I am almost speechless. Almost but not quite.You seem to plug this into just about every post but only since I started calling you out. Yet others are also suspect of you and you haven't called them out. Can you post a case with quotes and evidence or is this straight OMGUS?
in reference to the cult being up to 3 members.Does that not scare anyone else?
So, down the list.Sorry I'm not posting up a storm. Honestly this game is turning out to be more of a job than a game. I feel like I need to make some kind of graph of what everyone's role is(since everyone felt the need to claim) and who they targetted. Something I understand some people do for every game but I've never wanted nor needed to.
1To be short, this game has me quite lost.
Um...someone had the role of 'cult un-recruiter'...can you explain why we WOULDN'T have a cult please?SpyreX wrote:
Personally, I think that the flavor leads to our standard mafia (the actual shot on day one) and to an SK - tied to a dish rack and poked to death seem like very "silly" methods to die and, of course, no one expects the Spanish Inquisition; but we do expect mafia. Wink
Does a Cult normally get kills as well as recruits? With the two kills Day 1 and the single kill day 2 I would think that a Cult doesn't make sense - but an SK sure does.
2And normally the cult can kill OR recruit.
3Spyrex goes down in my book as #1 suspect for a cult. Makes sense too since 2 french taunters, 1 scum, 1 town, would be insanely weird.
4K7's action on PF makes sense but IM using his action(confirmed) doesn't. Could scum have a role blocker? Yes. Would scum pick IM to block over all the other choices available since everyone had claimed day 1 already? No. Just no.
5Don't like K7 or Spyrex.
6The rest is just lurker hunting which I normally like but with a growing cult and multiple scum running around I think lurker hunting is a good way to make the town lose quickly.
I'd like to see your cases on them. What "raised eyebrows" who are all the other claimed targets?K7
Chensi, Azimuth, Internet, TSPN(lurkers)
Now those 4 aren't just lurkers, they have done some things that have raised eyebrows but K7's claim just doesn't add up with IM's confirmed ability and I DON'T see scum blocking IM when there were plenty of other already claimed targets.
It is NOT an OMGUS kick - if it was I'd have been pushing on you like this from the first damn time you went "I dont like SpyreX". It is the fact that we've spiraled into this retarded discussion and you have patronized and deflected versus answering simple questions around your "scum list". Its the fact that you say we shouldn't lynch lurkers and most of your suspects are lurkers by your own admission. Its..well, you're play. Its been scummy and moreso as this went on.But Spyrex is also my top because of his recent OMGUS kick which is definitely usually something scum resort to(or newbies but he's said multiple times that while he only has a few games under his belt he knows what he's doing so I'm not letting him use the newbie card).
As it sits, the evidence for a cult is SIMPLY the cult un-recruiter. I have thought it would be a red herring because, to me, it seemed like it could be a red herring. We have NO concrete evidence of a Cult - we have evidence of two anti-town killing roles (and, even then only strong evidence for one). PF presented enough evidence (and actual evidence) that I could see the possiblity being stronger for there being a cult. AS I SAID then, until we've got some concrete evidence I'm assuming Maf / SK.Therefore, that makes him cult/SK. I'm leaning cult because he's quite adamant that he doesn't think there is one. Does that clear it up a little?
1. Um..reading my earlier posts about multiple people claiming and me having to make some kind of graph to show it all doesn't sound like I'm a bit jumbled? Is there a reason I'm not allowed to be a little lost like any other player? What part of this makes you think it's contrived? What part doesn't match with my views of K7?SpyreX wrote:So, down the list.Muerrto wrote:1To be short, this game has me quite lost.
2And normally the cult can kill OR recruit.
3Spyrex goes down in my book as #1 suspect for a cult. Makes sense too since 2 french taunters, 1 scum, 1 town, would be insanely weird.
4K7's action on PF makes sense but IM using his action(confirmed) doesn't. Could scum have a role blocker? Yes. Would scum pick IM to block over all the other choices available since everyone had claimed day 1 already? No. Just no.
5Don't like K7 or Spyrex.
6The rest is just lurker hunting which I normally like but with a growing cult and multiple scum running around I think lurker hunting is a good way to make the town lose quickly.
1.) For you being lost, you've definitely had opinions up to this point - the "I'm confused" doesn't jive with the focus you've had on K7.
