far.BaB wrote:Bib: Who do you think the possible scum pairs are? Do you see anyone who seems to be connected in a scummy way?
Oh,Bridges wrote: Cerb's post on 162 showed a contradiction that you made. It's been resolved by now, and I had just mixed it people. I left it there because I decided hey, it'll get a bigger reaction. I feel that you are resurrecting, but maybe that's good right now.
I don't think so. After you posted, CKD restated his questions, which prompted a direct answer from you. (#194-200)Bridges wrote: I hope you (or him) could point out questions that I missed. I probably saw them and answered them, but I didn't directly address I was answering the questions.
this is my point, I can pull about 3 different posts where BiB states he either has a good feeling about me, doesnt understand the attack on me, or feels I am protown.backinblack167 wrote:I'm not really sure at the moment, and I really haven't thought much about it yet. Your earlier interactions with Occult had me suspicious, and I think that could be a viable scumpair. JS and WLC have almost been sort of disconnected, and it's hard to really tie them to anyone in particular. I could see CKD with Occult despite his earlier confrontation with Boggzie, and maybe CKD with Amor, however that connection is slightly iffy. Cerebus and RI have looked pretty pro-town to me so far.BaB wrote:Bib: Who do you think the possible scum pairs are? Do you see anyone who seems to be connected in a scummy way?
I wouldn't make such a blanket statement as to call all lurking scummy or not scummy. There are times when it doesn't really mean much (like during the opening of the game, or if the player has a tendency to be quiet), but it can be a frustrating thing to deal with (like when the player is under scrutiny and the whole town is waiting for him). I think it is more scummy to post a lot but never put forth much content, then to post rarely but make content filled posts. It is more about content than the amount of words someone says.Bab wrote:Cerb: Is lurking scummy? What is the biggest scum-tell you find in games? Has anyone been exhibiting it?
Bab's posts haven't been useless, but the point I am trying to make is that the town had been spending way too much time just dealing with Bab and very little time actually scum hunting. To illustrate my point I went back and counted the number of posts that was not primarily about Bab or had been posted by him from when boggzie replaced out(82) until when I had last posted(215).RI wrote:[Cerb] To answer your question, I haven't found Bab's posts useless. I think he could become a talented player after he gets the gist of the game. To directly answer I've managed to get some information off of his interactions with other players. Yes, he's inconsistant, and yes he overdramatizes things, and yes, I have a problem with how strongly he's gone for things without having much information to go back on, but even erratic assualts against a player can bring out information. I do however conceed that if Bab makes many more posts like his one verses CDK, with little actual evidence to back anything up with but enough conviction to kill an angel, problems will be had. As it is, I have some questions saved up that may or may not become moot after CDK posts his reply. And no, they won't do much for me if I ask them now Smile
I really didn't like this, but I can't articulate why. I will need to think on this more.Amor wrote:Well, I think you're probably scum, so keep posting and giving us more evidence.
Black wrote:At the time, he was only really getting heat from BaB and RI. RI himself admitted that his reasoning for suspicion was weak. I personally wouldn't call that major pressure, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. The fact is, he did change his style, whether the pressure he was receiving was a significant amount or not.
During this game I think I've been not really caring/noticing how scummy I've been coming off. My goal this game has been to try unearthing the scum using a bunch of different tactics to see which one works. I'm sure that the best thing to do would have been to admit my mistake immediately, but I figured it would get a bigger reaction from CKD. Come to think of it (I've learned that), blatant lying is a poor way of getting a reaction from someone. It'll only come back to bite you.JimSauce wrote:Oh,Bridges wrote: Cerb's post on 162 showed a contradiction that you made. It's been resolved by now, and I had just mixed it people. I left it there because I decided hey, it'll get a bigger reaction. I feel that you are resurrecting, but maybe that's good right now.that. I don't think I'm following the logic behind delaying the excuse. Wouldn't that only make you look scummier, if you let people believe that you lied about an accusation and then bringing up an excuse when called out? (I don't have much reason to believe you're lying, I just wanted to throw that out there.)
I discount the predecessor's actions if they weren't very indicative of alignment, especially in the case of Boggzie, where he played for a short period of time. Like I said before;cerebus wrote:How scummy does boggzie's actions net then? How scummy is he/CKD taking into account all of their actions to this point?
In other words, Boggzie doesn't have much influence. He's still my second-top suspicion, though this may change if/when he responds to Bridges' accusations from however many pages ago...JimSauce wrote:CKD has restored much of his predecessor's actions with insightful and discussion-provoking posts.
Compared to other newbie posts, BaB actually uses punctuation, shows he is thinking about things (okay, maybe not overly consistent; well-argued might not have been the right word, but I felt that BaB was trying to do his best, come up with a well-constructed post, which to me gave the feeling BaB was actually looking for scum).cerebus3 wrote:Hrmm... going back through, I find post 59pretty scummy. I find it hard to believe that an experienced player (one of our IC's) calls Bab's total BS argument well argued and pro-townie. I am curious, WLC, what part of calling a player scummy for making a random vote in the random voting stage and saying that a joke is a clear indication of scum is well argued and pro-town?
Wait, so you don't judge a player's argument by whether it is a good argument or not, but by how well spoken he is? I find it hard to believe that you could arrive at the conclusion that he argument is a good argument if you actually considered the argument itself. He might have used good grammar, but his conclusions make no sense.WeyounsLastClone wrote:Compared to other newbie posts, BaB actually uses punctuation, shows he is thinking about things (okay, maybe not overly consistent; well-argued might not have been the right word, but I felt that BaB was trying to do his best, come up with a well-constructed post, which to me gave the feeling BaB was actually looking for scum).cerebus3 wrote:Hrmm... going back through, I find post 59pretty scummy. I find it hard to believe that an experienced player (one of our IC's) calls Bab's total BS argument well argued and pro-townie. I am curious, WLC, what part of calling a player scummy for making a random vote in the random voting stage and saying that a joke is a clear indication of scum is well argued and pro-town?
As for me being an IC, that's just a tag. This is only my fifth game of online mafia, and I'm still not really confident about my scumhunting. As in my previous games, I also stayed in the background because I wasn't sure what to say, and at the moment I did say something, people immediately found it suspicious, because explaining myself isn't my best feature.
I guess you could say that.WeyounsLastClone wrote:For example, I feel ceberus is a bit poking too much right now. He seems to find something suspicious on everyone. Are you trying to see who bites?
What did you think he was referring to?JimSauce wrote:That was weird. I didn't know WLC's "pro-town" comment referred to Bridges' rubbish argument.
Heh. You're far from the only one I think is scummy. I would also include CKD and maybe Occult in that category, and then there are some players who have been kind of shady but aren't really worth getting distracted by. To elaborate:BridgesAndBaloons wrote:Amor: Is there someone else that you consider scummy, or am I the only one "over 9000?"
JimSauce wrote:You, CKD, (though I doubt you're scum together), then I dunno. I would say Amor, but he's currently far below you and CKD.
I really don't see how you get "one of these two has to be scum" from that post. It seems like a reach to find something scummy. So, I'm not liking CKD here at all. He's probably the only one I could see myself voting for right now. I'll be looking closely at his response to BaB's arguments.curiouskarmadog wrote:also noted is Jim Sauce's stance that BAB and I are the best two scum suspects right now (if I misread your post, please feel free to correct me). This is a classic set up of, if one turns out to me town, the other MUST be scum.....