Mini 581 - Andy's Death - Over

[goborage]

@gorborage -- I'm not convinced you were telling the truth about the #43 debacle. There's nothing you can do or say to change my mind about this, for pragmatic reasons, I just thought I would let you know. You asked me to explain my stance, mentioning you would unvote when I did. You seemed unconvinced; but where is my unvote? If you had already made up your mind, why ask me at all? Furthermore, you claimed I was SK because I agreed with JD. Why can JDodge not be SK for bringing up the entire thing to begin with?

Ya I guess I should have said "convince me and I'll unvote".

I'm still suspicious of JDodge for the roleclaim. I said he was #2 on my list earlier. He seems to be winning people over but I'd like to point out that his posts have led us into a discussion about meta-gaming and away from scum-hunting.

goborage* I'm getting fairly protown vibes; you haven't posted about much except JD & Avin and the claim thing. What is your opinion on the other players?

Well I was reading page 3 and I thought this was weird:

Dave isn’t lurking. He’s not being very original or wordy, but he’s commented on all relevant topics, defended against accusations, and answered questions quickly. I get the feeling that he is reading along and commenting when he deems it important, which is exactly what he said he was doing. So I find it suspicious that gob and avin have basically called him a lurker for answering honestly.

Anyone think it's strange that Ythill would come to Dave's defense even though Dave has no votes? I'll get some discussion going: Ythill and Dave are scum buddies, true or false?

[avinashv]

@camisade -- thanks for the input; I understand that real life catches up to you .

@goborage --

Ya I guess I should have said "convince me and I'll unvote".

That's a supremely underwhelming answer to the many points I made. You've just bought a lot more attention on yourself. Care to give it another chance, this time addressing certain things? And again I find myself asking why you did not unvote me. Was the reasoning not satisfactory? Say so.

Did you mean JDodge's talk about mass-claiming? There was no roleclaim that I saw, unless I am severely mistaken.

I'm a little amazed that thus far you haven't found anything else really to talk about (except for the Dave/Ythill thing) except for myself and JDodge and the claim debacle. I've seen plenty of scummy talk, but you seem real eager to have me lynched; case in point with the baiting of a potential unvote if I explained my stance.

I agree that it is a little suspicious that Ythill came to Dave's defense very quickly--but I don't think that because he did that when Dave had no votes, they are scum buddies. I should mention that I feel that Ythill voted for me because of what seems to me my calling Dave out.

I've already made it clear that I think Dave is the least useful person in the town right now: gun to my head, I'd say he was scum, but even if he isn't, he's not a useful asset to the town by any means. I have by no stretch enough material to make a solid read on him.

In the end, I don't think that they are potential scum buddies because Ythill defended him when Dave had no votes; no: to me, the biggest suspicion is that it was Ythill that defended him. Ythill has managed to create this character that plays "Consistent, logical" (to quote Jenter) play. While I completely disagree that it automatically makes him pro-town, it does make him reasonably active, and for him to defend Dave's extremely passive and a hinderance of a role is suspicious. Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

[Jenter Brolincani]

I still say Dodge is today's lynch. He's twice led us into discussing theory not scumhunting, he's used plainly poor arguments and simply changed the topic instead of writing proper defenses, and has instead of ever attemptin any sort of proper argument just tried to condescendingly and agressively bluff his way out of things. It stinks.

[Andycyca]

Vote Count:

avinashv- 3 (camisade, goborage, Ythill)
JDodge- 2 (Dave, Jenter Brolincani)
camisade- 1 (avinashv)
Ythill- 1 (JDodge)

Not voting (1): Sethaniel

5 to lynch.

---

Strike count

[mrow]Player[col]Strikes

---

@av: actually, he would've got a prod on Thursday, but last week was a little bit complicated regarding my internet access. My fault, my apologies to all of you..

[goborage]

@goborage --

Ya I guess I should have said "convince me and I'll unvote".