2.) Again, since I'm apparently soo new, I decided to ask the wiki. Lets see if there's any chance of ambiguity this time: (Just posting one spot to save space)Cults generally do not have a killing ability.Why are you, again, lauding this (which if it is true is an exception) as the norm? I dont think at this point either of us can trust one another, so I'll ask the people this - find 5 or 10 games with cult, and see how many actually can kill OR recruit.
3.) Why would a cult have a taunter versus the town having one? If you had said you thought I was just lying, sure, but why is one of the cases above more valid than the other? Hell, even the I'm bussing a scum buddy makes more sense than that.
4.) WIFOM at its finest. How many actual roles did we have claimed at the end of Day 1? I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure only DBE and I had fullclaimed and Ironman was the only non-PR to claim (Bruce and Albatross were givens by their PR) so, again, why push so hard for the scum NOT having roleblocked him?
5.) Again, this comes up later - you mention K7 and I in the same breath and, of course, in a negative fashion. The fact that I was not on your scumlist still makes this stand out.
6.) Again Again, this comes up later - you say lurker hunting is bad but your suspicion list consists mostly of lurkers.
1.) Its not simply "I'm confused." Its, I'm confused, but due to the interplay between these players I am convinced player X is scum that makes the confused part seem contrived.1. Um..reading my earlier posts about multiple people claiming and me having to make some kind of graph to show it all doesn't sound like I'm a bit jumbled? Is there a reason I'm not allowed to be a little lost like any other player? What part of this makes you think it's contrived? What part doesn't match with my views of K7?
2. Where the hell did you find that in the Wiki? Any cult game I've EVER played in they can kill or recruit. I just recently played in a game with FOUR cults and no scum. Believe me, there's a large difference between the two. But I say AGAIN, drop it. This is mafia theory and has no place in the game. You think you're right, I think I'm right. WTF does that have to do with anything? Of course the cult is anti-town so it doesn't matter what the hell you wanna call them. In fact, the fact you KEEP dwelling on this and NOW are trying to make a case on me off it is one of the reasons I highly suspect you. There's just no reason to keep going on and on about this.
3. How are you confirmed as a taunter? In fact, you said you targetted Strapp who said she targetted you already. I see no taunt there. You keep acting like claiming means you're confirmed which is ridiculous. This has nothing to do with your ability, it has to do with your name. I ask again to everyone, have you ever seen a theme game with two people with the same name?
4. I'm not. I'm saying it's a possibility, I have all game. But if you combine K7's 'target' and his lurking, lack of content etc. why is it so amazing I find him scummy? In fact, several others put K7 on their list. Why are you so focused on me putting him on my list? Interesting...Simply reinforcing my suspiscions of you.
5. AGAIN, I don't think you're SCUM. I think you're anti-town!!! If YOU don't see a difference I'm sorry. But WTF does that have to do with me? Why would I list you as scum when I don't think you're scum???? And why do you keep harping on it repeatedly?
6. And your list contains me with strickly OMGUS reasons(in fact you admitted the OMGUS). Your other reasons are because I suspect K7, but so do alot of other people. So how does that make me scummy and not others? Your points just don't add up.
The mafia theory is applicable because of your focus on the cult. There is a possibility of cult, but it is not definite. The fact that you have placed me into a SPECIFIC scum group that we do not have evidence even exists makes me question the reasons. So, yes, when we are theorizing about the setup theory does and will play a role.Half your points are mafia theory and the rest are a mix of OMGUS and points that apply to nearly everyone currently in the game. Is this your entire case?
One assumes that if his answers had differed from what the bridgekeeper received, he might have said something about it.muerrto wrote: @TSPN: As for the bridgekeeper. So what you're saying isn't that you doubt the existance of the bridge keeper since it's been confirmed twice, but for some reason you take Spyrex's answers as he posted them at face value and call it an investigation confirming him? Did I get that right?
I guess that’s part of my point: for the most part I think I’ve done that. Certainly I didn’t just “summarise and agree with what's already been said.” I would highlight the points that stood out to me and give my opinion on them. I’m just wary of this meme that I am somehow not contributing, or even that I am “lurking,” which could not be further from the truth. Posting every two or three days isn’t considered lurking in most games; just because a handful of people have inflated their post count almost beyond measure doesn’t mean that the rest of us are hiding.imaginality wrote:That answer is a bit evasive. You don't have to 'invent some crazy new topic', you can further the scumhunt by offering insights, arguments and suggestions (and yes, questions) on the main issues, rather than simply summarise and agree with what's already been said.Azimuth wrote:I don't quite agree with this characterization; how is asking questions not hunting? It's true that most topics weren't started by me, mainly because nothing happened to me overnight -- unlike, apparently, many others -- and I was mostly trying to catch up with the posts of those others and make sense of them. There are only so many topics that can be brought up, after all; I'm not going to invent some new crazy topic just to satisfy someone else's idea of hunting.Lord Gurgi wrote:I notice that he has never done any scum hunting of his own, only followed what the town has been saying and asking an occasional question. This makes me lean to the scum side.
