Mini 734 - GrimMafia - OVER

[springlullaby]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

[Zachrulez]

Because of this...

{JereIC, Zwet, Beyond B, Zach, Sipylus, WolfBlitzer}

There is scum on this wagon. Zero is an easy target, as new players usually are. His erratic play and inability to grasp advanced Mafia theory makes him an ideal d1 herring, a perfect opportunity to force a claim from him (and potentially other town power-roles, in an attempt to validate or disprove Zero's original claim) and put themselves in a wet dream on night 1.

How can you possibly know for a fact that scum is on this wagon? It's possible that all the votes against Zero are town. In fact if you look at things from a hypothetical standpoint, it's also possible that you are making this point as his scum buddy, in order to make a case to get the bandwagon off of him. If he's town, maybe you just want the bandwagon somewhere else in hopes of lynching a power role (Since he's claimed townie.)

[Zachrulez]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

Oooooo... a demand.

So now... you can...

1. Try asking me nicely this time.

2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.

3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

[springlullaby]

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

[Ectomancer]

Posting from my G1 because my internet at home has been down for the last 5 days. I'll try to make a post from work tomorrow.

[Zachrulez]

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

1. Has to do with asking me politely in a way that's more likely to make me want to respond. Some people would call it manners.

2. Well that's great. Would you care to point out the exact posts or quotes, or do you want me to struggle to look through and find these explanations, so that when I fumble with trying to find them, you can find me scummy too?

3. Am I supposed to find your arguments convincing? I must have missed the rule that said that was a requirement to play this game.

[Nuwen]

How can you possibly know for a fact that scum is on this wagon? It's possible that all the votes against Zero are town. In fact if you look at things from a hypothetical standpoint, it's also possible that you are making this point as his scum buddy, in order to make a case to get the bandwagon off of him. If he's town, maybe you just want the bandwagon somewhere else in hopes of lynching a power role (Since he's claimed townie.)

Because the wagon is well-built and opportunistic. It's certainly possible that

six

town out of eleven other players simply think that Zero is dumb scum, but I think it's far more likely that the wagon is scum-propelled. Newer players are easy targets for scum, especially on day 1 before claims and power-roles can affect the game's direction.

Your last option sounds like terrible scum play. Ideally, scum want to leave as few footprints as possible when erecting wagons. Trying to shift suspicion away from a on-town wagon to another would involve either scum buddy acquitting the first wagon in order to make the next more gravitous. If either partner attempts to target the first player again (Zero, in this game) on a later day, it'll be easier for observant townies to poke holes in the wagon.

[Insert long and intelligent analysis here]

Brilliant. If Zero is scum, you are the obvious scum partner. Therefore, Zero is not scum, and you are scum. (This is tongue in cheek, do not take seriously. But seriously, bravo, and I agree with your logic.)

This is precisely why I think he's just an inexperienced townie - prior to my post, there was no attempt by Zero's hypothetical scumbuddy to redirect the wagon. While I realize that my post could be interpreted as the aforementioned redirect,

I

know that it isn't, and that constant allows me to poke and prod for reactions.

Remember

: The only thing a townie knows for certain on day 1 is that he or she is a townie.

I need to reread the thread again and closeread Sping/Jere's exchanges before commenting.

[Zachrulez]

I'm up to lynch zero, the wifom is going to kill me. But I have a couple thing to say first so no one lynches yet. Posting tomorrow.

Now... you're next post.

JereIC has hit a nerve with a few people, but looking at his most recent posts, something stood out: he says that using Zero as scum, "I think we'll be able to use that to implicate other players as scum" (or something like that). It's full of confidence, but if he's wrong, we'll have nothing to go off of to make said implications. Now, unless he's bussing on day one to set up lynches later (seems very unlikely), it dosen't seem to me that scum would make that assumption. ...did that make sense to anyone?

I'd like you to explain why you think the comment made by JereIC is anything but scummy.

Because to me that comment is one of the scummiest he has made, it is the equivalent of saying 'we should lynch scum because it's good to lynch scum', which says exactly nothing.

