Baseless. I fell behind through no fault of my own.Izzy wrote:You deliberately avoided the game and lurked.
That's your interpretation. Then again, I've decided, after failing to catch up, to ask for a few pointers and opinions on the game from everyone. Your interpretation would only hold water if I had actually shown inclination to piggyback on anything stated.Izzy wrote:You've attempted to find other people's opinions to latch on to to avoid the accountability of having your own.
Please. What you're ignoring in this point, but don't fail to exploit in another point, is that I was reading material from nine pages ago before, while now I've decided to read only recent posts.Izzy wrote:When you get enough votes that you have a bandwagon, suddenly you're all over this game like crabs on Paris Hilton. That's scummy.
OMGUS is such an empty accusation. You promptly fail to recognize the validity of my reasoning why I came back from living in nine pages ago, which is that deadline is only a week from now; and your failure to recognize this is scummy. That is not the same as voting you for voting me.DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:EBWOP: I also forgot that your vote for me is based solely on OMGUS. Which, y'know, at this stage of the game is also scummy.
Your activity elsewhere says otherwise.Korts wrote:Baseless. I fell behind through no fault of my own.Izzy wrote:You deliberately avoided the game and lurked.
You would have to piggyback onto something, else you could not contribute. Unless you're planning on actually catching up, you'll always be working from other people's opinions, and thus you will be able to deflect any criticism of your conclusions to other people. This is not town-beneficial play.That's your interpretation. Then again, I've decided, after failing to catch up, to ask for a few pointers and opinions on the game from everyone. Your interpretation would only hold water if I had actually shown inclination to piggyback on anything stated.Izzy wrote:You've attempted to find other people's opinions to latch on to to avoid the accountability of having your own.
So you say. Yet the fact remains that your activity has gone way up now that you have three votes and thus a bandwagon, and attention is on you. You cannot dispute this.Please. What you're ignoring in this point, but don't fail to exploit in another point, is that I was reading material from nine pages ago before, while now I've decided to read only recent posts.Izzy wrote:When you get enough votes that you have a bandwagon, suddenly you're all over this game like crabs on Paris Hilton. That's scummy.
You voted for me because I voted for you. You have said this. Then you posted some self-justification for your scummy behaviour that fails to hold water and fails to form even a vaguely convincing case as to why my decision to vote for you because of your scummy behaviour should be considered scummy. It's total OMGUS, and since GC has spotted it too, I'm not the only one who sees this.OMGUS is such an empty accusation. You promptly fail to recognize the validity of my reasoning why I came back from living in nine pages ago, which is that deadline is only a week from now; and your failure to recognize this is scummy. That is not the same as voting you for voting me.DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:EBWOP: I also forgot that your vote for me is based solely on OMGUS. Which, y'know, at this stage of the game is also scummy.
Not directed at me, but still... you had time to waste elsewhere. You had opportuinities to catch up yet you chose not to and to fall behind. That is most ceertainly unwilling.GC: I was not unwilling, I was trying and failing to catch up.
My activity has gone up since I stated that I won't bother trying to read nine pages before posting. The fact that I have a wagon on me is irrelevant and clearly not the cause of my increased activity as you're trying to depict.Izzy wrote:So you say. Yet the fact remains that your activity has gone way up now that you have three votes and thus a bandwagon, and attention is on you. You cannot dispute this.
The fact that I have more reason than "OMG YOU ARE VOTING ME I VOTE YOU" is enough to make the vote something more than OMGUS. Also, your appeal to authority/majority is noted.Izzy wrote:You voted for me because I voted for you. You have said this. Then you posted some self-justification for your scummy behaviour that fails to hold water and fails to form even a vaguely convincing case as to why my decision to vote for you because of your scummy behaviour should be considered scummy. It's total OMGUS, and since GC has spotted it too, I'm not the only one who sees this.
Feel free to read my ongoing games, or even my overall contribution on-site. I posted wherever I didn't have much backstory to read; check my newbie, I fell behind at approximately the same time I fell behind here.Izzy wrote:you had time to waste elsewhere. You had opportuinities to catch up yet you chose not to and to fall behind. That is most ceertainly unwilling.
