667: Random C9 (Game Over!)

[kuribo]

I think that if you're basing your opinion of charter on his level of activity in this game, you're either half-crazy or scum trying to go for the kill.

Are you saying that only scum can have less interest in one game than another?

[Vi]

I think that if you're basing your opinion of charter on his level of activity in this game, you're either half-crazy or scum trying to go for the kill.

Are you saying that only scum can have less interest in one game than another?

If you think

I'm

basing my opinion of charter solely on his level of activity in this game, you're either half-crazy or looking for reasons to push a case on me. (But I will separately acknowledge being half-crazy.)

The focus of the argument is that he's not interested in finding scum. Look through his last 40-or-so posts, and you'll see it's mostly shoving words down eld's throat, inhibiting discussion by saying he won't talk about things, calling for lynches because "nothing more is going to get done today", calling for prods, almost jumping on the afatchic wagon, and weakly pressuring JDodge. His activity postwise isn't much of a problem; his

refusal

to scumhunt

is.

[kuribo]

I suppose I've misinterpreted your previous post where you said he was correct in stating:

He's saying I'm scum cause I post in other games more frequently than this one...

[Vi]

I suppose I've misinterpreted your previous post where you said he was correct in stating:

He's saying I'm scum cause I post in other games more frequently than this one...

Oh, I see. That was the last straw, as I hope I've explained. Apologies for the confusion.

[charter]

He's saying I'm scum cause I post in other games more frequently than this one...
Actually, he's not saying it, he's trying to get you to say/think it. Quite scummy of him in fact.

So do you think Vi is scummy then?

Any thoughts on Sche since he has replaced in? Still happy with an eldarad-Sche scumteam?

I'm actually waivering on Sche. It's nothing he's done, but my whole case really was based on Moo's asking for a claim, while claiming cop, on page three. Still by far the scummiest thing I've seen this game, but Vi is getting continuously worse and making me question my earlier read.

I'm still sold on you, but I think your partner will be determined tomorrow, not today.

Vi, I don't know what scumhunting you expect me to do. I think I've found me a scum, no need to continuously post stuff against eld.

[JDodge]

He's saying I'm scum cause I post in other games more frequently than this one...
Actually, he's not saying it, he's trying to get you to say/think it. Quite scummy of him in fact.

So do you think Vi is scummy then?

Any thoughts on Sche since he has replaced in? Still happy with an eldarad-Sche scumteam?

I'm actually waivering on Sche. It's nothing he's done, but my whole case really was based on Moo's asking for a claim, while claiming cop, on page three. Still by far the scummiest thing I've seen this game, but Vi is getting continuously worse and making me question my earlier read.

I'm still sold on you, but I think your partner will be determined tomorrow, not today.

Vi, I don't know what scumhunting you expect me to do. I think I've found me a scum, no need to continuously post stuff against eld.

You know what I just noticed?

Vi starts going after charter. charter finds Vi scummy.

Sche pretty much ignores charter. Charter begins wavering on Sche.

Moo butted heads with charter more often than he did not. Charter found Moo scummy.

Afatchic kissed charter's ass for most of the game. Charter found afatchic "obviously town".

There is no way in hell I'm going to believe this is coincidental. I'm inclined to believe that either:

A) Charter is actively trying to get the people who disagree with him and/or find him scummy lynched in order to prevent further suspicion being reflected upon him (AKA self-preservatory in a scum frame of mind)

B) Charter is an egotistical jerkbag who does not actual work and instead thinks that anyone who agrees with his arbitrary suspicions must thusly be scum. (I'm a bit inclined towards this one).

Thoughts?

[charter]

Uhhh, I was suspicious of Moo for practically the whole game, he didn't disagree with me. I've been suspicious of eld since before he replaced in, avinyl didn't disagree with me.
And why am I waivering on Sch. Really? You realize my whole case against him is Moo's shaky actions a long time ago?

I suppose you have one point, that Vi is suspicious of me (though he's suspicious of about everyone) and now I'm suspicious of him. Though I pretty much ignored it the first time he was suspicious of me, so your point obviously doesn't hold water. He's doing something now I find suspicious, not the fact that he finds me suspicious. Interesting that you come to his defense as soon as I state suspicion of him though.

[charter]

Also, where have Moo and I 'butted heads'?

