I would argue that scum have to read the thread just as carefully to avoid inadvertent scum-slips.Kabe wrote: That last bit is what sold me on it. Scum don't read the thread fully. They can afford to just skim it because they don't need to search the thread carefully for clues as to who the scum are because they aren't searching for scum.
Yes, thanks for this spirited defense, except that Semioldguy already pointed this out to me in his post 101, and I admitted that I had screwed it up in my post 104. Both posts were further up on Page 5, the same page that you posted this on. In fact, it's why I unvoted you.Wulfy wrote:You're stupid. Read the conversation in context and you'd realize that Kirr provided the defense that she felt a need to pressure percy and vote him (despite being L-2) because in another game the town suspected her for NOT pressuring someone (further) just because the person was at L-2. I am speaking of the people in another game. My mind, therefore, didn't alter in the slightest.
It is my view that towniesArtem wrote:I would argue that scum have to read the thread just as carefully to avoid inadvertent scum-slips.
Is petty, antagonistic sniping. AndHmm, why, I wonder? What exactly happens when you're angry?
is the "impossible to prove that you're town" conundrum that you pointed out earlier,For voting for you? Well, because we think you are scum. Prove us otherwise.
The reason I have so few posts is that it appears I am in a far different timezone that the rest of you (US Eastern). Therefore, while you guys are able to actively partake in heated debates in real time, I am forced to be active only when my schedule allows it, which does not fall into any of yours. So, my posts are directed at the entire day, and by the time im next on a whole new page has been posted.Pablo wrote: Over has a whole 4 posts to his name, one jumping on a semi-popular wagon and mostly misinterpreting kabenon007's words even after kabenon's exchange with me had (I thought) cleared it up.
First of all, you never once said you were a new player. He wasn't voting for you becauseCJMiller wrote: Vote: Pablo Molinero for discriminating against new players.
Completely true. And if he comes back and give actual, convincing defenses than maybe he can get off the hook. However, L-2 is even more pressure than the L-3 where he's currently standing.FarkshinSoup wrote: He seems like if he is scum, some well applied pressure will reveal some cracks, or make him shut up completely. Either one would be telling.
You claimed you withheld your reasoning "for reactions". You say this as if it's supposed to be good for the town. Like by gaining reactions you do nothing but assist us in finding scum. But to me, this is a huge, blatant scumtell. By not giving your reasoning from the start, what would everyone else have to argue against? Nothing. You left the town nothing to pick apart aside from one specific error.kabenon007 wrote: Unvote, vote: Percy
Diescumdie.
Maybe I'm interpreting this wrong. But not only is this wordy and hard to follow, you seem to be saying that whether scum gather information or the town gathers information, its still good. To the town, scum gathering extra information is BAD. It gives them room to create fake defenses to convince the town they are innocent. The only way that you could possibly consider scum gathering information good is if you were indeed scum.kabenon007 wrote: I am saying that scum gathering information or town gathering information doesn't matter, information is still being gathered. The means by which it is gathered, while important, do not discount the fact that information was obtained.
I gave my reasons afterward, so the fact I witheld the information is irrelevant. I wasn't trying to present something for people to argue against, I was trying to see what would happen. Who would come to Percy's defense, who would jump on him after me, etc. All of these will be useful later on. Could I have said my reasons? Yes, but I chose not too in hopes of generating more talking._over9000 wrote:You claimed you withheld your reasoning "for reactions". You say this as if it's supposed to be good for the town. Like by gaining reactions you do nothing but assist us in finding scum. But to me, this is a huge, blatant scumtell. By not giving your reasoning from the start, what would everyone else have to argue against? Nothing. You left the town nothing to pick apart aside from one specific error.
Yeah, I had a tough time coming up with a way to word that as well, one that wouldn't be confusing. Let's try again._over9000 wrote:Maybe I'm interpreting this wrong. But not only is this wordy and hard to follow, you seem to be saying that whether scum gather information or the town gathers information, its still good. To the town, scum gathering extra information is BAD. It gives them room to create fake defenses to convince the town they are innocent. The only way that you could possibly consider scum gathering information good is if you were indeed scum.
I have not questioned why you were being defensive, nor have I ever thought you guilty for that. In fact, I specifically say in Post 113 that it is not why I find you suspicious. Next time spend the few extra moments looking for a quote before completely misrepresenting someone else (that would be in the best interest of the town). Artem posted a good example of what I've been referring to:kirroha Post 117 wrote:Like for example, you said, "Why are you being so defensive? If you're Town you shouldn't care much" (it's not the exact quote, I am too lazy to find the original, but he asked something along those lines) and of course, I have to answer that what I was doing (aka defending myself) is considered pro-town.
That quote by you could have been left out of your post. Adding it in makes it look like you are trying to appear pro-town rather than just being pro-town.Artem Post 124 wrote:This is not a response to somebody "picking up things that you have been doing and throwing them back at you". This is an explanation that what you're about to do is what a good townie should do. I'm with the semioldguy: a townie should let their actions speak for themselves.Kirr wrote: Okay, purely defending myself isn't going to let the Town go anywhere. I've read through all the posts, so I should post a bit on what I think about the players here so far.
You "sort of defended him" in post 37. A whole 14 posts later, youve changed your mind based on one quote. While I admit that his post was quite strange (which I'll get to in a minute), I can't see why it was enough to go from defending him to voting for him.kirroha wrote:Percy, I sort of defended you a bit since I didn't believe that you were the mafia, but this post you made made me think twice. Are you buddying up to me, by voting for the person who showed some suspicion at me? It's a pretty anti-town action, and you didn't give any case on Pablo before voting for him. I change my mind.
