Mini 737 - Hack Poetry Mafia (Game Over)

[Spolium]

Generally I consider lurking to be frustratingly anti-town. Lynx's post (#204)

scums

up my own feelings on you at the moment, though in itself your slightly bizarre approach is a null tell.

Hahahaha. Freudian slip?

Oh man, that's too perfect.

So much for being careful with my writing.

[TonyMontana]

Vote Count

(Now including non-voters!)

It's getting ridiculous, yes even conspicuous,
My vote count is always post two
A hint to my carelessness, last vote count was erroneous
But seems like no one had a clue.


L-3

springlullaby

(4) Plonky, Lynx, Azhrei, don_johnson
L-5

Budja

(2) RedCoyote, Ice9
L-6

fhqwhgads

(1) Goatrevolt

Not Voting:

Budja | fhqwhgads | Jebus | Spolium | springlullaby

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch

Deadline in

5 days

I have amended rule #5 to avoid confusion. Read to avoid ignorance.

[fhqwhgads]

I also understand that you have given us written word that you would be willing to lynch any of those 3. However, there is a large difference in willingness to lynch, and actually voting someone to move towards a lynch. Saying you're willing to lynch people is pretty meaningless without actually making any effort to do so.

QFT

In fact, what she's doing is making herself open to jump on the bandwagon of one of the three people that ironically are among some of the most suspected at the moment. Being non-committal makes it easy for her to backtrack in various ways later.

Also, reading further it seems Spring really made quite a few mistakes (admittedly, she did accept some) in her analysis. While this might be no biggie in insolation, seeing as this is her big 'comeback' post after openly and arrogantly lurking in this game, it IS significant. Also, making such a huge textwall and also cross referencing all over the place with rather telegram style comments makes it VERY difficult to go check the validity of her points.

Also, RC's "Oh nice, you're off the hook" pinged my radar a bit...

[don_johnson]

RC: a policy lynch is better than a no lynch. in my opinion it is not

much

better. an inactive lurker may not roleclaim, thereby putting town in danger of lynching a pr. also, a policy lynch leaves little to go on for day two as all participants have a "valid" reason for hopping the wagon. the only upside i see is the chance of hitting scum as opposed to not at all.

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

I don't understand. You express distaste of policy lynching so it's somehow scummy for RC to bring it up?

i felt he was regurgitating discussion. i feel we are generating enough information to lynch based on suspicions. a policy lynch, to me, would be a step backward. FoS is a tool to let people know how you feel. i feel that at this point in the game, anyone pushing for a policy lynch is aiming to avoid accountability.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

I'd like to point out that Budja, FHQ, and Spring have all still not placed a serious vote in this game. Perhaps Spring's lack of a real vote can be chalked up to her lurking move. Though failing to vote in her huge post does stand out to me still where she casts suspicion in several directions. I think FHQ and Budja are even worse with this fact. Fhq has posted several times with a no strong stance on who he wants to be lynched. I think he said Don in one post though he hasn't followed up on it whatsoever. Strangely, I do agree with all the points he presented in his last post(227). I'm just not sure where he stands suspicion wise with no voting pattern to look at. Another thing that I find suspcious is that he wanted to pressure the lurkers to talk, but he never he used a vote on anyone of them to draw them out.

Budja has done the same thing. He just recently removed his "random vote." And speaking of random vote, I do find it very peculiar that he deemed his vote "random." I really lost suspicion for his initial vote earlier in this game. However, his defense of said vote has really made up for that. First he said it was to escape the RVS. Then, he classifies it as bad play since he declared that the vote was pretty much useless when he applied it. A little after that he said he was trying to spark discussion and scum tells. And now, he just deems it another random vote. Don't think that we've forgotten that vote Budja because we haven't. I just don't know whether to place it as poor play or a genuine backpeddaling. You have moved back up on my scumlist nonetheless.

A policy lynch should not even be considered at this point. I think we definitely have enough info to pick out a proper lynch candidate.

Budja and FHQ who are your top candidates for a lynch. Who are you most willing to lynch and what is holding you back from laying your vote on that person?

Spolium shut up you're gonna give us up with slips like that haha...Seriously though, you aren't voting. Who's your prime lynch candidate in face of a deadline?

Jebus you unvoted Spring. Now are you back to looking at Coyote and Spolium? Or has anyone else caught your eye?

