Ignore him and hunt for scum in the remaining n-1 players.semioldguy wrote: If we knew that CJMiller was a 100% confirmed townie, which he is not but let's say he is for the purpose of this question, what do you think would be the best course of action for the town to take under the assumption that his style of posting and voting does not change?
Artem was also at three votes, why the Percy fixation? How is the hammer a silent killer, if anything a hammer is veryCJMiller post 23 wrote:Percy already has 3 votes. Not a L-x situation yet, but the hammer is a silent killer. Watch what you say, the mafia are everywhere.
It's posts like this that make you look like an active lurker. You need to contribute more to the thread. Several players asked you questions and wanted some answers. Just posting “filler” isn't much of an answer and posting a one word answer with no acknowledgement to the question just confuses people even more.CJMiller Post 50 wrote:@Artem and Percy: I wanted to say something on-topic so I wouldn't be seen as a lurker.
You find Percy suspicious?CJMiller Post 52 wrote:The question at the front of my mind: Who's tying Percy's noose?
People are finding you scummy because you aren't scum hunting or even commenting much on the thread. You are posting the absolute bare minimum. That needs to change.CJMiller Post 142 wrote: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.
Unvotebecause I will remain neutral for the rest of the day.
Posts like this, you have formed an opinion because of something kirroha said presumably. Explain why, tell us/show us what it was that made you think this. That's what scum hunting is all about.CJMiller Post 149 wrote:Vote: Kirrohafor acting too scummy to be a citizen
That wasn't what Artem asked you.CJMiller Post 174 wrote:I don't see any possible link between a Self-Watcher and a regular citizen (myself).
You say there is an equal chance of Percy and Psycho being town or scum yet you want to give them the benefit of the doubt and not get started on either of them of them. How does that make any sense? We should be pushing anyone and everyone for information, the Percy and Psycho exchange is one of our early leads and you just want to ignore it? Well not quite ignore it, you do ask Psycho for a defense, yet you seem perfectly happy with what Percy had posted.kirroha Post 37 wrote:Percy and Psycho could both be innocents making mistakes during the RVS, or could be scum slipping up. There is pretty much equal chance of both, so I do not think we should really get started on either of them right now. But I really want to listen to some sort of defense from Psycho.(Not to mention him disliking my usage of "fishy" D:
Pablo simply asked you a question, if he was suspicious it seemed to be minimum as he didn't vote or FOS you. This claim is just crap and I had to go back and look to see what you were talking about.kirroha Post 51 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.
Unvote
Vote: Percy
What signals did Percy give out in response to your pressure?kirroha Post 57 wrote:I am not rushing a lynch. I am merely trying to put more pressure on Percy to see if he would actually react differently. When people are pressured, they would tend to give out scummish signals or pro-town signals depending on their alignment.
This is simply not true. There are players that find you suspicious outside of that (Artem and Iaaun off the top of my head) citing the fact that it seems like you are trying too hard to appear pro town. That has nothing to do with the random buddying comment you made.kirroha Post 118 wrote:Oh and also: I think it's weird why all the suspicions fell onto me just because of one single reason: I suspected Percy of buddying. That has long since been cleared in an earlier post, so please review it.
Then we have this quote. Definitely the oppoiste of the trying too hard claims. Something is off with this statement. I almost want to say gloating, but needling at least.kirroha Post 119 wrote:Okay, kabenon007, don't think I'm going to stop attacking you just yet.
Why do you feel the need to claim with only three votes on you?kirroha Post 140 wrote:Anyway, currently I'm thinking of whether to claim or not. Because my role can serve to tell the scum about the setup pretty well.
What? Now you will only claim at lynch -1... So your last post was what? A soft claim to get people off your back and stop them from voting you because you have a super awesome role?kirroha ost 147 wrote: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.
Now, as my suspect has changed to CJMiller due to kabenon's ability to show some good defense points, I will go and review his posts (or lack thereof) again.
The thing is, the minute you placed a serious question accompanied by a serious FOS you pretty much ended the RVS. All random/joke/non serious voting after that is pretty telling one way or another because if they ignore the first talking part of the game you have to question why. If they talk about it, the game is being further pushed out of RVS.Percy Post 43 wrote:Aftermy failvote, butbeforemy correction, I FoSed CJMiller for his post. I use my FoSes to clearly mark my suspicions, and tend to use them liberally (I find it helps on re-reads when other townies mark out who they're suspicious of, rather than hiding it in dense wads of text, and that's why I do it). I wanted CJMiller to answer the question, but I didn't want to leave the random vote phase. Leaving the random vote phase too early can help lurkers slip under the radar, and whilst I was suspicious of CJMiller, I wasn't going to charge at him yelling "OMGOBVSCUMMMMMMM!!!!!!11" before I got a chance to hear his response.