------------------------------

Ectomancer, I'd like to know what you think of JereIC.

So you found JereIC scummy, but you were up to lynching Zero?

It seems to me that your vote against him was premeditated and that you were LYING about being up to lynching Zero.

Hmmmm...

[Zachrulez]

I'm sorry to hear that, PerArdua.

My top suspects right now are Zero and spring. As other people have mentioned, Zero hasn't contributed much but posted to appear like he was. His insistence that his question may be a distraction tactic too - let's talk about what there is to talk about, not who's scum or not.

Spring really hasn't contributed much either.

I'm beginning to think that she was trying to speedlynch Ectomancer with her "random" vote, and originally thought up the whole "speedlynches are good for town" argument to try to explain that. When the bandwagon swung around to her, she used it instead to try to knock us off-topic. On the other hand, she's right about Beyond_Birthday's posts - their tone is self-conscious, like he's constantly evaluating his own behavior.

By my counting, this is the fifth vote on Zero. I think he's scum, and I think we're going to be able to use the fact that he's scum to implicate other players.

Vote: Zer0ph34r

BTW, part in bold is a really crappy argument.

Is this why he's scummy?

Why is it a crappy argument?

[springlullaby]

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

1. Has to do with asking me politely in a way that's more likely to make me want to respond. Some people would call it manners.

2. Well that's great. Would you care to point out the exact posts or quotes, or do you want me to struggle to look through and find these explanations, so that when I fumble with trying to find them, you can find me scummy too?

3. Am I supposed to find your arguments convincing? I must have missed the rule that said that was a requirement to play this game.

1. If you have a problem with my 'manners' or lack thereof, do take your complaints to the mod and I will respect arbitrage if any. As far I'm concerned, I do not believe I have been excessive in any way toward you. If you do not wish to take your complaints to the mod, I expect this line of discussion to be dropped, and am willing to pretend it wasn't raised in the first place.

2. Yes, I expect you to struggle and find them, it's your job. I will tell you if I think you to be scummy when you have done so.

3. I do not require of you to find my argument convincing, however I asked you to demonstrate why you think they are not and am expecting an answer.

[springlullaby]

I'm up to lynch zero, the wifom is going to kill me. But I have a couple thing to say first so no one lynches yet. Posting tomorrow.

Now... you're next post.

JereIC has hit a nerve with a few people, but looking at his most recent posts, something stood out: he says that using Zero as scum, "I think we'll be able to use that to implicate other players as scum" (or something like that). It's full of confidence, but if he's wrong, we'll have nothing to go off of to make said implications. Now, unless he's bussing on day one to set up lynches later (seems very unlikely), it dosen't seem to me that scum would make that assumption. ...did that make sense to anyone?

I'd like you to explain why you think the comment made by JereIC is anything but scummy.

Because to me that comment is one of the scummiest he has made, it is the equivalent of saying 'we should lynch scum because it's good to lynch scum', which says exactly nothing.

------------------------------

Ectomancer, I'd like to know what you think of JereIC.

So you found JereIC scummy, but you were up to lynching Zero?

It seems to me that your vote against him was premeditated and that you were LYING about being up to lynching Zero.

Hmmmm...

I am still up to lynch Zero, I however would prefer lynching JereIC for the reasons I have cited.

The 'premedited' argument is an interesting attack. It is the same kind of argument that JereIC has used, and scummy in the same way because my alleged refusal to lynch Zero could possibly be considered scummy only if Zero were scum. This makes me ask the same question that I have asked of JereIC: what make you so sure Zero is scum?

[springlullaby]

I'm sorry to hear that, PerArdua.

My top suspects right now are Zero and spring. As other people have mentioned, Zero hasn't contributed much but posted to appear like he was. His insistence that his question may be a distraction tactic too - let's talk about what there is to talk about, not who's scum or not.

Spring really hasn't contributed much either.