[RedCoyote]

I'm not ashamed to admit I've had a change of heart on spring. Do I agree with the way she played this game? No, and I've said as much. She says, essentially, "Well I did it, now call me out for it or don't". If Goat or Lynx want to continue pushing her on that point, then I will await and see how much else they'll learn from it, but I don't think she's scum at the moment. I think, as scum, spring wouldn't want to draw this much attention to herself. That makes more sense to me than to assume she just drew up all these notes in a few minutes and used her lurking as some sort of ploy to look like a crappy townie. Naturally I'm going to go by what makes more sense.

---

i feel that at this point in the game, anyone pushing for a policy lynch is aiming to avoid accountability.

Do you think post 184 is me "pushing" for a policy lynch in order to "avoid accountability" on this game?

[fhqwhgads]

Budja and FHQ who are your top candidates for a lynch. Who are you most willing to lynch and what is holding you back from laying your vote on that person?

Speaking for myself, at the time of my previous post, the vote count wasn't up yet, and I felt cautious to vote until I know what the standings are.

Thing is, my suspicions earlier in this game was mostly 'fishing' to see responses, rather than having something solid. That being said, I rather like my feeling on spring at the moment, so I feel confident to

vote: springlullaby

.

That makes more sense to me than to assume she just drew up all these notes in a few minutes and used her lurking as some sort of ploy to look like a crappy townie.

You know, I agreed initially with the way you feel about SL. Directly after her post, my feelings toward her were much more positive. But I didn't study her post thoroughly and only focused on the things she accentuated. This is exactly what I think she tried to do with that post. Reading back the responses about the amount of mistakes she made, it seems to me these 'notes' weren't made during the game, but rather after the fact.

[don_johnson]

i feel that at this point in the game, anyone pushing for a policy lynch is aiming to avoid accountability.

Do you think post 184 is me "pushing" for a policy lynch in order to "avoid accountability" on this game?

no.

[springlullaby]

I'd like to ask for a deadline, because I actually don't have all the time I need to answer.

If you're town you want to give me the time to answer everything.

[Spolium]

Spolium shut up you're gonna give us up with slips like that haha...Seriously though, you aren't voting. Who's your prime lynch candidate in face of a deadline?

I've given this some thought, and tentatively I'd have to say Budja or Spring, for the following reasons:

• Just about everyone has expressed an opinion on each of them, so a lynch of either should provide a high yield of information with which to work on D2
  
  
• They both have a high proportion of low-content posts in the thread, to the point where scumhunting has been hindered
  
  
• They seem to be the most resoundingly anti-town, and I really don't like anti-town behaviour

More specific concerns:

BUDJA

- high proportion of vague filler posts
- flip-flopping between vote justifications (see #229)

SPRING

- lurking for seven and a half pages highly anti-town
- wallpost ambiguous enough to explain away "misinterpretations" if necessary
- "

I'm happy to vote players x, y and z

" with no vote

If we're approaching a no-lynch situation, I'll vote whichever gives us a lynch. Otherwise, I'll

vote: Budja

on the basis of unhelpful wishy-washy filler posts and the fact that everyone has provided an opinion on him (see above). I'm not entirely happy about doing so as it feels more like a dead-weight vote than an I-am-confident-he-is-scum vote, but my meta argument for him only goes so far. Spring's more recent burst of activity gives her the edge here in my eyes.

I still have a weird feeling about Goat, but he seems to be actively scumhunting and I can't really fault him for that. I wish Ice9 were more active recently so I could make a more informed decision about him, as I don't read aggressive players very well and am currently erring on the side of

most others think he's town, so I'm probably wrong

.

I find everyone else more or less on a par in terms of scumminess, though I will give the thread a reread before the deadline to see if anything else stands out.

I'd like to ask for a deadline, because I actually don't have all the time I need to answer.

If you're town you want to give me the time to answer everything.

Eh? A deadline has already been set. Why are you asking for a deadline if you don't have enough time to answer?

Also, can you explain what you mean by the second comment?

[springlullaby]

A scumlink is a possible connection between you and gads. At the time I made that note I didn't see what you were answering to.

i didn't ask "what is

a

scumlink"? i asked "what is

the

scumlink"? apparently there is not one.

I found this post suspicious because I didn't understand to what you where responding/what accusation you were making. Theft of Haiku?

You are right. I misread that. Your unvote is justified.

thank you and strike two.

i didn't vote you for meta, i voted you for "active lurking". a vote on a lurker is generally for pressure. i believe someone else pointed to your meta, and i agreed. i was not going to carry the vote based solely on that, however.