I don’t know; I still think it was as good a reason as any, although because of it I’ve now soured on the notion of making lynches based on roles (as I mentioned at the end of my post 1006). Beyond that, it’s pretty easy to criticize one’s reasons for suspecting a revealed town player now that we all have the benefit of hindsight.imaginality wrote:I also didn't much like your posts during Day 2 where you said:andThe only possible thing that I can think of is that Iron Man's ability (giving someone else's night choice a random target, if I have that correctly) seems quite chaotic, and not one that could be used effectively in any pro-town capacity. But does that mean he's mafia?because I think it is pretty clear that in a Monty Python theme game, there are going to be at least a few roles capable of creating chaos and confusion, and there's no reason to assume that such a role would be given to a scum player rather than a townie. So you giving that as your main reason for (almost) voting Iron Man doesn't sit well with me.Just chiming in to say that I was quite close to placing a vote on Iron Man too, mainly because his ability doesn't seem to be pro-town (but also for the other reasons -- lurking, possible contradiction, etc.)
Well, if I were claiming to be town based on my not voting Iron Man, I suppose you’d have a point, but I’m not. If you actually looked at that part of the game, you would see that at least four players (farside22, PokerFace, SpyreX, and I) were talking about voting Iron Man. Only one of us could actually hammer; does that mean the other three have to be suspicious?imaginality wrote:And then there's the not voting thing that Lord Gurgi mentioned, which on Day 2 does look bad: by saying you're suspicious of Iron Man but not going to the extent of putting a vote on him, you conveniently look good whether he turns up scum ("See, I said he was suspicious") or town ("See, I didn't vote him").
I'll respond to the rest tonight. OMW to work.SpyreX wrote:1.) Its not simply "I'm confused." Its, I'm confused, but due to the interplay between these players I am convinced player X is scum that makes the confused part seem contrived.
Where did I say I'm convinced? I'm not even voting you or K7 at this time. Like I said, some people are more careful with their vote than others and without K7 making any further comment I'm not about to place my vote on him.
And just because I think you're cult doesn't mean I'm ready to vote you either. I don't like your claim, period. You're not gonna get anything better than that. Have you really done anything overtly scummy? No. Have I EVER seen a duplicate claim in any theme game I've ever played? No.
3.) I am NOT confirmed as the taunter. Your posts about it are "two taunters don't make sense." If you do not think there are two taunters, say I am lying and go for it. Dont talk out both sides at the same time.
Where am I talking out both sides? I've said your claim is bogus since the very start of day 2. I've not felt like lynching you for it because there were other more worthy candidates(IM, now K7) but I don't buy your claim, period. Haven't since DBE's was revealed.
4.) Where have you said that a roleblock was a real possibility? Hell, I dont care about the push on K7 by you - its the method of it and the fact you still haven't voted. You've been pushing this "I dont like X or Y" but yet never voting for either.
Again, I guard my vote till I'm sure. I also didn't vote DBE till I was sure. I also didn't vote IM till I was sure. Some people like to throw theirs around, some don't. There are several people not currently voting. Have you questioned them?
As for where I said the roleblock was a possibility? Several times. I'll quote later if you want me to but you can read back just as easily. Have I said I buy it? No. But I HAVE said it's a possibility every single time.
5.) This must be a problem in our semantic debate. However, I still find a huge issue with someone asking for scum suspects and, assuming the scum != cult, at the minimum at that point saying "I would still rather lynch SpyreX because I think he is cult." Pushing and pushing and not putting down a vote or doing anything about it is shady.
Ignoring this. Explained it multiple times.
6.) It is not OMGUS reasons. If it was any other damn player that was saying "I dont like Player X, I dont like Player X, Players A, B, C are my suspects" I'd have done the exact same thing - the fact it was ME made me see it quicker because, like everyone, I tend to pay attention when its my name mentioned.
Break that habit. Town vote town, town lynch town, just as easily as scum lynch town and town lynch scum(and scum lynch scum etc). Because someone's attacking you does not make them scum.