I'm beginning to think that she was trying to speedlynch Ectomancer with her "random" vote, and originally thought up the whole "speedlynches are good for town" argument to try to explain that. When the bandwagon swung around to her, she used it instead to try to knock us off-topic. On the other hand, she's right about Beyond_Birthday's posts - their tone is self-conscious, like he's constantly evaluating his own behavior.

By my counting, this is the fifth vote on Zero. I think he's scum, and I think we're going to be able to use the fact that he's scum to implicate other players.

Vote: Zer0ph34r

BTW, part in bold is a really crappy argument.

Is this why he's scummy?

Why is it a crappy argument?

It is a crappy argument because it rest on the supposition that I genuinely wanted to 'speedlynch' Ectomancer.

Accusation to which I have already answered and countered easily: I already stated that I was not.

It is further scummy because the supporting argument he presents to that accusation is very flimsy: I have already explained the reasoning behind my 'speedlynches are good for town' comment, and JereIC has yet to come up with a convincing rejoinder demonstrating why I am wrong.

As some would say, this entire argument is pure conjecture, and not a very good one at that.

[JereIC]

[Insert long and intelligent analysis here]

Brilliant. If Zero is scum, you are the obvious scum partner. Therefore, Zero is not scum, and you are scum. (This is tongue in cheek, do not take seriously. But seriously, bravo, and I agree with your logic.)

Unvote

Now, moving on to the next point:

Actually, your initial play and the questions relating to them, Spring, are a bit scummy in my book. Your questions have offered you a bit of defense, but JereIC, I feel, has a better point in your unwillingness to lynch him. It could either be:

A) you do not want to lynch a townie.

OR

B) You do not want to lynch a scum partner. However, this is severely lacking. I think if you were both scum, then you would rather bus him off, by your current logic.

As a result, I am working off of Zero is stupid townie (this and Nuwen's argument), and as a result, I think that your defense "[JereIC's] argument would apply if Zero is scum" is false. I think that

Vote Springlullaby

is a better place for my vote.

...

That doesn't make any sense. My case against Spring is built mostly on Zero being scum. If you assume he's a townie I don't see how you can vote for her.

[JereIC]

Nuwen, I've reread your posts about Zero at least three times now, and all I get out of #190 is a long and colorfully-written version of the newbie defense. In #206 you add the argument that no one tried to redirect the bandwagon, but it's just as likely that his scum buddies stayed clear or tried to bus him. Are there other reasons you think he's not scum?

[Zachrulez]

I'm up to lynch zero, the wifom is going to kill me. But I have a couple thing to say first so no one lynches yet. Posting tomorrow.

Now... you're next post.

JereIC has hit a nerve with a few people, but looking at his most recent posts, something stood out: he says that using Zero as scum, "I think we'll be able to use that to implicate other players as scum" (or something like that). It's full of confidence, but if he's wrong, we'll have nothing to go off of to make said implications. Now, unless he's bussing on day one to set up lynches later (seems very unlikely), it dosen't seem to me that scum would make that assumption. ...did that make sense to anyone?

I'd like you to explain why you think the comment made by JereIC is anything but scummy.

Because to me that comment is one of the scummiest he has made, it is the equivalent of saying 'we should lynch scum because it's good to lynch scum', which says exactly nothing.

------------------------------

Ectomancer, I'd like to know what you think of JereIC.

So you found JereIC scummy, but you were up to lynching Zero?

It seems to me that your vote against him was premeditated and that you were LYING about being up to lynching Zero.

Hmmmm...

I am still up to lynch Zero, I however would prefer lynching JereIC for the reasons I have cited.

The 'premedited' argument is an interesting attack. It is the same kind of argument that JereIC has used, and scummy in the same way because my alleged refusal to lynch Zero could possibly be considered scummy only if Zero were scum. This makes me ask the same question that I have asked of JereIC: what make you so sure Zero is scum?

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=126

Add to that his refusal to acknowledge anyone who has actually BOTHERED to answer his question and his continued assertions that no one has...

I'm as sure as you can get on day 1. A lot more sure than I am about your alignment or JereIC's one way or another.

[Zachrulez]

I'm sorry to hear that, PerArdua.