You ended the RVS (well maybe CJ did technically but you certainly helped). The game had been open for like a day, some people can't check in for whatever reason. It being the RVS or not doesn't effect that at all. Plus if a player isn't going to post because the game is no longer in the RVS then they are pretty much set to lurk though most of the game anyway.Percy Post 43 wrote:Urgh, tunnelling on the two of us to start with, when all of this has exploded out of not much at all, is pretty dumb. There are people who still haven't really got to posting, and much more info can be gathered about the entire playerbase. Why do you want to end the random vote phase when it's what generated this information in the first place?
All content is useful content. How everyone reacts to you three will help us figure out just who is on what side. Who ignores the discussion, who takes what sides and why.... All of this is useful regardless of alignments.Percy Post 43 wrote:To clarify: Yes, getting started on us will generate content, but it won't be useful content unless one of Psycho, CJMiller or myself is scum. If we're all town caught in a clusterfuck of vague reads, the scum will rub their hands and hasten this along until one of us gets lynched. I'd prefer to keep my focus wide at this point.
After a whole post of questioning, prodding and serious content you....Random vote again?Percy Post 43 wrote:Unvote
Vote: Pablo Molinero
Be determined all you like. You helped kill RVS, no amount of CPR will revive it. I'm sorry.... It's dead. Move on.Percy Post 46 wrote:I'm determined to keep things in the random vote stage, looking at everyone and yes, fishing for reactions before we go tunnelling in on any subset of players.
@CJMiller: Filler for what?!
Yet you are neglecting them by not even mentioning them. Who are these coasters? What should we do about it?Percy Post 56 wrote:In answer to your first question, I don't think it's been "too long" in the random voting stage. There are clearly some players who havecompletelycoasted by, and I don't want them being neglected.
To me, it looks like you don't want this to be what we're working with because it's about you. Plus we're not “stuck” anywhere. Discussion can take us anywhere. Why are you so content to muddy the information being generated at this point? Is it hitting too close to home?Percy Post 56 wrote:I know we have information now, and I think the way my wagon has progressed is good information. But I didn't want this to be what we're working with, and now we're stuck here.
You admit to tunneling yet do nothing about it. Tunneling happens mostly when a player doesn't realize what they are doing, or when scum just doesn't want to shift their focus. There is no excuse for your tunneling at this point. Especially since you seem to realize that you are guilty of this!Percy Post 56 wrote:I believe I answered your first question - I want to see each player talk and state opinions, even if they're small and dumb. I don't really understand your second question, but I think a lack of a good starting point (in the random voting stage) leads to unnecessary tunnelling,as evidenced by my current state.
If the three of you are town isn't someone manufacturing scum tells, a scum tell in itself? You have a big issue with not only being in the spotlight, but being in the spotlight with these players.Percy Post 56 wrote:OK, I phrased that poorly. When I said "useful", I meant "information accurately identified as scumtells". I'm wary of the situation where the three of us get honed in on, our posts picked apart,scumtells manufactureduntil one of us is dead, and there isn't any chance we could hit scum because we're all town. Maybe we're not, maybe one of us is scum and it would be a great idea to shine the light on the three of us, but unless that's the case we're narrowing our search too early.
Well the fact you spent a whole post discussing content and then topped it off with a random vote that came seemingly out of nowhere, I'm not sure what else you were expecting in ways of reactions.Percy Post 56 wrote:There was no buddying. The content of my post was "It is still the random vote phase let's get everyone talking goddamn", and I voted Pablo simply because he posted directly before me. That was the only reason. Ascribing scummy motives and then voting me earns my FoS.kirroha 51 wrote: 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.
Why is placing a 4th vote on Percy out of the RVS silly? Even if you don't agree with his reasoning, it is providing the game with content which is what we want.Pablo Molinero Post 42 wrote:iamausernameWord. And then placing a fourth vote on top of Percy. I'm all for pressure wagons, but that much out of the RVS seems kinda silly. I don't want to answer completely for Percy, but I don't think Sniper's question is has much merit because the Percy's RVS shouldn't mean much, if anything, while the FoS seemed to be transitioning out of it. However, Sniper does thankfully qualify his vote with:I don't like the way you presume to speak for the whole town in saying this.