That is an alright explanation. But if you voted me for active lurking; why did you unvote me in that particular post in which you mention my meta?

i unvote you because you responded to the vote, which was a pressure vote asking you to participate. i mention meta as a bad reason for keeping the vote. i clarify my stance on meta in a later post.

so i dislike people referring to meta in most cases, and when they do i prefer to question them on it and find out where they are getting it(unless i agree with them). generally, i find that when people refer to meta that they are talking bullshit and when called on it can usually produce little to no evidence.

in my only previous game with you, you lurked and were scum, so i agreed to a certain degree with someone else calling you on that meta, however, it was only one game(for me) that i had to base that opinion on and that was not enough to keep my vote on you. it is unfair to pressure vote someone without giving them an oppurtunity to relieve said pressure. no?

1) I think there is still possibility of backtracking on your part in here because you say that you voted me for active lurking: what at the point of your unvote did I do to change your opinion on that? Because at present you seem to say that I have been active lurking all the way. But I actually understand with what you are saying about pressure and allowing one to relieve it so I will buy this.

]how does ice "read town"? in my experience, aggressive play is dangerous and should be reserved for experienced players. causing a commotion and getting people riled up can be productive, but an aggressive, inexperienced townie can have the same effect as aggressive scum. i.e. if i jump into a car parked on a steep hill and take it out of gear, i will be the cause of what happens next, but it may not be beneficial for the town. my suspicion of aggression is waranted to say the least.

Dangerous play doesn't mean scum.

Ice reads town because his post has the boisterous nature of town post.

I think the way he unceremoniously dropped the whole Spolium thing is the biggest towntell in his book

.

i didn't say or imply the bolded statement. dangerous play doesn't necessarioly mean scum, but it does warrant suspicion. the second(underlined) statement is your opinion of what is really a null tell.

1.Please tell me, were your criticism of Ice based on what you think of his alignment, or on how you thought he should be playing?

2. I don't particularly like your 'underlined statement is your opinion' bit.

a) Of course it is my opinion, and I think it is a relevant opinion, so I'm sharing it. The only relevant consideration you can make is whether you think it is a scummy opinion or not. So basically your 'it's your opinion' means exactly nothing.

b) That was basically my trick as scum in the game we previously shared, and the fact that you would quote me almost verbatim here is bizarre, especially since it is not warranted here I think.

106. ask a meta question to budja concerning Ice - bad, where did that come from?

again, please pay attention. i was clarifying information.

Yes, I have gathered that, but it seemed to me that your question was out of the blue. Random questions is easy scum fare.

swing and a miss. is that strike three or four? depends on how you look at this one. the question was in response to a post in which there was a significant prepositional discrepancy. in a game where all we have is our written word, clarity can mean all the difference.

I can give you that making things clear is important. But still is the fact that your question amounted to nothing very much in term of scum hunting and the drawing of conclusion. Are we in agreement on that?

As for the question, when I read it, it seemed out of the blue, but upon further examination of your exchange with RC, I think you have sufficient motive in asking it.

strike five?

Fair enough.

doesn't matter if you're town, i explained this fully.

Yes you explained. My remark suggest that you may be took that stand at that point, despite never being very concern by my wagon till then, because you may know my alignment.

this is wifomic. whether or not you are town was irrelevant to my reasoning. you seem to be simply speculating about scumdj based on null tell behavior.
[/quote]

Of course it is a speculation but it is not wifomic, because if you thought I was scum at that point in time, you wouldn't care about the quality of the wagon on me. But here we may perhaps need clear up something, my speculation here is not meant to be a definitive argument against you, it is an observation, as you may find in notes. I will expand on that further at the end of this post.

"sounds genuine, but would be easy to fake." so? basically you are willing to lynch me based on "gut" feeling?

No. My assessment of your 176 is that it reads very town, but town read is easiest to fake when it comes to generic discussion.

if you think i can fake it, why can't Ice9? again you speculate about scumdj based on null tell behavior.

Here you are missing the entirety of the argument. Your 176 is a post solely consisting of general considerations about gameplay at large, this is the easiest kind of post you can fake town read in because there is very little reason for scum to lie in theory discussion, and the spontaneity and sincerity involved translates readily.