My top suspects right now are Zero and spring. As other people have mentioned, Zero hasn't contributed much but posted to appear like he was. His insistence that his question may be a distraction tactic too - let's talk about what there is to talk about, not who's scum or not.

Spring really hasn't contributed much either.

I'm beginning to think that she was trying to speedlynch Ectomancer with her "random" vote, and originally thought up the whole "speedlynches are good for town" argument to try to explain that. When the bandwagon swung around to her, she used it instead to try to knock us off-topic. On the other hand, she's right about Beyond_Birthday's posts - their tone is self-conscious, like he's constantly evaluating his own behavior.

By my counting, this is the fifth vote on Zero. I think he's scum, and I think we're going to be able to use the fact that he's scum to implicate other players.

Vote: Zer0ph34r

BTW, part in bold is a really crappy argument.

Is this why he's scummy?

Why is it a crappy argument?

It is a crappy argument because it rest on the supposition that I genuinely wanted to 'speedlynch' Ectomancer.

Accusation to which I have already answered and countered easily: I already stated that I was not.

It is further scummy because the supporting argument he presents to that accusation is very flimsy: I have already explained the reasoning behind my 'speedlynches are good for town' comment, and JereIC has yet to come up with a convincing rejoinder demonstrating why I am wrong.

As some would say, this entire argument is pure conjecture, and not a very good one at that.

You know you didn't want to speedlynch Ecto, but everyone else... it depends on believing you when you say it.

I did not agree with your "speedlynches are good for town" comment, or your stated assessment of how they could be... but that's fine, we don't have to think the same way about that.

His case lacks proof, and I have never in any way said it was good. Notice that I'm more interested in your reactions and attacks of him and am more investigating right now rather then leaping to a conclusion.

You can argue his case is bad. You can argue that him believing you are scum based on whether or not Zero is scum is just downright bad play, but I can't really see how you can argue that it's blatantly scummy.

[Zachrulez]

Wait a minute...

I am still up to lynch Zero, I however would prefer lynching JereIC for the reasons I have cited.

The 'premedited' argument is an interesting attack. It is the same kind of argument that JereIC has used, and scummy in the same way because my alleged refusal to lynch Zero could possibly be considered scummy only if Zero were scum. This makes me ask the same question that I have asked of JereIC: what make you so sure Zero is scum?

You haven't made your opinion clear at all. You said yesterday you were up for lynching Zero, but you haven't voted for him. You say it's a crapshoot as to whether he's scum, but don't explain why the case is weak. You haven't commented on Nuwen's analysis, which could support your case against me pretty well, but would require you to talk about Zero.

1. He was at L1, I didn't want to hammer because there were other things I wanted to comment on.
2. I said very clearly why I thought Zero was crapshoot, I think he has an equal chance of being awkward scum and awkward town. I also think the best argument against him right now is to get rid of the distraction.

My point's not just about content - your timing and apparent unwillingness to discuss Zero, even when it's in your interest, are suspect. That's what makes it look like you're trying to cover for him while distancing yourself from him, and if he turns out to be scummy, that's going to make you look scummy too.

1. Apparent willingness to discuss Zero, where? I said everything that there is to say about him already. Please point out where you discussed him in any detail.

2. What you say here would be remotely workable only if Zero is scum. Which led me to the question, what make you so sure Zero is scum?

___________________

Ok, I've got enough I think. I decided that I'm not lynching Zero.

Vote JereIC

: circular logic, generalities sprouting, bad arguments. See my discussion vs him.

I think it's a much better vote than Zero who has a higher chance of being just an idiot.

Pay close attention to the bolded portion.

So which is it Spring? Are you still up to lynching Zero, or have you decided, as you stated in 196 that you are not lynching Zero?

[Nuwen]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

1. Try asking me nicely this time.

2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.

3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

Jesus Christ, Mary, and the other guy. Stop this type of question-counterquestion play. It's not productive, cute, or clever. One doesn't always need to be on the questioning side to have a one-up in conversation. One doesn't always

need

a one-up in conversation.