SniperIt's not an outright confirmed scum action, obviously
Why do you think Percy is anti town and not out right scummy?Artem Post 48 wrote:FoS: Percybecause I think you're being anti-town at the moment.
You are still with holding your reasons despite saying you got the reactions you wanted. Why was Percy the scummiest player to you at the point of your wagon jump?kabenon007 Post 60 wrote:Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town. I jumped on as vote four. If you're going to get pissed at someone for a wagon, go after the ones who put him at -2 and -1. I jumped on because I believed at that moment that Percy was the scummiest, therefore my vote would rest with him. I witheld my reasons for reactions, which I got.
You did say that you hated day one so I can see where he got that assumption. Still you know what they say about that.kabenon007 Post 73 wrote:This is hilarious. Where did I say I'm trying to get Day 1 over with as soon as possible? You[Pablo]drew that conclusion on your own my friend. Also, you misinterpreted what I said, drawing your entire accusation from it.
But saying you voted they way you did to get reactions/information and then seemingly do nothing with that information isn't very helpful. You unvoted Percy so I guess he is no longer suspicious or at least the most suspicious to you. Who is?kabenon007 Post 73 wrote:I am not omnipotent. Gathering information is gathering information is gathering information. I had no particular goal in who I wanted to get information from, I have no particular person I was trying to trap or whatever. I was just getting information, mostly for use come Day 2. Once we have a couple corpses on our hands, we can then look back and see who defended who, who accused who, and who avoided speaking about anyone. Besides, I don't want to point anyone in the right direction, as that would be leading the town. People can take what they want from the information gathered. They don't need me to "point them in the right direction." Frankly, as of right now, I can't point them in the right direction, because I don't know where it is. But I didn't gather the information to try to lead the town somewhere, I gathered it just to get some information out there.
People can't have more than one suspect?kabenon007 Post 150 wrote:This was in her previous post... in which she is attacking me. I didn't say anything in between that post and the post in which she says I show good defense points. Nowhere did I get the impression that she thought any of my points were good, in fact it seemed like she was attacking me all the harder. Does anyone else find this suspicious, cuz I sure do.
Which player are you talking about here?Farkshinsoup Post 69 wrote:There's already a great level of activity in this game, which bodes well for it.
But am I really getting called out for lurking when 24 hours had not even passed since my last post, and we're only on page 3? And by a player who has posted a lot but said almost nothing (lurking in plain sight)?
How was he persecuted?Farkshinsoup Post 127 wrote:unvotePsycho's last post seemed genuine. Maybe I'm just a sucker. I always want to believe the persecuted townie (see below). Except when I'm scum, of course.
This is a whole bunch of fence sitting on kirroha, you have one foot firmly in both camps. You go on to state you like the (easier?) CJ wagon... Why?Farkshinsoup Post 127 wrote:Lot of good circumstantial evidence against kirroha - I see where everyone is coming from. My head is saying "scummy" but my gut tells me that she's town. It feels like one of those things where every time she opens her mouth now she just confirms everyone's suspicions that much more. (I realize that could be because she's been caught, but the day is still young - I reserve judgement for now)
Right now I'm liking the CJ Miller wagon. 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.
Vote: CJ Miller
What prompts this change?Farkshinsoup Post 160 wrote:Ok, my head just beat out my gut - I'm going toFoS kirroha. CJ Miller vs. Kirroha feels like bussing to me. I'd be happy at this point lynching either one of them.
Why don't you think a townie would make the above post?Wulfy Post 115 wrote:He[kabenoon]brushes off all assaults in his last post and I don't think a townie should ever make the above post that he made. So, yes, I still feel this strongly about him.
Hiiamausername Post 162 wrote:Hi, Sotty! Are you scum again?Sotty7 wrote:Hey, hey.
Plenty of chances? It's only page 8 and yet you are just willing to give up on trying to get him to provide any sort of content? A lynch -1 vote at that. I pretty much agreed with what you had posted before this. Why are you so keen to get an end to this day?iamausername Post 162 wrote:Players like CJ are incredibly frustrating, because it's pretty clear that he would be playing exactly the same useless way if he was town or scum, and the chances are that he's town, just because there's more town than scum (unless CJ is the mod, of course). But either way, he's never going to be of any help to town, and we can't afford to let him slide by, because he might be scum.
We've given him plenty of chances to get his act together and do something to help the town, and it's clearly not going to happen, soUnvote, Vote: CJMiller(THAT'S L-1, Y'ALL)
This is pretty much my feelings from what I have seen. I understand that players like CJ are very frustrating but that is no reason to just wagon the snot out of them and get them gone as soon as possible.semioldguy Post 176 wrote:I don't think it very likely for CJMiller to flip as scum. I'm willing to bet on his innocence. That being said, his style of play works against the progress of the town and I am fairly sure some opportunistic scum are getting in on his wagon to blend in with the frustrated townies.