Ice9 may be faking for all I know, but I don't think it is as likely because my town read of him arise from the attitude he takes in scumhunting proper. And that is harder to fake because, when it comes to scumhunting, deception is involved from scum.

Now, that said. I will say that your reply here actually looks quite good.

Please tell me, can you discern how much of your vote is distaste for my attitude?

none. you basically posted a game summary and agreed with suspicions that were already placed on the table. the only "original" information you seem to have posted has been shown to be in the form of misrepresentations of people you are okay with lynching. i can't see why townSL would do this.

[/quote]


1. I think you are unfair, there are summary elements in my notes true, but there are also relevant opinions.

2. I don't think I have misrepresented you as much as I have committed some errors. And I don't the mistakes I made reading some of the post you made are as glaring as you make them to be. I also do not appreciate the ambivalent use of the word 'people' here suggesting plural.

If you think I have intentionally misrepresented several people, please point out where it is the case.

3. The clicheness of 'I don't see why townSpring would do that' is also not sitting well with me.

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

Here is my view on you at this point in this game:

You seem quite outraged by my post, and this I'm not sure yet what to make of. On one hand I could understand a degree of emotional reaction to being accused from town, on the other, I think yours is overdoing it a bit now. And this is suspicious because the 'offended townie' role is easy to slide in as scum.

One reason I can think for that if you are town is that you are pissed by the content of my notes in which I'm snarky at times, but here I'll try to clear this up:

My notes are the process by which I came to the conclusion that you are likely scum but the comment in them are not meant to be definite accusation Ultimately my reason for suspecting you is that when I view everything you have contributed to this game, I think it doesn't amount to very much.

So here I will ask you, do you think you have done a lot of scumhunting in this game? Do you think you look very town?

That said, I will tell you that I feel your vote on me is somewhat understandable BUT not justified from a town point of view. I think it is easy and lazy, and quite scummy as it does not take the game in its entirety into consideration. But I also understand that I have written myself in a somewhat difficult corner concerning you by making, what I think are, some minors mistakes, allowing you to take on the righteous townie role.

So here is what I will do, I will not make it easy for you, and I ask of you for a list of whom you think is scummy beside me, and why. Plus why you think I am scummier than any of your other suspect.

If you are town, there is very little reason I see for not doing this.

[springlullaby]

I'd like to ask for a deadline, because I actually don't have all the time I need to answer.

If you're town you want to give me the time to answer everything.

Eh? A deadline has already been set. Why are you asking for a deadline if you don't have enough time to answer?

Also, can you explain what you mean by the second comment?

That was mistake, I intented to ask for and extension.

I'm asking for an extension because I do not want to be lynched by a deadline vote rush. Which given the fact that there are 2 dead votes from lurkers hanging on me is likely to happen.

[Spolium]

Okay, that makes more sense.

[springlullaby]

Beyond this post, you appear to have no real negative reads on me. Your final conclusion does not appear to refect this in any way.

On a first glance yesterday, your post appeared to be fairly insightful to me but when I read it more closely it simply appears to be a summary of the actions so far, impressive but with little actual argument over any of your claims.

It is true I have no real negative read, but taken in its ensemble, the fact that you have in reality contributed very much of nothing is damning, and this is a solid argument I think.

I've stated how making such a move clears you of any early player interactions along with the fact that coming in with a big player analysis comes off trying to look pro-town to me. The big problem I have is that a move like yours allows you to avoid getting a read on you.

Well said, I hadn't noticed that.

[/quote]

Hadn't noticed what? Hadn't noticed that you couldn't get a read on me? How can you not notice that?

[springlullaby]

Okay, that makes more sense.

Please support the extension.

[Spolium]

How long an extension are you requesting/expecting?

It would also be appreciated if you addressed post #222.

[springlullaby]

What are you talking about? You listed 3 players that you are fine lynching. Why would you be placing a vote for pressure or reactions at this point in time? I'm not calling you out for failure to place a pressure vote, I'm calling you out for failure to follow through by placing a vote

to lynch

.

I also understand that you have given us written word that you would be willing to lynch any of those 3. However, there is a large difference in willingness to lynch, and actually voting someone to move towards a lynch. Saying you're willing to lynch people is pretty meaningless without actually making any effort to do so.

I'm not saying that you are calling me out for pressure vote. I'm talking about the fact that votes can be retracted as pressure or whatever later on, and in my eyes my stating my willingness to lynch if not stronger, equivalent. But at the time I wrote that I had not considered in the fact that deadline means nolynch if there isn't a majority. As such, you are right in your concerns, and I will make my vote today.