I checked the thread and saw a call for a prod on me. I responded. And it was Izzy's request that prompted me to check the deadline rules and make the decision to contribute based on interactions rather than reading the backlog.GC wrote:Maybe I'm missing something. Tell me how his understanding is incorrect.
You post on April 8th - the bottom of page 11 (post 274).
You don't pay attention to the thread for a few days.
You come back April 12th - the middle of page 15 (post 362).
Your "come back" post is immediately (as in, 3 minutes) following Dizzy's request for you to be prodded. This makes it look like you were keeping up with the thread.
This is unless you assume that in that time I checked the deadline rules and saw that I didn't have the time to properly catch up.GC wrote:I find it hard to think that the one hour and ten posts that it took for you to shift your position somehow made you believe you couldn't catch up.
This is a blatant misrep. If you have been following the game at all, I fell behind on page 4 approximately, andGC wrote:And then only 12 hours later you claim that you are now nine pages behind (post 386)! And that you originally were only a page and a half behind. If you came back on page 15 and were only behind a page and a half, but when you get to page 16 and now claim that you're nine pages behind I have to call bullshit.
I have other responsibilities beside mafia. The fact that I am on scumchat and am able to reply to posts that don't require a read of nine pages worth of materal does not mean that I am not occupied with studying.DizzyIzzyB13 wrote:Also, GC if you look at his posting history, you'll see that during his periods of inactivity here, he was clearly posting in other games quite happily. He had ample opportunity to catch up/stay up to date, and he's steadfastly refused to do so. His alleged nine pages isn't even all that much to read. Unless he's a really slow reader, which I doubt based on his interactions in Scumchat, I can't see how it could take more than, like, an hour.
...Wait, what? I will freely admit that I didn't check out your page four posts because how in the world is someone behind on page four?Korts wrote:This is a blatant misrep. If you have been following the game at all, I fell behind on page 4 approximately, and that was when I declared a backlog of 1,5 pages. If you do your research at least make the effort of doing it right.
So you're saying you lurked/fell behind because you mismanaged your time (scumchat over ongoing game) and/or over-extended yourself (not enough time in the day to oblige your commitments)?Korts wrote:I have other responsibilities beside mafia. The fact that I am on scumchat and am able to reply to posts that don't require a read of nine pages worth of materal does not mean that I am not occupied with studying.
This was my interpretation, too.Korts wrote:That's your interpretation.Izzy wrote:You've attempted to find other people's opinions to latch on to to avoid the accountability of having your own.
Slightly scummy. I don't really see why me being in that other game with him is relevant unless he fakequickhammers in this game too.Ether wrote:Charter, you were in the second game Incognito linked to--what do you think of Xdaamno?
Wait, I didn't replace out at all. Are we talking about the same game?Incognito wrote:(Part 2 of 3 - Xdaamno's (town) meta)
I mainly looked through two recently completed games of Xdaamno's to get a general feel of what he plays like as town. I couldn't find any recently completed scum games of his outside of the games he played during Marathon Day and one where he replaced in really late.
- I don't think you need to look through too much of this game to notice the differences between his style of play here and there. In 725, he seemed much more assertive, more aggressive, he actively scum-hunted, and seemed to address all or most of the concerns that came up towards him. In our voll-mod game here, I think the difference is quite dramatic: the only thing I really know about Xdaamno is that he thinks GC is town, he thought Patrick was scummy but then he thought he was town-ish, and... that's about it.
- This was the other game I looked into where he was town and was D1 lynched as town. Interestingly, I think his play in this particular game matches much more closely with the type of play we've been seeing here. He seemed more "on the sidelines" and distanced from everything and less likely to pay attention to what was going on or address points that were made against him.
Conclusions? Meh, it seems like there's two different Xdaamno's out there: One where he actually seems fairly competent and the other where he seems completely clueless and scummy.