If someone asks a question that you already answered, provide links and quotes. He or she is obviously having a hard time finding the answer, which requires clarity from the respondent. Neither of you are extracting or contributing useful information by repeatedly head-butting the other with senseless semantic quibbles.

[Ectomancer]

For the record, I wasn't concerned at all about being speedlynched.
Busy day here at work, I'll stay after to post, though my internet at home is supposed to be back up today

[Zachrulez]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

1. Try asking me nicely this time.

2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.

3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

Jesus Christ, Mary, and the other guy. Stop this type of question-counterquestion play. It's not productive, cute, or clever. One doesn't always need to be on the questioning side to have a one-up in conversation. One doesn't always

need

a one-up in conversation.

If someone asks a question that you already answered, provide links and quotes. He or she is obviously having a hard time finding the answer, which requires clarity from the respondent. Neither of you are extracting or contributing useful information by repeatedly head-butting the other with senseless semantic quibbles.

I look forward to you reading the rest of the game. (This would mean the posts that have come below and AFTER the posts you quoted.)

[Beyond_Birthday]

Spring has allowed a certain amount of chaos then cleared it up later in an out-of-the-box revelation. However, one might view that Spring's primary motivation for this would be to make opinions and votes while keeping a real intention and suspicion from actually being seen. In a way, she is under the radar while being perfectly active.

As JereIC points out, Spring is attempting to hold off the lynch for Zero despite being all for the lycnh. Why? For favoritism of more discussion. However, this reason doesn't hold any water. While I now disaagree with a Zero lynch due to Nuwen's post, I think that allowing him to be lynched would have revealed more and led to better discussion day 2 for more accurate hunting. So, concluding that likely: Zer0 is town aligned; then I can logically percieve the idea that Spring, as scum, did not want to be associated with the lynching vote.

Sorry if this wasn't clear, as I posted in a very weary state...

[springlullaby]

Zachrulez, explain why you think JereIC points are good.

1. Try asking me nicely this time.

2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.

3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.

2. I already explained why his points are scummy.

3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

Jesus Christ, Mary, and the other guy. Stop this type of question-counterquestion play. It's not productive, cute, or clever. One doesn't always need to be on the questioning side to have a one-up in conversation. One doesn't always

need

a one-up in conversation.

If someone asks a question that you already answered, provide links and quotes. He or she is obviously having a hard time finding the answer, which requires clarity from the respondent. Neither of you are extracting or contributing useful information by repeatedly head-butting the other with senseless semantic quibbles.

Don't be jealous, I promise I'll headbutt with you too if I see fit.

Now seriously, is there something in there which warrants an answer or was that a pure hissy fit moment?

[springlullaby]

I'm up to lynch zero, the wifom is going to kill me. But I have a couple thing to say first so no one lynches yet. Posting tomorrow.

Now... you're next post.

JereIC has hit a nerve with a few people, but looking at his most recent posts, something stood out: he says that using Zero as scum, "I think we'll be able to use that to implicate other players as scum" (or something like that). It's full of confidence, but if he's wrong, we'll have nothing to go off of to make said implications. Now, unless he's bussing on day one to set up lynches later (seems very unlikely), it dosen't seem to me that scum would make that assumption. ...did that make sense to anyone?

I'd like you to explain why you think the comment made by JereIC is anything but scummy.

Because to me that comment is one of the scummiest he has made, it is the equivalent of saying 'we should lynch scum because it's good to lynch scum', which says exactly nothing.

------------------------------

Ectomancer, I'd like to know what you think of JereIC.

So you found JereIC scummy, but you were up to lynching Zero?

It seems to me that your vote against him was premeditated and that you were LYING about being up to lynching Zero.

Hmmmm...

I am still up to lynch Zero, I however would prefer lynching JereIC for the reasons I have cited.

The 'premedited' argument is an interesting attack. It is the same kind of argument that JereIC has used, and scummy in the same way because my alleged refusal to lynch Zero could possibly be considered scummy only if Zero were scum. This makes me ask the same question that I have asked of JereIC: what make you so sure Zero is scum?