Personally, I wouldn't be very comfortable with CJMiller still being around in a lynch or lose situation. Having him around obfusctes reads on everyone else and game progress in general as can clearly be seen by what has unfolded today, regardless of his allegience. His play is frustrating and distracting from other aspects of this game that could use more attention.
Once here and once on another site in 2003 (the site is now dead).Artem was also at three votes, why the Percy fixation? How is the hammer a silent killer, if anything a hammer is veryloud.
What is your mafia experience level CJ? Played on other sites before?
So I'm supposed to post a wall of text every single post or I'm lurking scum?It's posts like this that make you look like an active lurker. You need to contribute more to the thread. Several players asked you questions and wanted some answers. Just posting “filler” isn't much of an answer and posting a one word answer with no acknowledgement to the question just confuses people even more.
So I'm supposed to post a wall of text every single post or I'm lurking scum?People are finding you scummy because you aren't scum hunting or even commenting much on the thread. You are posting the absolute bare minimum. That needs to change.
Posts like this, you have formed an opinion because of something kirroha said presumably. Explain why, tell us/show us what it was that made you think this. That's what scum hunting is all about.
What do you want me to say?That wasn't what Artem asked you.
Nah, but answering questions directed at you is a damn good place to start.CJMiller Post 181 wrote:So I'm supposed to post a wall of text every single post or I'm lurking scum?
Why do you suspect kirroha? You are voting for a reason. What is that reason?CJMiller Post 181 wrote:What do you want me to say?
I voted for Kirroha for thinking I'm scum when I'm not and also for acting like scum.Why do you suspect kirroha? You are voting for a reason. What is that reason?
That's a loaded question. If I believe him, I'm scum. If I don't believe him, I'm scum.Artem asked you what you thought about his claim. Do you believe it? If you do, how come. If you don't why not?
Granted, but I post approximately once a day. Now you know.semioldguy wrote:Just to clarify I wasn't so much defending you as making a correction to what I saw as a mistake by another player, he clearly just missed something. I figure that by trying to set him straight sooner he would get his focus off of something meaningless and back to more important things. I can't know how long it would be for you to come and correct him and I feel that correcting people in cases where it is almost certain where something went wrong it is better to do it sooner rather than later.Wulfy wrote:This is why I *hate* people defending me, but putting that aside.
WIFOM defense to a WIFOm accusation? That's kind of new.iamausername wrote:I doubt it. Jumping on the first wagon you see without thinking and hoping for the best would be incredibly short-sighted scum play. Even on the off chance that no one noticed it at the time, and it lead to a town lynch on that day, it would certainly get him in trouble before the end of the game. kabenon's been on the site for 2 years, I'm pretty sure he has enouh experience to know what a stupid plan that would be.kirroha wrote:That's a WIFOM. He jumped on a wagon without thinking of the consequences.
I certainly think it's possible that kabenon is scum, but I think whatever his alignment, he definitely did think about the consequences of his Percy vote.
Considering you vote CJ later in this post, this screams irony. If Kirr is scum, then you realize CJ isn't scum. HOWEVER, while questioning Kirr's "wagon hopping" vote, you...vote...CJ... this is contradictory.iamausername wrote:And what do you call that kirroha vote CJ just made, if not wagon hopping for the sake of wagon hopping?Wulfy wrote:I feel as though many people, some of whom are probably scum, just decided to land on CJ who, although obscenely anti town, hasn't techinically done anything scummy. Has he been...anti town? Yeah... lazy townie possible? Definitely. Scummy?
ehh.... not really. By the book, wagon hopping for the sake of wagon hopping is scummy.
kirroha wrote:Mod: I will be going to China to visit my relatives for a month. As I will be going to a rural village, I am not sure if I can gain access to internet connection. Thus, if I don't post in 3 days, please help me find a replacement. If there internet connection I will post here to notify you. Thanks!
I don't know why information that you "plan" to get or "linear" information reception is somehow better, but let me paraphrase.kabenon007 106 wrote:Mm, perhaps I should have used a different word other than random. I was merely drawing a parallel between random votes and the information that would come of them, and so called it random. Random information in this case would be information garnered in a fashion that was not planned, and therefore the information received was not of a linear nature.Percy wrote:1. What is "random information", and why is it bad?