That's a supremely underwhelming answer to the many points I made. You've just bought a lot more attention on yourself. Care to give it another chance, this time addressing certain things? And again I find myself asking why you did not unvote me. Was the reasoning not satisfactory? Say so.

I'm going to quote myself seeing as how I feel I've already addressed your points.

avinashv is still # 1 on my list for supporting JD. JD has argued his position. Comparatively, avinashv just quietly agreed. If you were SK and someone (JD) was pushing for an FBI claim wouldn't you support him?

This is my reasoning. I raised a hypothetical question but it'd be nice if avinashv answered it.

Because then we have one confirmed townie. The math is already shown in earlier posts. One confirmed townie means a lynch has a better chance of hitting scum, from a purely statistical standpoint. Factor in human deduction, and you're on better standing. Add to that the FBI might have played a little strangely and could have trigger someone's scumdar.

I'm still not convinced that the minor advantage a claim would give the town is worth giving the SK a free town-kill.

The FBI being on someone's scumdar is a non-issue. The FBI will never be lynched day 1 because he'd claim and then we'd be in the situation you are pushing for.

Yes I found your reasoning unsatisfactory. And just so we don't have to repeat this circular debate:

@gorborage -- I'm not convinced you were telling the truth about the #43 debacle. There's nothing you can do or say to change my mind about this, for pragmatic reasons, I just thought I would let you know.

Replace "gorborage" and 43 with avinashv and massclaim respectively.

I'm a little amazed that thus far you haven't found anything else really to talk about (except for the Dave/Ythill thing) except for myself and JDodge and the claim debacle. I've seen plenty of scummy talk, but you seem real eager to have me lynched; case in point with the baiting of a potential unvote if I explained my stance.

Well I guess my scumdar isn't as sensitive as yours. Most of the preceding posts are either about meta-gaming or flaming.

[Andycyca]

This weekend counts as 0 days.

[Dave]

Unvote

for now

[avinashv]

...why?

[Dave]

Well, because my vote was on JDodge, but i have a feeling he isnt scum. Rather just an unusual player. No offecne

[Jenter Brolincani]

Why do you think it's just playstyle? JDodge is far more experienced than I am (or indeed pretty much anyone else here), he should easily know better than to argue in favour of anti-town actions.

[Ythill]

I have returned from V/LA. Will be catching up on all of my games this weekend, hopefully by tonight.

[camisade]

I'd like to see a PBPA by Jenter. All he's posted lately is things about meta/scumtells/etc.

[camisade]

oops; I meant to say JDodge not Jenter*

[Ythill]

Whether that mathematical redundancy was his or not is irrelevant, it barely added to the flow of the game.

Absolutely false. It brought a logical end to the mass-claim discussion, in favor of town. And if the authorship was irrelevant, why did you include it in your accusation?

This is a strange turn of events, because the vote seems a little rash. A bit of a BW has started on me as the focus shifted away from JD, and it seems that you're trying to capitalize on that.

Factual sequence of events: I (non-random) voted first on JD, I unvoted when he got to L-1 (citing my intent to avoid an early lynch and a partial dismissal of the case against him); I stated explicitly that you seemed scummier than JD; I reread, asked questions, and awaited the answers; I reread again and,

at your request

(maybe demand is a better word), voted for the player I found most scummy, citing evidence regarding not only my vote, but every player in the game. And I said it’s still too early (IMO) for a definitive read.

I even gave (and am entertaining) one bit of evidence that suggests you could be town, because I am interested in learning the truth, not manipulating the thread. You twisted this evidence of my open mind into an accusation against me. You demanded a vote and then turned that vote into another accusation. You posted questionable defenses to my reasonable accusations, and slanted your defense as to reflect suspicion back onto me.

You went on to post a false dichotomy that Jenter correctly called you out on, and then dismissed his own defense that cited your attack as hypocrisy, neither addressing that defense nor withdrawing your accusation. You missed gob’s post (#115), which could suggest a lack of honest curiosity. And you seem to have taken Seth’s simple explanation of why he didn’t directly answer your question as an accusation that you are following me, which is far too proactively defensive for my liking.