Answer me this. You're not Spyrex. You're another player. Spyrex counter claims DBE with the same role name(possibly different abilities we don't know since DBE could've lied about that). DBE comes up with the role she claimed. You now automatically buy Spyrex's claim of the exact same name as scum? If you said yes...I'm not sure how we can go any further with this discussion. Remember, 3rd person, you don't know your role.
/agree... I usually think it's scummy for people to play the "confused card."SpyreX wrote: So, down the list.
1.) For you being lost, you've definitely had opinions up to this point - the "I'm confused" doesn't jive with the focus you've had on K7.
I know I was in BM's elementla mafia (with four cults) and the cult could either recruit or kill each night. SO that's one example. And I know Muerrto was in that game with me, so that's probably why he brought it up.spyrex wrote: 2.) Again, since I'm apparently soo new, I decided to ask the wiki. Lets see if there's any chance of ambiguity this time: (Just posting one spot to save space)Cults generally do not have a killing ability.Why are you, again, lauding this (which if it is true is an exception) as the norm? I dont think at this point either of us can trust one another, so I'll ask the people this - find 5 or 10 games with cult, and see how many actually can kill OR recruit.
TheSweatpantsNinja wrote:I agree. . . and I'm also going to go ahead and ask if anyonereallywants chenhsi around at endgame. I don't think he's going to be high on scum kill lists anytime soon.
I think you may have misunderstood me. Perhaps I should word things better now. If the Scum can block and kill, then they can effectivly stop 2 actions. One action they can stop via the block, and the other they can stop via the kill.Azimuth wrote:PokerFace, I will have to reread your posts again. Not to look for alignment clues, but to try to understand some of your theories. I know you’ve been through a lot, flavor- and night-wise, but sometimes I don’t know how you have reached some of your conclusions. I think I disagree with some of them, but is that because I don’t understand them? Or is it the other way around: perhaps I only think I don’t understand them because I disagree with them? One example would be your rationale why you think K7 is town in post 985. (For what it’s worth, I don’t think that killa seven’s alignment necessarily reflects on PokerFace’s; if K7 is ever shown to be mafia, I wouldn’t conclude the same for PF and I’m not sure why anyone would.) Like I said, I will do some re-reading of your posts to see if they make better sense this time around, but for now I would like to ask one question. In posts 1120 and 1123, you talked about how “scum [potentially could have] killed and blocked two skills.” I’m wondering which two blocks you are talking about (I only see references to the possible block of Iron Man in your previous posts) and, more importantly, why you think “scum” must have done the blocking. Sorry if this is explained in the game elsewhere or if I’m misunderstanding you, but can you clarify that statement?
__________________________________PokerFace wrote:Ok then 2 options with Ironman's skill not working. 1 he was roleblocked by scum or 2...
Someone who lurks like ironman i can see getting a skill in too late and the colonel/shaft.ed not counting it. This same warning was not posted during night 2 when ironman was dead and thus not possibly late on a second action. Either way I know ironman's skill did not take effect.shaft.ed wrote:the colonel wrote:Now, I'm awake but it seems a few of you are still sawing it off. Now, I'll give you slackers 24 hours to have completed your night actions before I wake everyone up. Get along then, ten nine, eight and all that.
PokerFace wrote:hmm... so you think he has a good chance of being cult (because he doesn't think there is one), but otherwise don't suspect him considering he isn't scummy compared to those you earlier mentioned.
Is that what you are saying Muerto?
I can see why Muerto's comments have come off as somewhat contradictory. Since Muerto wants to lynch the cult, it would make sence he would want to vote for and scumhunt someone who has a good chance of being cult. I think this is the conection SpyeX is making. Muerto, do you see you previous suspects as having a good chance of being in a cult? Do you want to lynch cult or scum(Mafia, SK, etc) first or does it not matter to you who goes first?
That way, not too much time is spent discussing the too confusing and the too lurky. No one apreciates this joke, do they? I need to stop playing violent video games on my days off. (I am using your vernacular) (this is all theory talk)Muerrto wrote:Answer me this. You're not Spyrex. You're another player. Spyrex counter claims DBE with the same role name(possibly different abilities we don't know since DBE could've lied about that). DBE comes up with the role she claimed. You now automatically buy Spyrex's claim of the exact same name as scum? If you said yes...I'm not sure how we can go any further with this discussion. Remember, 3rd person, you don't know your role.