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=126

Add to that his refusal to acknowledge anyone who has actually BOTHERED to answer his question and his continued assertions that no one has...

I'm as sure as you can get on day 1. A lot more sure than I am about your alignment or JereIC's one way or another.

I do see why people are voting Zero, but there are also things I do not like about his wagon.
- the fact that he has played so very un-apologetically badly actually augment the risk of him being terrible town in my eyes
- the fact that the wagon was so linear, it seems very much too easy
- the fact that skillit, our resident lurker, has not reacted to it on way or another

These are factors which make me doubt about Zero, and I want to know why you, amonst others, do not seem to consider them. What do you say?

You know you didn't want to speedlynch Ecto, but everyone else... it depends on believing you when you say it.

I did not agree with your "speedlynches are good for town" comment, or your stated assessment of how they could be... but that's fine, we don't have to think the same way about that.

His case lacks proof, and I have never in any way said it was good. Notice that I'm more interested in your reactions and attacks of him and am more investigating right now rather then leaping to a conclusion.

You can argue his case is bad. You can argue that him believing you are scum based on whether or not Zero is scum is just downright bad play, but I can't really see how you can argue that it's blatantly scummy.

What else do you propose anyone base their arguments on if not on bad arguments and bad play?

Wait a minute...

I am still up to lynch Zero, I however would prefer lynching JereIC for the reasons I have cited.

The 'premedited' argument is an interesting attack. It is the same kind of argument that JereIC has used, and scummy in the same way because my alleged refusal to lynch Zero could possibly be considered scummy only if Zero were scum. This makes me ask the same question that I have asked of JereIC: what make you so sure Zero is scum?

You haven't made your opinion clear at all. You said yesterday you were up for lynching Zero, but you haven't voted for him. You say it's a crapshoot as to whether he's scum, but don't explain why the case is weak. You haven't commented on Nuwen's analysis, which could support your case against me pretty well, but would require you to talk about Zero.

1. He was at L1, I didn't want to hammer because there were other things I wanted to comment on.
2. I said very clearly why I thought Zero was crapshoot, I think he has an equal chance of being awkward scum and awkward town. I also think the best argument against him right now is to get rid of the distraction.

My point's not just about content - your timing and apparent unwillingness to discuss Zero, even when it's in your interest, are suspect. That's what makes it look like you're trying to cover for him while distancing yourself from him, and if he turns out to be scummy, that's going to make you look scummy too.

1. Apparent willingness to discuss Zero, where? I said everything that there is to say about him already. Please point out where you discussed him in any detail.

2. What you say here would be remotely workable only if Zero is scum. Which led me to the question, what make you so sure Zero is scum?

___________________

Ok, I've got enough I think. I decided that I'm not lynching Zero.

Vote JereIC

: circular logic, generalities sprouting, bad arguments. See my discussion vs him.

I think it's a much better vote than Zero who has a higher chance of being just an idiot.

Pay close attention to the bolded portion.

So which is it Spring? Are you still up to lynching Zero, or have you decided, as you stated in 196 that you are not lynching Zero?

This does looks contradictory, but believe it or not, my 210 was written in haste and badly formulated. What I meant by it was that I was not strictly opposed to a Zero lynch as opposed to wanting to lynch him myself, preffering a JereIC lynch myself.

[springlullaby]

Spring has allowed a certain amount of chaos then cleared it up later in an out-of-the-box revelation. However, one might view that Spring's primary motivation for this would be to make opinions and votes while keeping a real intention and suspicion from actually being seen. In a way, she is under the radar while being perfectly active.

As JereIC points out, Spring is attempting to hold off the lynch for Zero despite being all for the lycnh. Why? For favoritism of more discussion. However, this reason doesn't hold any water. While I now disaagree with a Zero lynch due to Nuwen's post, I think that allowing him to be lynched would have revealed more and led to better discussion day 2 for more accurate hunting. So, concluding that likely: Zer0 is town aligned; then I can logically percieve the idea that Spring, as scum, did not want to be associated with the lynching vote.