Ythill* He quickly accepts JDodge's defense (which was"massclaim wins games; deal with it.") Then asks

How much of your argument was meant to trap overzealous scum?

Uhh, what? You're assuming that JDodge's massclaim debate was a trap. I questioned you on this before and you never responded, but when JDodge voted you that got your attention.You said:

However, my question suggested that there may have been (town friendly) ulterior motives for bringing up your opinion.

But it looks like your question more stated than suggested.

I’m repeating this for the last time. An applicable answer to my question was “none.” I didn’t assume anything. I didn’t state anything. I

only

suggested it by inference.

There is no conflict if my statements are taken at their face values and little reason to suspect dishonesty. If I planned on attacking JD, why clear him in the first place?. Nor would an existing conflict prove my alignment one way or the other, because a townie should be asking tough questions of every non confirmed player, even those people he has partially cleared.

Anyone think it's strange that Ythill would come to Dave's defense even though Dave has no votes? I'll get some discussion going: Ythill and Dave are scum buddies, true or false?

What does the number of votes have to do with anything? You can call my post a defense of Dave if you like. A seemingly false accusation was made by a player I was (and am) becoming more suspicious of. I’m not going to ignore it.

Nor is this proof of a buddy relationship. In my experience, scum are at least equally likely to defend (or be defended by) town.

Ythill has managed to create this character that plays "Consistent, logical" (to quote Jenter) play. While I completely disagree that it automatically makes him pro-town, it does make him reasonably active, and for him to defend Dave's extremely passive and a hinderance of a role is suspicious.

Someone having a different playstyle does not make them scum. And if I were to suspect lower content players as a policy, I’d be pretty damned paranoid. Besides, lurking isn’t a very strong scum strategy in this setup, which makes me suspect those who have attacked Dave more than I suspect him.

Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

Gob is the weakest poster in this game. Your opinion of Dave flip-flops a little too much for my liking.

I like my vote even more now.

[goborage]

Anyone think it's strange that Ythill would come to Dave's defense even though Dave has no votes? I'll get some discussion going: Ythill and Dave are scum buddies, true or false?

What does the number of votes have to do with anything?

The number of votes would be an indicator of how suspicious the town is of Dave. I'd understand your defending of Dave if he was under scrutiny, but he is drawing zero votes. Your running to his aid after the slightest of attacks looks suspicious to me.

Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

Gob is the weakest poster in this game.

I take some offense to this. While I agree my posts may not be the most insightful or analytic, I don't see how Dave's are any better.

Look at this post:

Unvote for now

No explanation is offered. All of his posts have to be prompted by someone else and when he does post it's either a repeat of someone else's or completely lacking in content. Your defending of him just encourages more of this behaviour.

[Dave]

Firstly, Sorry for my inactivity, some real life stuff has been making it a little harder to spend as much time as i would like here. Also, i am very new to all this so bare with me.

@JDodge: To be honest, I think his original argument, that Serial Killer finder should claim is just silly. I originally thought he may be the serial killer, and was trying to get the Serial killer finder to claim so he could kill him in the night, But I then thought that was too obvious for someone as experienced as JDodge. Consequently, I don't really know what to think of him. Hence my unvote, and comment that he is a rather unusual player.

@goborage: He has been active and I agree with what he had to say in the first two pages of the thread. From then on, until page 5 he was very quiet. I am thinking he is town right now.

@Ythill: He has been active throughout the game. I don't really have much to say about him. Nothing stood out as exceptionally scummy from him. I think he is town at the moment. Although he seems to be pro active.

@camisade: For all his posts, he seems to be in disagreement with either JDodge or avinashv. He has since made a big post outlining his thoughts on all the players. I don't really know how to read him. He could be scum or he could be town, at this point I am not sure.

@Sethaniel: Has been rather quiet all game. Consequently, there is not much to go on. I am thinking neutral at the moment. But i would like to see a large post outlining your thoughts on everyone.