114. reply spolium; the first part is ok; good comeback; a little prod to me - hmm wanna shift suss on me that you feel a little heat? overall TR though

Am I forbidden from attacking players while someone is suspicious of me?

No you are not. But it is a possibility.

119. very nice and civil conclusion to headbutt with spolium it seems - scumlink to watch

Originally I thought he was really reaching in his defense of Fhq. In that post I finally realized that we were clashing heads because he misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I doubt it was intentional, so it nullified a large part of my suspicion.

Ok, but I'm also under the impression from the last game we were in that you were more animated than that in your arguments. But it may be that you were arguing against me whom you thought scum.

120. tidy reply to spolium. well this kinda post raise my hackles, very undergoggy

I have no idea what you're talking about.

That should spell underdoggy. Which isn't a word either but it is just the impression that you are quite subdued in that reply. It is rare to see people coming to peaceful agreement with each other in games. Rare also for town post to lack ego/omgus.

168. seems to find putting lurker at L1 acceptable; would it means you'd go along with a lurker lynch

Lurking is a viable strategy for scum if you allow people to lurk and are timid about pressuring them. I was mainly asking that question to gauge don-johnson's reaction, but yeah, I don't have a problem with lynching lurkers, although I'd rather lynch a good suspect.

Ok.

[springlullaby]

How long an extension are you requesting/expecting?

It would also be appreciated if you addressed post #222.

A week I think would be good.

I'm working through them all one by one.

[springlullaby]

Spolium:

16. RV GADS
17. another joke on the RV - trying to hard to make it look random?
19. bizarre jumpiness, bait for banter, yet very quick to say 'only jest'
21, 22. clearing confusion, reafirm only joke - looks nervy

Dodgy assessment, since (a) it was the jokevote stage, and (b) haiku are somewhat limiting. I do recall that you requested that people clarify whether they were being serious or not so I'm not overly concerned about this.

Well, you made 3 posts to clear up the matter on whether you were joking or not. It did look jumpy to me. It's not a definitive scumtell or anything though.

33. response to don, a little dramatic maybe, the friend acusation seems a litte too obvious - hard to tell if it's the style or what
36. general warning about word use - do not like

These two are somewhat related. I had become aware that people may try to explain away terms and phrases perceived to be scummy by claiming poetic license. #36 was meant to address this potential problem and improve clarity, so I'm not sure why you didn't like it given that you were one of the first to call for this.

Well from my point of view, anything that is general considerations about gameplay is easy to fake and is easy to make, so it is ground for suspicions

on others

. Had you done a lot of it, it would have been a scumtell.

74. write post in draft - serious business is serious, may be scummy

I was actually expecting someone to point this out a lot sooner.

The way I see it, careless use of language by townies gives scum more to exploit so it makes sense to take a bit of care. That aside, I've notepad-drafted everything out of habit ever since I lost a ridiculously long megapost to the dread login page.

I can accept the reason you offer here, I don't think drafting is a definitive scumtell anyway. I don't understand people losing post to login pages though, all I have to do is to press 'previous page', and I get everything back.

90. reply to Ice, nice and tidy. "as I haven't come across many townies who risk this sort of play" - scumslip? - interesting sophisticate looking case on goat, the contradiction is there but it is kinda nitpicking,

townies are very hypocrite creatures too

I'm not sure what point you're making (bold) - is it that townies are often hypocritical and thus arguments based on hypocritical behaviour are less valid?

It depends. Sometimes cases based on hypocrisy lacks subtlety because it doesn't take into account the fact that townies are quite often hypocrites too. In your case on Goat, I thought it could be argued that there was hypocrisy on Goat's part ( here I'm noting that I do think that Goat explains everything pretty well afterward), but the margin was so slim that even townie could have honestly not seen it as hypocrisy/ wouldn't want to admit to it.

96. something about urgency of drawing people's attention away on Az' part - a little convoluted maybe, I don't like this kind of open ended accusation,

seems to be suggesting Ice/Az

I don't really understand this either. What do you think I was suggesting about Ice/Az, and why?

Typo, the first Az is meant to be Ice. As for the Ice/Az, I'm sorry I don't remember what I was thinking. Actually, now that I'm rereading this post, I see little of reproach.

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

I have a question for you though, what do you think Ice now?