[Vi]

Vi, I don't know what scumhunting you expect me to do. I think I've found me a scum, no need to continuously post stuff against eld.

kk
I think I've found me a scum (in you). I'm going to go play in my other games now; see yas D2. The rest of you can sort it out from here. People, vote charter.

~

Obvious problems:
1) You could be wrong. (Imagine that)
2) You've basically stopped playing. Lest you forget, there's more than one scum around. You could help your own cause by pointing out who the possible scumpartners are based on your eld suspicions.

Blatantly anti-Town. Why are people not voting charter for this.

----------

Interesting that you come to his defense as soon as I state suspicion of him though.

Come on, you can do better than that for scumhunting. Or you could if you were Town.
So go ahead and quit pussyfooting around. Neither me nor JDodge are eldarad (thankfully), so we can't both be scum. What's the point of implying this partnership (that is, trying to get people to say/think there is one)? On your own scale, that's pretty horrible.

[Vi]

He

[Vi]

's doing

something

now I find suspicious, not the fact that he finds me suspicious.

Clarify.

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

Fascinating.

Mach-Maf. You said that you consider it a significant and quite reliable scumtell here and here for someone to be posting tons in other places onsite, but not here. With that in mind, has your opinion on charter changed?

I don't see where charter has stopped posting or where charter was not motivated to post. I still see charter as the #4 person on my list, below my 3 suspects and above you and Sche.

[Vi]

@M-M:

Posting before prod. Waiting on charter.

Keep on waiting. Go ahead and keep your suspicions of me as well.

^^this^^

[Simenon]

Vote Count

eldarad (3)- charter, Jdodge, Machiavellian_Mafia
charter (2)- eldarad, Vi
Vi (1)- kuribo

Deadline: November 30th

[Vi]

Oh hey, eight days. Scheherazade is the one not voting in the vote count btw.

@kuribo. Am I still your top suspect?

[charter]

Vi, how does me not defending myself make me more likely to be scum?

[Scheherazade]

Uh, long post.

In response to your second worry, kuribo = afatchic's replacement.

I took a long nap and I'm back. Sorry about that.

I have the same issues that kuribo raised with the first and third link in the chain between lack of motivation to post and scum behaviour.

I think denying information to the town by not posting is a strategy that scum can employ or a personality issue with town. Putting myself in your position, given that I/you find afatchic generally town, I'd lean towards finding his behaviour a personality issue.

---

I disagree with your premise that suspicion can only be generated by placing a vote, and that therefore if I am not voting for someone I am not questioning them and/or being suspicious of them.

The issue was town suspicion. You voted after the town had become suspicious of afatchic and charter, correct? When drew attention to that behaviour, you said that you helped generate that suspicion.

Was it your goal to generate suspicion of afatchic and charter? If so, I must assume that as town you found them worthy of a lynch at the point when you thought they were worth lynching and therefore worth your vote. That's my confusion.

With regards to the afatchic questions, the quoted posts were:

im still

unsure about him

but in the opposite way, his remarks just

sound like

an agrevated newb

scum

to me.

charter i agree, i don't like it when people use the excuse that im new and im just now learning. while it may be true, its a terrible excuse because it can't be proven or countered.

my suspicion is def. on moospiker

, and if his play doesn't start acting more like a townie to me then

i may very well put him at L-1.

You misread his statements. I bolded words to help. Was that intentional? I sort of think it is, especially because you maintain the initial read instead of rereading it. The correct read is:

"He sounds like aggravated newb scum to me."
"I suspect him and may put him at L-1."

They are consistent.

I think my perseverance was totally necessary and afatchic's posts should be considered far more suspicious than most other players have attached to them.
...
I don't even remember this, and the fact that no-one else brought it up suggests to me that it wasn't significant to anyone.

First, you seem to think something can be significant regardless of the attention it gets from the town. I agree.

Second, I will have to ask Vi, but it appears that making the point you tried to dodge was more important to Vi than noting you were dodging in that instance.

To answer your other questions, it's counter-productive--wasteful--to ask somebody to back up a statement that wasn't made. I think it's a scummy dodge, but I can't prove that, which is why I left open the possibility that it was unintentional. Regardless of the intent, the effect was the same.

The claim wasn't necessarily scummy, other than the fact that vanilla is probably the safest claim for scum to make now. I just wasn't sure it it was true. I was explaining to Vi why I said "you should claim now if you lied earlier" to you.