As far as the bolded text, why, barely emerging from the RVS, would ou be so certain that any one person was innocent?kirroha 68 wrote:That is true. However, I do believe that pressure had been enough for Percy, and thatI was rather convinced at that time that both are innocent.I was not suspicious of Percy's "vote-switching" at that time, as I think that I would have done the same as well - it's human nature to correct mistakes that other people have made.Thus, I did not actually see the point of over-pressurizing Percy.When scum see us fighting among ourselves, it would be better for them without them even lifting a finger.
You're switching your story, in barely 10 posts. Maybe you have an excuse that I'm not seeing, but to me this seems like a scumtell.kirroha 57 wrote:I am merely trying to put more pressure on Percy to see if he would actually react differently.
That's a WIFOM. He jumped on a wagon without thinking of the consequences. And don't you think it's weird, the way that he tried directing suspicion to me, who is the one who has the most number of votes at the current moment? That's very scummy to me.username wrote:These are not rhetorical questions, kirroha.
He should have given his reasons at first when he made his vote. He gave it afterwards. Like what happened to me, things can't clear up just because of one messed up post that we had made.username wrote:So, if he was town, what should he do instead when people ask him to give his reasons?
Of course I'm trying to look Town. Because I am Town, but I'm being doubted. It's normal to defend yourself at a time like this, I have repeated this thousands of times. But you all just chose to see what I had said as a scumtell. If you still don't believe me, then I think maybe I should claim.username wrote:"Trying too hard to look town" is not the same thing as "Too Townie".
Then look at it this way. If it's valid against me, why can't it be valid against him? If you choose to say what I used against him is invalid, what you used against me is also invalid.username wrote:And again, you keep on using this as a point against kabenon. If it's not a valid argument against you, then why is it a valid argument against him?
VSkabenon wrote:more like attacking and questioning
Now how does attacking get non-threatening? I am attacking you right this instand, kabenon, and it's not non-threatening.I like to respond in a way that is non-threatening and trying to be helpful
And you vote for me when I challenge you to vote for the person you think is scummiest, because "it's a Townie thing to do".kabe wrote:You know, username, I've made up my mind as to my direction, at least for Day 1. Vote:kirroha
For goodness sake. It was break time at school that time, and I prefer the read posts from the back because it is habitual! Read my posts carefully, please!kabe wrote:That last bit is what sold me on it. Scum don't read the thread fully. They can afford to just skim it because they don't need to search the thread carefully for clues as to who the scum are because they aren't searching for scum.
I'm letting my actions speak for themselves, but obviously they failed to speak for themselves. That is why I explained. Clear enough?Artem wrote:I'm with the semioldguy: a townie should let their actions speak for themselves.
How much of the thread can you read in 10 minutes? And post as well in that span of time? Really, I think you're trying too hard to get me lynched, since you have the second most number of votes at the current time. But since you seem to be at least trying to help the town now, my suspicions on you have lessened. Still, IGMEOY.kabe wrote:It is my view that townies have to read the thread to play the game well, while scum only should read the thread. They can get by with only skimming, but it's not a wise choice, as it can lead to my very accusation on kirroha.
I've explained it in one of the old long posts. Please read it. I changed my story because of something Percy did that I misinterpreted as scummy (He voted for Pablo who was the only one suspecting me at that moment without any proof and coincidentally I defended him earlier, but in the end I realised that it was just an RV).over wrote:You're switching your story, in barely 10 posts. Maybe you have an excuse that I'm not seeing, but to me this seems like a scumtell.
What do you want me to do? Whenever I do anything, it just makes you all think I'm scum.CJ, so far, you have really shown zero indication that you are interested in finding scum. Do something about it, or I will be forced to conclude that you don't need to find them, because you already know who they are, because you are one of them.
That's the problem. Claiming will help the mafia know about the setup. But I know I'm Town - if I get lynched it won't be good for the Town either. Still, it's better for a real scum to be lynched Day 1 and a pro-towner to die Night 1 than for a Pro-town power role to get lynched Day 1 and a pro-towner to die Night 1. No matter what, we should always aim for minimal casualties.over wrote:I can't see why you claiming would help at all. We've already got one role claimed, which gives the mafia one target. If there's a doctor, they could still save Artem if they find it worthwhile, but if you also claim then they now have 2 targets. Doesn't seem like it would be much good to the town.
Pray tell, what have you done AT ALL during this game? People suspect you because of what you ARENT doing, not what you are.CJMiller wrote: Whenever I do anything, it just makes you all think I'm scum.
CJ, you shock me.CJ wrote:Whenever I do anything, it just makes you all think I'm scum.
True. But at this point in the game, a claim means next to nothing when anyone could claim any role and have just as much validity as everyone else. From a neutral perspective, pretending I don't suspect you and that you are town, claiming is probably a bad idea. If I'm wrong about you and you're innocent I'd rather you be useful. Just IMO.kirroha wrote: That's the problem. Claiming will help the mafia know about the setup. But I know I'm Town - if I get lynched it won't be good for the Town either. Still, it's better for a real scum to be lynched Day 1 and a pro-towner to die Night 1 than for a Pro-town power role to get lynched Day 1 and a pro-towner to die Night 1. No matter what, we should always aim for minimal casualties.
That's the reason why I'm not claiming just yet. But if I get to L-1 and I have no choice, I will have to claim.over wrote:True. But at this point in the game, a claim means next to nothing when anyone could claim any role and have just as much validity as everyone else. From a neutral perspective, pretending I don't suspect you and that you are town, claiming is probably a bad idea. If I'm wrong about you and you're innocent I'd rather you be useful. Just IMO.