Netlava wrote:Odd implies scummy, people.
CF Riot wrote:Charter you say Blackberry's actions seem
odd
. On a scale of 1-10 rank his
scumminess
in your eyes right now.
No. It doesn't. At all. I'm awed by your ability to bold two unrelated words.
Odd means unusual. Unusual does not necessarily mean something scum would do.
Just for fun, I looked up odd on
Dictionary.com's thesaurus. One of the synonym's that came up was 'strange.' You called my confirming by saying 'firmcon' 'strange.' So, by your words, you think confirming by saying 'firmcon' is scummy. Seriously? Do you see how totally absurd this is?
Odd is not scummy.
Netlava wrote:Macavenger wrote:Really? What's suspect about Hadhfang's vote? Cause you didn't seem to imply that you found anything suspect about his when you brought it up earlier.
I changed my mind. Right now, I find batt and had to be the most scummy (explained later).
Nope, no backsies. It doesn't work this way. My post was the only one in between those two posts you made, and it provided no new information on Hadhfang's vote. You don't get to just suddenly change your mind like that. That's a scummy action.
Netlava wrote:CF Riot has been giving me pro-town vibes as much as I find his actions scummy. Therefore, after re-reading the thread, I think had is scum. Batt would be my second choice.
Translation: "Shit, people realized the bullshit wagon I started on CF Riot was bullshit. I need to start another bullshit wagon so they don't lynch me or my buddy charter!"
Seriously, this is another example where you don't just get to change your mind cause you feel like it. The timing of this is just too unbelievably convenient. Right as the pressure on CF Riot dissipates, you suddenly find him townie, after all those posts you spent attacking him, giving no indication you thought there was any chance he was town? This is bullshit. You're changing your mind on him because you're scum, and realized you can't mislynch him.
Netlava wrote:Battousai wrote:As you can see, not answering questions is bad. Now I don't think you should be lynched based on that alone, but I will add my vote on you to add on even more pressure.
Implies not answering questions is somehow lynch-worthy.
Funny cause when I read Battousai's sentence, it implies exactly the opposite. He says he
doesn't
want to lynch you just on that. Could you please at least try to hide the fact that you're twisting everyone's words to say what you want? This feels like shooting fish in a barrel, not a game.
Netlava wrote:hadhfang wrote:I think that you are perhaps a bit too over eager to defend your actions, This might be a scum tell, but i'm going ot see where this leads.
Damn that vote was useful. A few posts later and you unvote, having gained the wonderful insight of that vote, Anyways, defensiveness as a possible scumtell is the motif here.
Actually yes, it was useful. Seeing how people react to votes is a great way to get a read on them, especially if overdefensiveness is one of the main things they're being accused for.
Netlava wrote:Battousai wrote:I see my vote has gotten a reaction out of you charter. Just so you know, just because I vote for you doesn't mean I want you lynched. I wanted to see how defensive you would become with an additional vote on you.
Post implies you expect charter to be defensive after voting him. Then you use that as a scumtell!
More of Netlava's standard twisting. He'd already voted him when he said that. The vote was clearly to see how he reacted, i.e. whether he became more defensive or not. It's called seeing something scummy, giving the target an opporutnity to slip further, and seeing if they do or not. There was nothing slightly scummy about what Battousai did there, and you're misrepresenting what he's trying to do once again.
Walnut wrote:Sorry Macavenger, I am not following your script. That is exactly what I am trying to say. I am challenging you to use your brain and interpret what you see before you, not to simply use a mental list of known scumtells and check them off as they go by (references power roles? check/// insinuates that he is town? check/// shows concern for rep for next day? check/// defends another player? check etc). I would also challenge your definition of helpful, in that whatever is posted here may be helpful to some member of the town, even if not to you. A bit like someone answering a question for someone else- it is not the result that you desired, but it is still unquestionably part of the puzzle.
Good job, that's exactly what I've been doing. You point out one instance of this yourself about my thing with Acidmix - voting for crap reasons is a standard scumtell, but I skipped it here because in context, I see no reason for him to be doing it as scum. I've also done this with CF Riot this game, and I'm doing it here with you - that's the whole point of me telling you to quit marking your own "scumtells." Doing so isn't anything near a standard scumtell, but it could be one, because pointing out your own would make it easier for you to try to slip some, standard or nonstandard, by the rest of the town. Hence, trying to point out your own scumtells is something I would consider scummy, as there's no benefit to doing it as town, but there is benefit to doing it as scum. That's why I told you to quit doing it.