[springlullaby]

I also understand that you have given us written word that you would be willing to lynch any of those 3. However, there is a large difference in willingness to lynch, and actually voting someone to move towards a lynch. Saying you're willing to lynch people is pretty meaningless without actually making any effort to do so.

QFT

In fact, what she's doing is making herself open to jump on the bandwagon of one of the three people that ironically are among some of the most suspected at the moment. Being non-committal makes it easy for her to backtrack in various ways later.

Also, reading further it seems Spring really made quite a few mistakes (admittedly, she did accept some) in her analysis. While this might be no biggie in insolation, seeing as this is her big 'comeback' post after openly and arrogantly lurking in this game, it IS significant. Also, making such a huge textwall and also cross referencing all over the place with rather telegram style comments makes it VERY difficult to go check the validity of her points.

Also, RC's "Oh nice, you're off the hook" pinged my radar a bit...

1. Your first attack is unfair, you shouldn't be concerned over whether my suspects are "among some of the most supected at the moment", but whether you think I'm justified in thinking them scummy.

2. What IS significant and in which way? The second accusation is rather vague, what my being arrogant or not has to do with anything?

3. Well, it is difficult only if you are lazy enough. Lynching me because you feel to lazy to verify my say is pretty crappy I think.

-- In regards to my non vote, see my reply to Goat.

[springlullaby]

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

That's quite the flimsy accusation to make and it is looking scummy on you. Do you seriously believe in the hypothesis of scumME being so crude about it?

[don_johnson]

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

That's quite the flimsy accusation to make and it is looking scummy on you. Do you seriously believe in the hypothesis of scumME being so crude about it?

Spring, you admitted to misrepresenting me on several points. to have gone throught the trouble of preparing your giant post, you had to have spent a certain amount of effort. effort shows intent. why the wifom question here? my accusation was preceded by an entire post of evidence supporting it. how is that "flimsy"?

I found this post suspicious because I didn't understand to what you where responding/what accusation you were making. Theft of Haiku?

not sure if you knew what you were getting into with "hackpoetry". Spolium had previously tried to commandeer the Haiku form(in the sign-up thread, i believe?) and his poem tried to express his ownership of it. personally i love haiku and didn't think it fair for one player to "steal" an entire form of poetry. this statement could be taken several ways. it was during the rvs. if you don't understand something, ask a question. you didn't ask because you were busy lurking. so by not clarifying information, your opinion was swayed, hence the importance of clarifying post content.

1) I think there is still possibility of backtracking on your part in here because you say that you voted me for active lurking: what at the point of your unvote did I do to change your opinion on that?

you responded. it was all i asked when i voted.

Please tell me, were your criticism of Ice based on what you think of his alignment, or on how you thought he should be playing?

i don't understand this. i explained how i feel about aggressive behavior. it is not a scumtell, but it has serious anti-town potential. i am always suspicious of it. unfortunately Ice has dissappeared.

2. I don't particularly like your 'underlined statement is your opinion' bit.

a) Of course it is my opinion, and I think it is a relevant opinion, so I'm sharing it. The only relevant consideration you can make is whether you think it is a scummy opinion or not. So basically your 'it's your opinion' means exactly nothing.

you gave an opinion. i disagreed. i didn't get "towntell" from it.

b) That was basically my trick as scum in the game we previously shared, and the fact that you would quote me almost verbatim here is bizarre, especially since it is not warranted here I think.

i stopped reading you at a certain point in that game. remember, i was scum too.

I can give you that making things clear is important. But still is the fact that your question amounted to nothing very much in term of scum hunting and the drawing of conclusion. Are we in agreement on that?

no. by not clarifying things we can let scum slip through the cracks, or make baseless and incorrect assumptions about other players.

Here you are missing the entirety of the argument. Your 176 is a post solely consisting of general considerations about gameplay at large, this is the easiest kind of post you can fake town read in because there is very little reason for scum to lie in theory discussion, and the spontaneity and sincerity involved translates readily.

Ice9 may be faking for all I know, but I don't think it is as likely because my town read of him arise from the attitude he takes in scumhunting proper. And that is harder to fake because, when it comes to scumhunting, deception is involved from scum.

okay, so you have a "gut" feeling on me. you produce no evidence to support this. also, you are pointing to a post that was made in response to several other players. you are faulting me for requested interaction. also, i do ask questions of others in this post and i believe that the post itself, inherently aids the scumhunting process. i think you are reaching on this one, supporting my accusation of "intentionally misrepresenting".