Lastly, scrutinising players of the game is pro-town, I agree. However, it's exactly that the scum must do to get townies lynched. Therefore, I don't consider it a town tell per se. If you helped lynch scum that wouldn't otherwise have been lynched, my view of it might change. Does that answer your question?

[JDodge]

Vi, I don't know what scumhunting you expect me to do. I think I've found me a scum, no need to continuously post stuff against eld.

kk
I think I've found me a scum (in you). I'm going to go play in my other games now; see yas D2. The rest of you can sort it out from here. People, vote charter.

~

Obvious problems:
1) You could be wrong. (Imagine that)
2) You've basically stopped playing. Lest you forget, there's more than one scum around. You could help your own cause by pointing out who the possible scumpartners are based on your eld suspicions.

Blatantly anti-Town. Why are people not voting charter for this.

Because it seems (from my perspective) that charter is solely a poor player and a lazy dickhole as opposed to scum? How exactly is him stopping after he things he's found something "suspicious"? Lazy, useless, assholish, yes - but it does not realistically equate to anything worth being suspicious of. Charter is clearly just another one of the people who tries to use the quiet, low-reasoning methods without understanding how they actually work. Which is stupidity, not scumminess.

You have much to learn in the ways of how people on MS are generally retarded.

Let's analyze your two reasons, shall we?

You could be wrong.

Yes. So could you, so could any of us. The issue herein is the amount of security one feels in their convictions - if charter really does feel

that solidly

about his suspicions, then it would follow that regardless of what he does

nothing is likely to change his mind

.

You've basically stopped playing. Lest you forget, there's more than one scum around. You could help your own cause by pointing out who the possible scumpartners are based on your eld suspicions.

You're also making the (fallacious) assumption that he is no longer reading the thread - you have no basis to stake this claim upon, thus your reasoning is invalid. If there is anything that would motivate him to change his mind, he would thus notice it through reading the thread.

You seem to be assuming (for whatever bizarre reason) that if you read something 20 times as opposed to once then somehow everything magically becomes clear to you and you can pick out every scum in the game. In theory, this

sounds

like a good idea. In reality, life doesn't work that way. You're actually more likely to overscrutinize (which is bad - attempting to indict someone on bullshit is one of the worst things you can do as town), which leads to poor play in and of itself.

I eagerly await your rebuttal.

[Vi]

Vi, how does me not defending myself make me more likely to be scum?

Because you're not on the offensive either, except against a single vendetta target.
I wish I could effectively take up space and get away with it.

----

Second, I will have to ask Vi, but it appears that making the point you tried to dodge was more important to Vi than noting you were dodging in that instance.

I'm not exactly sure what's being dodged here.

other than J

----

Because it seems (from my perspective) that charter is solely a poor player and a lazy dickhole as opposed to scum? How exactly is him stopping after he things he's found something "suspicious"? Lazy, useless, assholish, yes - but it does not realistically equate to anything worth being suspicious of.

Charter is clearly just another one of the people who tries to use the quiet, low-reasoning methods without understanding how they actually work. Which is stupidity, not scumminess.

I don't buy this explanation. Quiet and low-reasoning, sure, that sounds somewhat like charter (a little light on the "quiet" part). But even a lazy, useless, assholish Town player is more open to who should be lynched, and the ones I've encountered in my experience will actually look at other players given enough of a kick in the rear. charter's

refusal

to scumhunt is inexcusable.

Yes. So could you, so could any of us. The issue herein is the amount of security one feels in their convictions - if charter really does feel

that solidly

about his suspicions, then it would follow that regardless of what he does

nothing is likely to change his mind.

Which doesn't exempt him from participation.

You're also making the (fallacious) assumption that he is no longer reading the thread - you have no basis to stake this claim upon, thus your reasoning is invalid. If there is anything that would motivate him to change his mind, he would thus notice it through reading the thread.

Contradiction. You've already said that charter believes so strongly that nothing will change his mind. Further, I'm genuinely surprised you don't remember lurkers, people who read the thread and yet do not play except when convenient. Lurking is a great scum tactic, as is active lurking - posting but not contributing.

You seem to be assuming (for whatever bizarre reason) that if you read something 20 times as opposed to once then somehow everything magically becomes clear to you and you can pick out every scum in the game. In theory, this

sounds

like a good idea. In reality, life doesn't work that way. You're actually more likely to overscrutinize (which is bad - attempting to indict someone on bullshit is one of the worst things you can do as town), which leads to poor play in and of itself.