Anyone who goes by a literal list like the one you give there and lynches only based on that is probably scum looking for easy lynches anyway. Of the ones you list, power roles is a decent one, insinuating town isn't at all, concern for rep is situational and usually weak depending on how it's done, and defending is extremely situational.
The tells I'm using on Netlava are mainly twisting what people say to mean what he wants, and backtracking/flip flopping. These are relatively standard tells, but they're both pretty strong (if situational, in the case of flip flopping). I'm also not applying them blindly. Twisting once or twice can be a legitimate mistake by a townie misinterpreting what someone said. Netlava hasn't done it once or twice, he's doing it multiple times per post. He's also doing it in very malicious ways, i.e. reading things into questions or arguments people are making that aren't really there, in ways that make legitimate, protown questioning look scummy. His opinion changes are also rapid and have poor reasoning, which is what constitutes scummy flip flopping. Wish I could talk about a big argument I just had in an ongoing game here. If a townie takes a couple days, rereads the thread, and comes back with new suspicions and good reasons for them, that isn't scummy. Changing opinions because a wagon evaporated or your old thought suddenly becomes inconvenient is, and it's what Netlava is doing.
Walnut wrote:The advantage of hanging around this time is that I was able to ask the mod a question about game setup and get a reply back (thanks Mizzy). Based on that, FoS Netlava.
To summarize:
Had is scum, batt is probably the second. Third, dunno yet.
There is no game setup metadata that says that there are three scum. Would you care to explain?
So, after all your ranting about how mindlessly applying standard scumtells is bad, you pick out the bog-standard "how many scum are there slip" tell to accuse Netlava based on? This is terrible. First of all, 90% of the time that isn't a slip in the first place. Secondly, probably 98% of mini normals have 3 mafia/werewolves (plus possibly an SK, but that shouldn't be counted as a fourth in this context, since it's not part of the group) in them, so it's entirely valid to assume there are three.
There are more than enough good reasons to lynch Netlava right now. Let's stick to those and not make up shitty ones. While you're at it, why don't you ask some people some questions, or provide a bit more speculation on who you think the scum are than that one nearly-useless comment, instead of just commenting on parts of the game that happen to directly relate to you?
ShadowGirl wrote:Hn, I don't know. When I think of 'odd' I think that something is off, and off would lead to scummy, wouldn't it?
Situational. Depends on how it's off, and what the motivations are.
hadhfang wrote:Netlava is staying true to form and twisting words, and it looks like trying to influence a bandwagon by repeating what has already been said, Charter still seems scummy to me, but there is a possibilty that he has a power role (though it seems unlikely), no idea on a third.
Quoted because this was worth making people read again.
Blackberry wrote:Netlava -- I like netlava's recent posts and am glad he has come to the realization had is most likely scum (lol).
FoS: Blackberry
Guys, please seriously read all the stuff hadhfang and I have posted about Netlava's twisting and stuff. His arguments are so incredibly full of shit. Netlava is already the best day 1 lynch I've ever seen, or expect to see for the next year or two. He's repeatedly warping the hell out or what everyone is saying in ways that have no possible protown motivation. He needs to be strung up. There's still some chance charter might be a horribly misguided townie in my mind. Netlava's not. We're well past the "beyond a reasonable doubt" threshold here. Every post he's twisting stuff people say trying to make them look bad. His abrupt reversals of opinion come for no perceivable reason, and all at times that are very good for a scum player. He started the Riot wagon, pushed it really, really hard saying "I think you're guilty" multiple times and leaving no room for any doubt. Suddenly now, when it's clear that no one wants to lynch Riot, he doesn't suspect him anymore? And tries to start a new bandwagon by twisting someone's words to make him look bad, doing anything he can to direct attention away from the scummy charter? We can't let him get away with this. The scummy orca needs to die.
Confirm Vote: Netlava
"By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon
) it gives me slight confidence in my stance on CF riot