I think you are unfair, there are summary elements in my notes true, but there are also relevant opinions.

yes, but your opinions tend to give certain players the "benefit of the doubt" while painting others scummy for what amount to similar gameplay. also, your opinions are seem based off your notes, which you have admitted, are flawed. perhaps it is you who needs to reassess.

I also do not appreciate the ambivalent use of the word 'people' here suggesting plural.

i believe three other players have pointed to issues with your notes as well. three plus one makes four, hence plurality.

My notes are the process by which I came to the conclusion that you are likely scum but the comment in them are not meant to be definite accusation Ultimately my reason for suspecting you is that when

I view everything you have contributed to this game, I think it doesn't amount to very much.

as opposed to whose contributions? yours?

So here I will ask you, do you think you have done a lot of scumhunting in this game? Do you think you look very town?

a) yes. i think i found one. b) i have no idea, and this is a loaded question which no matter how i answer can be used against me.

So here is what I will do, I will not make it easy for you, and I ask of you for a list of whom you think is scummy beside me, and why. Plus why you think I am scummier than any of your other suspect.

SpringLullaby
Budja
Red Coyote
Fghjdads
Ice9
Azrhei?
Jebus?
Plonky?
Lynx
Goat
Spolium

my suspicions of you are well documented. your mistakes seem less reasonable as "mistakes". I believe your intent is to misdirect town.

[Plonky]

I'm sorry, I am here, I just was writing a huge post but then my computer crashed and I lost everything. I am, suffice to say, a bit upset about this. Will post later.

[springlullaby]

SL is my biggest suspect right now. her misrep of me seems intentional and thorough. i think she may have been hoping that people were just going to read the bolded parts and her lynch choices.

That's quite the flimsy accusation to make and it is looking scummy on you. Do you seriously believe in the hypothesis of scumME being so crude about it?

Spring, you admitted to misrepresenting me on several points. to have gone throught the trouble of preparing your giant post, you had to have spent a certain amount of effort. effort shows intent. why the wifom question here? my accusation was preceded by an entire post of evidence supporting it. how is that "flimsy"?

No, I have admitted that I had made 2 factual errors/misreads, which we clarified when you pointed them out.

I'm not sure what you mean by "effort shows intent".

My question may be wifom, but I'm not particularly afraid of wifom:
the theory you suggest here is that I purposely made easily identifiable mistakes in order to misrepresent you. This is flimsy because I'm just not that bad scum, which you should have an idea of because you have seen scum me before, hence my question.

not sure if you knew what you were getting into with "hackpoetry". Spolium had previously tried to commandeer the Haiku form(in the sign-up thread, i believe?) and his poem tried to express his ownership of it. personally i love haiku and didn't think it fair for one player to "steal" an entire form of poetry. this statement could be taken several ways. it was during the rvs. if you don't understand something, ask a question. you didn't ask because you were busy lurking. so by not clarifying information, your opinion was swayed, hence the importance of clarifying post content.

I can accept that.

1) I think there is still possibility of backtracking on your part in here because you say that you voted me for active lurking: what at the point of your unvote did I do to change your opinion on that?

you responded. it was all i asked when i voted.

I'm considering this, and I think it is quite the pointless move.

Please tell me, were your criticism of Ice based on what you think of his alignment, or on how you thought he should be playing?

i don't understand this. i explained how i feel about aggressive behavior. it is not a scumtell, but it has serious anti-town potential. i am always suspicious of it. unfortunately Ice has dissappeared.

I have asked that question because what I see there is a contradiction in terms and possibly a scumslip. Yes you have explained how you felt about "dangerous play", but you have described it as a *townie* behavior. As such, you being suspicious of it doesn't make sense.

2. I don't particularly like your 'underlined statement is your opinion' bit.

a) Of course it is my opinion, and I think it is a relevant opinion, so I'm sharing it. The only relevant consideration you can make is whether you think it is a scummy opinion or not. So basically your 'it's your opinion' means exactly nothing.

you gave an opinion. i disagreed. i didn't get "towntell" from it.

b) That was basically my trick as scum in the game we previously shared, and the fact that you would quote me almost verbatim here is bizarre, especially since it is not warranted here I think.

i stopped reading you at a certain point in that game. remember, i was scum too.