I have no idea what you're responding to here, but whatever. I agree that lots of rereads do not indicate success. However, I don't think my accusation is on shaky ground.

I eagerly await your rebuttal.

Actually, I wouldn't much care if you chose not to rebut this post. With a known lurker/slacker who is also my #2 suddenly pushing a defense on my #1, I'm now considerably

more

interested in seeing charter lynched.

People, vote charter.

[kuribo]

@kuribo. Am I still your top suspect?

Yes, because your predecessor was scummy, and while my certainty of you as scum began to waver for a bit, I don't see your case against charter as air-tight.

In fact, it seems to me like you're hell-bound and determined to push that wagon, even if others are pointing out your fallacious logic.

And that's pretty bad coming from me, considering charter and I haven't been on the same page.

You're falling back on a "Lynch the Lurker" mentality, and in such a small game, I can't see that helping the town.

The difference between anti-town and scummy? Pushing to lynch a lurker in a small game is scummy. (Hint: it keeps pressure off of you and knocks out someone you know to be town)

Why charter? Why not JDodge? Is there something besides the lurkiness that you're not sharing?

[JDodge]

Because it seems (from my perspective) that charter is solely a poor player and a lazy dickhole as opposed to scum? How exactly is him stopping after he things he's found something "suspicious"? Lazy, useless, assholish, yes - but it does not realistically equate to anything worth being suspicious of.

Charter is clearly just another one of the people who tries to use the quiet, low-reasoning methods without understanding how they actually work. Which is stupidity, not scumminess.

I don't buy this explanation. Quiet and low-reasoning, sure, that sounds somewhat like charter (a little light on the "quiet" part). But even a lazy, useless, assholish Town player is more open to who should be lynched, and the ones I've encountered in my experience will actually look at other players given enough of a kick in the rear. charter's

refusal

to scumhunt is inexcusable.

You're stereotyping. Stereotyping is bad. You need to look at charter as charter, not charter as the lazy, useless assholish Town player.

Then

you will see what I mean.

Yes. So could you, so could any of us. The issue herein is the amount of security one feels in their convictions - if charter really does feel

that solidly

about his suspicions, then it would follow that regardless of what he does

nothing is likely to change his mind.

Which doesn't exempt him from participation.

I'm not saying to exempt him from anything (exempting anyone from anything is generally bad). I'm saying that it explains everything quite well, which you have yet to refute.

You're also making the (fallacious) assumption that he is no longer reading the thread - you have no basis to stake this claim upon, thus your reasoning is invalid. If there is anything that would motivate him to change his mind, he would thus notice it through reading the thread.

Contradiction. You've already said that charter believes so strongly that nothing will change his mind. Further, I'm genuinely surprised you don't remember lurkers, people who read the thread and yet do not play except when convenient. Lurking is a great scum tactic, as is active lurking - posting but not contributing.

Not contradiction. I've said that nothing would change his mind. How does that mean he'll stop reading? I've noticed a tendency among new people to have some sort of fetish with assuming the worst and considering it fact. Lurking is a

terrible

scum tactic because it's one that scum will tend to get called on quite often. I maintain that with the popularity of the whole "lynch all lurkers" meta, that lurking in and of itself has ceased to become a valid tell. Active lurking as a tell is also rapidly becoming invalid.

I eagerly await your rebuttal.

Actually, I wouldn't much care if you chose not to rebut this post. With a known lurker/slacker who is also my #2 suddenly pushing a defense on my #1, I'm now considerably

more

interested in seeing charter lynched.

People, vote charter.

My, my, we're a bit snippy today, aren't we?

[kuribo]

Active lurking as a tell is also rapidly becoming invalid.

Especially when there are a few players on this site who do it even when town. And despite getting lynched / vigged constantly.

[charter]

I will ask JDodge once to stop insulting me.

[eldarad]

The issue was town suspicion. You voted after the town had become suspicious of afatchic and charter, correct? When drew attention to that behaviour, you said that you helped generate that suspicion.

Was it your goal to generate suspicion of afatchic and charter? If so, I must assume that as town you found them worthy of a lynch at the point when you thought they were worth lynching and therefore worth your vote. That's my confusion.