In Mini 725, I certainly received a completely different feeling about your play than you led on in this quote. In fact, in that game you were NK-ed during Night 2. You mentioned a few posts back that you know that your playstyle has changed. Did you make a conscious effort to change your style of play into one that appears more scummy/non-contributive? Why did you seem to exhibit two completely different styles of play in these two games when they appeared to be running at the same time and where, in each case, you were aligned on the side of the town?Post 87, Xdaamno wrote:I suppose you mean me?
I try not to post unless I have something useful to be doing, because it's actually an effort for me to not look scummy. I get lynched all the time.
What was the point of this question, OGML? It seemed like you had a reason for it.OhGodMyLife wrote:Before I get into anything else, does anyone here other than Yosarian or Patrick want to venture a guess as to why the two of them continuing to hammer at wanting a reason for me not believing a miller IN THIS SETUP is terribly scummy?
Right, and that's completely not what I pointed out. Your skimming is showing, watch out. There was a seven page gap in what Korts said he needed to catch up on in 14 hours. It isn't a difference between 7 and 9 pages.charter wrote:Green Crayon's arguing the meaning of a couple and Korts said 9 but it was only 7 or whatever seems really trivial to me.
Post 413, skitzer wrote:Incognito: It's been so long, I don't remember any issues about you from me other than your opinion on Izzy.
So then whoskitzer, in your 2nd post, (bolded blue is my emphasis) wrote:For suspicions, Incognito's attack of Dizzy which started the whole case is probablymy biggest suspicion.
Because I wasn't the only one to not answer your questions but yet I was the only one who you called out about it. Also, you even went so far as to say I was "avoiding realposting" which is a blatant misrep and exaggeration considering the fact that I've been "realposting" through the entirety of the game. Your comment here:Post 415, Korts wrote:I have madetwoposts in short succession saying that I wanted these questions answered by everyone--what makes you think I only want you to do so?
...leads me to believe you yourself recognize this and were just tossing dirt on me for your own convenience.Post 415, Korts wrote:A question: why is Incog considered so pro-town? Is it a build-up of a constant series of helpful scumhunting posts?
Inc wrote:I couldn't find any recently completed scum games of his outside of the games he played during Marathon Day and one where he replaced in really late.
You've let to draw a link between this behaviour and being scummy. I can see one, but I want to know what you're thinking of.Green Crayons wrote:Right, and that's completely not what I pointed out. Your skimming is showing, watch out. There was a seven page gap in what Korts said he needed to catch up on in 14 hours. It isn't a difference between 7 and 9 pages.charter wrote:Green Crayon's arguing the meaning of a couple and Korts said 9 but it was only 7 or whatever seems really trivial to me.
Korts came in, said he was "a couple" of pages behind. (Seriously? You want to argue that a couple isn't two? At most three if you want to be liberal/casual about it.)
He originally wants people to draw conclusions for him because he just doesn't want to do the reading.
He gets shit about his laziness from other players.
He then says he wants people to draw conclusions for him because he won't be able to catch up.
He gets shit about him wanting people to draw conclusions/how he won't be able to catch up.
He complains that he is now nine pages behind.
Where in your post does he 'argument shift'? And why is misrepresentation a scum tell - couldn't it be that he lied about how far he was caught up, assuming that he'd be able to catch up later? Town players do that often.Green Crayons wrote:The obvious implications of my posts are active lurking, argument shifting and misrepresentation to cover his lie/argument shift.
I can see that. Lurking as a scumtell is a highly controversial issue, so there may be no correct answer. On those cases, I figure that Xdaamno is lost in his less-than-average defending skills, so that case will either die or be pushed to lynch. Both of these cases have seemed to fade out; nevertheless, I will read up on them. I'm not completely sure what you mean by passive, but I think I act the way I do because I usually have an opportunity to post once per day in each game and so I try to make stuff count when I can.Patrick wrote:Actually I do think scum are more likely to lurk than town, and that alot of people don't appreciate that. I've found it to be especially true in games with fairly strict deadlines. A small part of me wonders if you typed that last sentence to see if you could excuse away your own lurking. Have you got any opinions yet on those cases you said you'd read up on? Why are you so passive?