Ok. By curiosity, were you not aware that I frequently used this line of argument in our previous game?

I can give you that making things clear is important. But still is the fact that your question amounted to nothing very much in term of scum hunting and the drawing of conclusion. Are we in agreement on that?

no. by not clarifying things we can let scum slip through the cracks, or make baseless and incorrect assumptions about other players.

Well, I think that if 'clarification' is a minor subset of the making of case. Also I dislike your sudden use of 'we' here, but I fear I might be starting to get very nitpicky.

Here you are missing the entirety of the argument. Your 176 is a post solely consisting of general considerations about gameplay at large, this is the easiest kind of post you can fake town read in because there is very little reason for scum to lie in theory discussion, and the spontaneity and sincerity involved translates readily.

Ice9 may be faking for all I know, but I don't think it is as likely because my town read of him arise from the attitude he takes in scumhunting proper. And that is harder to fake because, when it comes to scumhunting, deception is involved from scum.

okay, so you have a "gut" feeling on me. you produce no evidence to support this. also, you are pointing to a post that was made in response to several other players. you are faulting me for requested interaction. also, i do ask questions of others in this post and i believe that the post itself, inherently aids the scumhunting process. i think you are reaching on this one, supporting my accusation of "intentionally misrepresenting".

Are you missing the point on purpose? Why do you insist that "I have a gut feeling" on you? I never claimed such thing. Where am I reaching exactly? Right now you appear to be the one misrepresenting me.

Here I see the possibility that you may be under the assumption that I regard that post as a definite scumtell, I'll clarify again that it is not the case. I made an observation to the effect that I detected towntell from the post in question, but were wary of it for the reason described. And it was just that, a remark.

I think you are unfair, there are summary elements in my notes true, but there are also relevant opinions.

yes, but your opinions tend to give certain players the "benefit of the doubt" while painting others scummy for what amount to similar gameplay. also, your opinions are seem based off your notes, which you have admitted, are flawed. perhaps it is you who needs to reassess.

Here I think you are being unfair again. It is true that my assessment of this game is not very dramatic, but I believe it is the nature of this game which lead to that. There are very few players who distinguished themselves by their play today, the big bulk of you being in the grey zone, and not particularly distinguishable from each others. I made the best assessment I could, and pronounced myself accordingly.

It is easy for you to criticize when you have not done such an assessment yourself. Maybe you should try so we could compare notes.

I also do not appreciate the ambivalent use of the word 'people' here suggesting plural.

i believe three other players have pointed to issues with your notes as well. three plus one makes four, hence plurality.

And you agree with each and all of these "issues"?

My notes are the process by which I came to the conclusion that you are likely scum but the comment in them are not meant to be definite accusation Ultimately my reason for suspecting you is that when

I view everything you have contributed to this game, I think it doesn't amount to very much.

as opposed to whose contributions? yours?

Well, yes, I think I'm stepping it up quite a bit.

So here I will ask you, do you think you have done a lot of scumhunting in this game? Do you think you look very town?

a) yes. i think i found one. b) i have no idea, and this is a loaded question which no matter how i answer can be used against me.

It was not a loaded when I conceived it, but I now that I consider it, I think it might be difficult to answer regardless of alignment.

I'll explain why I asked it further: you seemed quite indignant at my calling your play milky and amounting to nothing much. But looking at your play, I just don't see what you are indignant about because it is by no measure stellar, and you have pretty much backsitted the entire day. I think town would be more honest in their perspective of their own play. What do you think?

So here is what I will do, I will not make it easy for you, and I ask of you for a list of whom you think is scummy beside me, and why. Plus why you think I am scummier than any of your other suspect.

SpringLullaby
Budja
Red Coyote
Fghjdads
Ice9
Azrhei?
Jebus?
Plonky?
Lynx
Goat
Spolium

my suspicions of you are well documented. your mistakes seem less reasonable as "mistakes". I believe your intent is to misdirect town.

This is not what I asked for, I'm asking for who your others suspects are, plus your reasons why you think them to be scummy. And why you think I'm scummier than them.

[springlullaby]

I'm sorry, I am here, I just was writing a huge post but then my computer crashed and I lost everything. I am, suffice to say, a bit upset about this. Will post later.

Are you content with your vote on me?

---

Now,

Vote Budja

Of my three suspects, he is the one looking the worse atm. Because of the insightful/not so much to the fact that he seems to need find reason to suspect me in others people's post.