Sorry if this wasn't clear, as I posted in a very weary state...

This is a bad circular argument. Here you propose to justify your vote on me by an assumption of Zero's alignment, which you again propose to justify based on conjucture as to the motivation of my actions coming from scum.

I also don't like your first paragraph, it is in my opinion saying very much of nothing. Tell me, don't you think that "one might view that Spring's primary motivation for this would be to make opinions and votes while keeping a real intention and suspicion from actually being seen." can be said about anyone a propos anything?

[Nuwen]

2. I said very clearly why I thought Zero was crapshoot, I think he has an equal chance of being awkward scum and awkward town. I also think the best argument against him right now is to get rid of the distraction.

Anti-town argument, if not scummy. No one appreciates being caught in LILO with an erratic, inexperienced townie -

but it's better than losing

. Cannibalizing "distracting" players who are little more than a "crapshoot" at being scum does nothing for town. This sounds like a thinly-veiled attempt to get Zero's (or any hapless townie's) wagon started up in earnest. A desire to lynch someone for

being town, albeit bad town

, is suspect.

(This would mean the posts that have come below and AFTER the posts you quoted.)

You there, patience. I did say that I needed to do a full rethrough of Jere & Spring's interaction. This involves revisiting posts that seems long-dead or immaterial.

I pointed out their directionless bickering because, currently, it provides an illusion of investigation and counter-investigation without actually bearing new information. Example:

1. What was your reasoning behing x statement?
2. I already posted it, why are you continuing to pursue the point?
1. Why won't you simply answer my question, and why are periphrasing the subject at hand?
2. I'm not dodging the subject at hand, I'm answering and have already answered your question. Why do you want to know an answered question?

• Compare to

  Oooooo... a demand.
  
  So now... you can...
  
  1. Try asking me nicely this time.
  
  2. Explain why you think his points are scummy.
  
  3. Tell me where you saw the word good in my post about his points.

  1. Explain what 'nice' has to do with anything.
  
  2. I already explained why his points are scummy.
  
  3. You said that you didn't believe JereIC's point were scummy, as per 2, I expect you to explain why you don't find my arguments convincing.

  1. Has to do with asking me politely in a way that's more likely to make me want to respond. Some people would call it manners.
  
  2. Well that's great. Would you care to point out the exact posts or quotes, or do you want me to struggle to look through and find these explanations, so that when I fumble with trying to find them, you can find me scummy too?
  
  3. Am I supposed to find your arguments convincing? I must have missed the rule that said that was a requirement to play this game.

  1. If you have a problem with my 'manners' or lack thereof, do take your complaints to the mod and I will respect arbitrage if any. As far I'm concerned, I do not believe I have been excessive in any way toward you. If you do not wish to take your complaints to the mod, I expect this line of discussion to be dropped, and am willing to pretend it wasn't raised in the first place.
  
  2. Yes, I expect you to struggle and find them, it's your job. I will tell you if I think you to be scummy when you have done so.
  
  3. I do not require of you to find my argument convincing, however I asked you to demonstrate why you think they are not and am expecting an answer.

And so on. This is a common scum-buddy technique used to disassociate each other without actually giving the town any workable data. I pointed this out with the hope that either poster would snap back into progressive posting, but that isn't happening. Usually the tactic is better choreographed.

Nuwen, I've reread your posts about Zero at least three times now, and all I get out of #190 is a long and colorfully-written version of the newbie defense. In #206 you add the argument that no one tried to redirect the bandwagon, but it's just as likely that his scum buddies stayed clear or tried to bus him. Are there other reasons you think he's not scum?

Play to win - why would anyone bus his or her scum buddy this early in the game? There's no reason to toss up a sacrifice just to avoid an intervening defense. Between third party strawmans and strings of chainsaws, a quality scum player can rescue his or her partner while barely touching the subject. Bussing should be reserved for cop investigations and little else. As a preemptive gambit, it's overambitious and unnecessary.