Could be, but it's best to make sure he's not just assuming this from out of nowhere. Also, it borders rolefishing.camn wrote:And I wonder if he has role-based info as to the NONexistence of a miller?
This, being an entire post, seems practically worthless unless it was in reply to something I missed earlier. It makes it sound like "oh, look at me! I'm attempting to look all sorts of town!" I don't like it.Xdaamno wrote:I came in here to find some scumtells, so that's what I'm doing now.
I'm not liking Xdaamno currently, but I know the way he's acting now kind of meshes with his usual playstyle. camn's reasoning still doesn't suit me perfectly, so I guess that's another person I'm watching. charter's vote on Izzy is actually well reasoned, and I forgot this point on Izzy until I saw it, so I agree with this point. Kort's vote, however, seems OMGUSy.Incognito wrote:So then who do you find scummy? Also, what do you think of Korts's and charter's votes on DizzyIzzy?
X wrote:Where in your post does he 'argument shift'?
GC, in 428 wrote:You post on April 8th - the bottom of page 11 (post 274).
You don't pay attention to the thread for a few days.
You come back April 12th - the middle of page 15 (post 362).
Your "come back" post is immediately (as in, 3 minutes) following Dizzy's request for you to be prodded. This makes it look like you were keeping up with the thread.
You then immediately (as in, 2 minutes) follow your "come back" post with the suggestion that you won't catch up and ask other people to draw conclusions (post 364).
You then shift this stanceof you just not wanting to read three pages into "if I try to catch up I will just fall behind!" only an hour and some change after your "come back" post (post 375). I find it hard to think that the one hour and ten posts that it took for you to shift your position somehow made you believe you couldn't catch up.
And then only 12 hours later you claim that you are now nine pages behind (post 386)! And that you originally were only a page and a half behind. If you came back on page 15 and were only behind a page and a half, but when you get to page 16 and now claim that you're nine pages behind I have to call bullshit.
GC, in 439 wrote:Korts came in, said he was "a couple" of pages behind. (Seriously? You want to argue that a couple isn't two? At most three if you want to be liberal/casual about it.)
He originally wants people to draw conclusions for him because he just doesn't want to do the reading.
He gets shit about his laziness from other players.
He then says he wants people to draw conclusions for him because he won't be able to catch up.
He gets shit about him wanting people to draw conclusions/how he won't be able to catch up.
He complains that he is now nine pages behind.
Uh, that's an incredibly dumb, scummy way to play as town. Do you have case examples of this happening often?X wrote:And why is misrepresentation a scum tell - couldn't it be that he lied about how far he was caught up, assuming that he'd be able to catch up later? Town players do that often.
Incog wrote:I find it strange that Xdaamno is here looking for scum-tells but keeps questioning the dude he thinks is town.
Go back through X's posts. They're just as bad. This is not some sort of new development of X's play this game. Not quite sure why people are happy to say "X is pretty suspicious" but not put their money where their mouth is (just singling these two posts out because they just happened; pretty sure Yos, Patrick and camn have all voiced ample amounts of suspicion about X but I think I'm still the only one voting him).skit wrote:This, being an entire post, seems practically worthless unless it was in reply to something I missed earlier. It makes it sound like "oh, look at me! I'm attempting to look all sorts of town!" I don't like it.
So you disagree with Incog's 405 assessment (two different play styles)?skit wrote:I'm not liking Xdaamno currently, but I know the way he's acting now kind of meshes with his usual playstyle.
I haved played games with Xdaamno before, and I find that his posts between those games and this one are pretty similar.Green Crayons wrote:Go back through X's posts. They're just as bad. This is not some sort of new development of X's play this game. Not quite sure why people are happy to say "X is pretty suspicious" but not put their money where their mouth is (just singling these two posts out because they just happened; pretty sure Yos, Patrick and camn have all voiced ample amounts of suspicion about X but I think I'm still the only one voting him). Psst, Incog. Please note he completely side-stepped the meat of your questions about his play.
Green Crayons wrote:So you disagree with Incog's 405 assessment (two different play styles)?