The issue was the timing of my vote. If you want to discuss "town suspicion" then we can do so. But that is a seperate question to the one you asked.
I still don't agree that voting is the only way of expressing suspicion - which is the basis of your question, even after the re-phrasing.

I asked charter and afatchic questions that would give me insight into their motivation. The aim wasn't specifically to "create suspicion" but if their answers were suspicious, then we've got a lead (and, more to the point, a lead that wasn't me) which is a good thing.

You misread his statements. I bolded words to help. Was that intentional? I sort of think it is, especially because you maintain the initial read instead of rereading it.

So...you think that I have intentionally lied about a fact that can be easily verified? Right...

The shift between those two posts is pretty dramatic, and IMO the catalyst for the change was charter's expression of suspicion in #85. Even so, I don't see anything in the intervening posts that would change afatchic's opinion from "unsure" to "I may put him at L-1."

Second, I will have to ask Vi, but it appears that making the point you tried to dodge was more important to Vi than noting you were dodging in that instance.

Reading Vi's reply in #467, it really does look like you're the only person who knows what the hell you're talking about here...

~~~
So, I've been a L-1 or thereabouts for ages now, and I haven't been hammered yet. What do you all think that means?

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

@M-M:

Posting before prod. Waiting on charter.

Keep on waiting. Go ahead and keep your suspicions of me as well.

^^this^^

Again I don't really see anything wrong with this, especially in relation to my reasons for suspecting afatchic/kuribo and JDodge. It's highly unlikely that my vote will go to charter today unless something crazy happens like charter claiming scum.

So, I've been a L-1 or thereabouts for ages now, and I haven't been hammered yet. What do you all think that means?

If you are asking about whether scum are on your wagon or holding back, it's impossible to tell. Votes have been spread out pretty much all game, so I doubt a lynch will happen until significant pressure from the deadline kicks in.

[Scheherazade]

The issue was the timing of my vote. If you want to discuss "town suspicion" then we can do so. But that is a seperate question to the one you asked.
I still don't agree that voting is the only way of expressing suspicion - which is the basis of your question, even after the re-phrasing.

Elderad - In addition to actions of his predecessor, I find the timing of elderad's votes on afatchic and charter to be troubling, more so for afatchic. In both cases it seemed like he tries to get his feet wet in expressing suspicions and

then pounces with votes when the suspicion for both had increased

to levels that make his votes look better.

Now, a little critical reading exercise here. Did Machiavellian-Mafia mean your suspicion levels? If he did, then your increased suspicion makes your vote look better to the town.

Test: T/F? Saying "I think X is scummier now than before, so I'm going to vote for X" will make the town like your vote for X more.

Did he mean the town's suspicion? If he did, then your vote looks better when the town suspects the player you vote for.

Test: T/F? The town saying "we think X is scummy" will make the town like your vote for X better.

When you responded, you also said that you helped create the suspicion surrounding those players. Did you mean you helped create your own suspicion surrounding those players? If so, you admit to voting based on delusion. Did you mean the town's suspicion? If so, you're now being disingenuous, which is one of the reasons I think you're scummy.

So...you think that I have intentionally lied about a fact that can be easily verified? Right...

Exactly so! Why do I think you would do that? See the bottom of the page.

The shift between those two posts is pretty dramatic, and IMO the catalyst for the change was charter's expression of suspicion in #85. Even so, I don't see anything in the intervening posts that would change afatchic's opinion from "unsure" to "I may put him at L-1."

Okay. You're right. They're two completely different expressions of uncertainty and afatchic should have to justify why he clarified his position after another player voted for his top suspect.

Reading Vi's reply in #467, it really does look like you're the only person who knows what the hell you're talking about here...

Responding to this will require another post. I'm now ninety percent sure you're saying things to waste town time. Therefore, I'll drop the point completely. I don't think that invalidates my case.

This appeal to emotion does help validate it, though.

So, I've been a L-1 or thereabouts for ages now, and I haven't been hammered yet. What do you all think that means?

I think it means I waited too long.

Vote: eldarad

Gratuitious observation of scummy behaviour! Looking at posts 291, 292 and 299. Summary: eldarad fabricates a quote; charter points out that the quote was blatant falsification; eldarad responds: prove it!

What does this show? eldarad will lie, hoping that no dumb sap will actually go through the game and laboriously show that he's lied. As I'm becoming that sap, I've hammered.