Of course not. Like I said, if it was any player who was in that setup and I was paying attention to the flow I would have raised suspicions about it. The fact that it was revolved around me didn't "change" that - it just made me pay that much more attention.Muerrto wrote:Break that habit. Town vote town, town lynch town, just as easily as scum lynch town and town lynch scum(and scum lynch scum etc). Because someone's attacking you does not make them scum.
That is pretty much the norm.PF wrote:I myself have played alot of theme games, and have never seen two players claim to be the same character, and then later, both turn up that character. One has always turned up a liar and they have been scum.
I like being the exception that proves the rule apparently. Although, the only thing I can bring up is, for whatever reason, DBE lied about what her role does (or the card flips are actively ambiguous) - so, there was a "lie" in this mess, just not what I expected it to be about.
Even though DBE wasn't under fire at that time? Bussing seemed unneccessary. The only way I'll think you're on DBE's side is if you claim it or flip it. Sorry, but that was not bussing.SpyreX wrote:As scum? Yes - I could see a scum partner bussing another.
What about the possibility of it being another scum but from a different group? I.e. a member of mafia group A counterclaiming a member of mafia group B? I know we only had one kill last night, but there could have been a doc save, so I don't think we should yet rule out the possibility of there being two mafia groups.SpyreX wrote:So, personally, with a double claim like this my thought process would be:
Town 40%
Scum bussing Scum 40%
SK 15%
Cult 5%
I already did but sure. I just answered the first one a second ago to Spyrex. It's all about his claim. I just don't buy it. I've never seen a dup claim in a theme game...ever. I won't ever buy it till I see it.PokerFace wrote:@Muerto,could you respond to this:
PokerFace wrote:hmm... so you think he has a good chance of being cult (because he doesn't think there is one), but otherwise don't suspect him considering he isn't scummy compared to those you earlier mentioned.
Is that what you are saying Muerto?
I can see why Muerto's comments have come off as somewhat contradictory. Since Muerto wants to lynch the cult, it would make sence he would want to vote for and scumhunt someone who has a good chance of being cult. I think this is the conection SpyeX is making. Muerto, do you see you previous suspects as having a good chance of being in a cult? Do you want to lynch cult or scum(Mafia, SK, etc) first or does it not matter to you who goes first?
Huh? Which post of mine are you refering to where I said that? I'm a bit deprived of sleep right now so I can't honestly remember. Can you refresh my memory on what you're talking about?Also, to PF specifically, what do you mean by the softclaim?
Post number 1130, where you saidPokerFace wrote:Huh? Which post of mine are you refering to where I said that? I'm a bit deprived of sleep right now so I can't honestly remember. Can you refresh my memory on what you're talking about?Also, to PF specifically, what do you mean by the softclaim?
Emphasis mine.The Internet (Breadcrumb Hunting,The Softclaim, The K7 hunt / defending Chenshi)
Um this is post 1130. It's written by SpyreX, not me. Are you deprived of sleep too and thefore confusing us?SpyreX wrote:I am apparently losing my mind. I swear it said he was shot - but, rereading, it sure doesn't one bit - just slain.Where did it say he was shot SpyreX?
Yes, my role is French Taunter that taunts someone to target me. DBE said she was a French Taunter that RB'd (but came up role attractor).SpyreX's claim was same name, different powers. Something to note.
I really dont think the cult is as likely as an SK - I can not think of a way the Unrecruiter would have worked that wouldn't have broken the game; I think it was a flavor name for Brian.
As for suspects:
Chenshi (Lurking, but obviously here, saying he's made statements he hasn't, no contribution (as well as some ongoing game meta).
Muerrto (I'll give a full case later, but a pinch of OMGUS, the odd focus on the cult (and me being in it), the "hunting lurkers is bad, my suspects (aside from K7) are suspects for lurking and the fact I, who he's brought up more than once, isn't even on there)
The Internet (Breadcrumb Hunting, The Softclaim, The K7 hunt / defending Chenshi)
Why the K7 thing bothers me at this point:
Yes, K7 COULD be scum, but of everyone he's tied himself tightest to another player. Although there are scenarios where K7 is scum and PF isn't, the Razor suggests to me that they are both the same alignment and, due to PF, I believe them to be town. Of course, the fact that K7 gives another player a night action could be very handy (one of the roles that has been claimed that would make sense for scum to get rid of).
I think I K7 lynch is a bad call today, Personally. The Fact is that although I dont like his play, he's made the connection that I dont think needs to be called out at this moment.
Of them, Chenshi is definitely far higher on my list today.