@avinashv: He is in agreement with JDodge about the mass claim idea at the begining of the game, which made me thought he was scum, but that seems a little too obvious. He like Ythill in my opinion is a little too active. At the moment, I am thinking he is scum.

[Jenter Brolincani]

You missed me out...

[Dave]

I know, I have to go out. I will do you later

[Ythill]

Calling us out on pointing a finger at the weakest poster in the game is also suspicious.

Gob is the weakest poster in this game.

I take some offense to this. While I agree my posts may not be the most insightful or analytic, I don't see how Dave's are any better.

Sorry to offend. I was referring to post frequency and, specifically, your long period of inactivity. Fact is, over the last couple of days you are beginning to overtake Dave but, at the time of the “defense,” he was more active than you.

@ Dave: Check my meta. I'm always very active regardless of my alignment. Nor do I agree that pro-active play is a scumtell, but I suppose it would be more of a scumtell here than in other games, due to the setup.

[Andycyca]

avinashv - Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:08 am
camisade - Posted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:19 pm
Dave - Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 5:39 am
goborage - Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:00 am
JDodge - Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:17 pm
JB - Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 4:54 am
Sethaniel - Posted: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:01 am
Ythill - Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:33 am

I'm extending my standard prod to 5 days. Anyone who doesn't post at least once every 120 hours will be prodded. Of course, I'm fallible and you might be lucky, so if you post before you're prodded, you'll avoid a strike. Whenever you see a list like this means I'm seinding prods.

People getting prods: Jdodge, Sethaniel.

---

Strike count

[mrow]Player[col]Strikes avinashv[col] camisade[col] Dave[col] goborage[col] JDodge[col]X JB[col] Sethaniel[col]X Ythill[col]

[JDodge]

Why do you think it's just playstyle? JDodge is far more experienced than I am (or indeed pretty much anyone else here), he should easily know better than to argue in favour of anti-town actions.

When did massclaim become anti-town again?

Statistically speaking yes. Informationally speaking no.

[avinashv]

I will be busy for 2 days; expect no posts.

[Sethaniel]

All right- here I am. And what I think right now, for what it's worth.

@JDodge: I still think it's a bad idea for the SK finder to claim. That said, he'd have to know, given his experience level, that backing down from an unpopular stance would make him look scummy.

@goborage: again, I think the 43 incident has been pushed way out of proportion.

@Ythill: Either the best defense is a good offense, or he's pro-town. No one else has posted as much lengthy analysis combined with specific questions directed toward other players.

@avinashv: re the whole JD massclaim- avina abandoning an unpopular stance has definitely made him look scummy. He seems very defensive, now, and many of his recent posts have been attacking various players, as if he's trying to get the town's attention turned toward anyone but him.

@Dave: more posting recently, but still don't have much of a read on him.

@camisade: not much posting, beyond the big player analysis post. Seems to base a lot of his opinion on activity= good.

Jenter: still pushing for a JD lynch, despite everyone else jumping ship. Tends to get a little hostile in some of his posts.

I guess I'd have to say that right this second Ythill seems the most town to me, and avinashv seems the most scummy.

[JDodge]

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

[goborage]

@avinashv: re the whole JD massclaim- avina abandoning an unpopular stance has definitely made him look scummy. He seems very defensive, now, and many of his recent posts have been attacking various players, as if he's trying to get the town's attention turned toward anyone but him.

I think this is a pretty good point. Although, I'm not really sure what else avinashv can do in his situation other than scumhunt.

Ythill seems town because the bulk of his posts are non-opinionized inquisitive posts designed to give the impression of scumhunting while not committing to any actual stance.

Haha. To be fair Ythill has voted for avinashv and has been making a case against him.

Other than defending yourself (which I think you did well), pseudo-flaming and meta-game talk I haven't seen you do anything I'd consider scumhunting. I'm guessing by your vote that you find Ythill suspicious. Anybody else making your scum-sense tingle?