Say Person A randomly votes Person B. There are many different ways Person B could respond, so let's say Person B says "Lulz, well, you're ridiculous." Because the cause was random, it did not force Person B to give any kind of information, therefore it is not as trustworthy as if Person A made an accusation, forcing Person B to respond and make some comment on the exact information Person A is desiring. It makes sense in my head at the moment, if it needs a bit more clarity, ask and I'll try again when I'm less tired.
I am not arguing against seriousness, guys. I'm not saying that the RVS is all we ever need to go by. Iiamusername 122 wrote:Bolded is the part that I entirely object to. By keeping things stuck in light-hearted silliness, you don't generate content, you generate irrelevant bullshit. And none of the supposed benefits you ascribe to your strategy are in any way unique to the random voting stage. You can still establish personality reads from what people say about actual game-relevant things, with the added benefit that they're also talking about actual game-relevant things.Percy wrote:This is how the day proceeds, whether we get out of the RVS sooner or later. But later is better - it's the best way to prepare us for the day.It generates content for everyone, and establishes personality reads that can be scrutinized later.
You ensured conversation with semioldguy. He said kirroha, but unfortnately the RVS was on the way out by then. I immediately got a read on both you and semioldguy; a small one, but I knew straight away that you were an aggressive player, and as semioldguy just brushed it off, that's info on his playstyle too.iamausername 8 wrote:semioldguy! Imagine someone has a gun to your head, and is telling you that you must choose one of kirroha or PsychoSniper to be lynched RIGHT NOW. Who do you choose, and why?
I acknowledged earlier that the fuckup was mine; I can't put actual suspicion down on the table and expect people to not talk about it, and continue on as if it never happened. In my mind, I wanted to keep getting the kind of info I was getting from the RVS, but putting my thoughts down at the same time. This is impossible, but I still like the RVS.Sotty 180 wrote:The thing is, the minute you placed a serious question accompanied by a serious FOS you pretty much ended the RVS. All random/joke/non serious voting after that is pretty telling one way or another because if they ignore the first talking part of the game you have to question why. If they talk about it, the game is being further pushed out of RVS.
Also I don't quite see how the RVS makes lurkers commit to the game. If anything they will post their random RVS vote/comment and then when the game does become serious they will lurk anyway. So yeah, I don't get it.
It's hard to spot the difference between scum-trumping-up-mistakes and townies-identifying-scumtells (that's why mafia is awesome!). Various players were saying that the best thing to do would be to concentrate on a subset of the players, and I fundamentally disagree that this is theSotty 180 wrote:If the three of you are town isn't someone manufacturing scum tells, a scum tell in itself? You have a big issue with not only being in the spotlight, but being in the spotlight with these players.
What are your opinions of Psycho (now myself) and CJ now? How do you think they handled all this?
...the post that started it all. This was followed by a backtrack:kirroha 51 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.
Unvote
Vote: Percy
There are two options in my brain at this point: townie who made a mistake and corrected it (with too much grovelling), or a scum who's embarrassed to be caught out in such an early wagon when her excuse didn't fly.kirroha 59 wrote:I felt it suspicious because I thought RVS was over, and yet Percy voted for someone without any reason at all and the person whom he voted for was the person who showed a tiny bit of suspicion of me at that time, so I thought he was trying to buddy up. Sorry, I'm a bit paranoid. ^^;
Anyway, thanks for clearing up.
Unvote
...to which she responds:Artem 108 wrote:To clarify, rather than simply doing something pro-town, you are explaining that what you're about to do is pro-town. This, to me, is trying to appear too townie.
See, this really doesn't address the issue, as others have pointed out. It's not that she's "too townie", but that she always seems to fall over herself trying to appear that way.kirroha 111 wrote:And also, you're picking out every single thing I've done here that a pro-towner would do and using that against me with the "Too Townie" case. I'm trying to explain myself here. I'm trying to tell you that what I'm doing is pro-town so that you all can start voting for real scum instead. But if you believe that that's what scum would do, I can't stop you - go ahead and vote.
QFT. I didn't like her "I'm going to claim if you people don't stop being mean to me!" vibe.iamusername 162 wrote:Don't try to scare people away from your wagon with scummy softclaims.
See, this is bullshit. Getting on wagons only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is actually scum. Not thinking and jumping on a wagon headed for a town lynch is just about the stupidest thing I can think of.kabenon007 60 wrote:Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town.
I found this post interesting. His response:Pablo Molinero 72 wrote:"That's just how I play" is an insufficient excuse for scummy actions, although you freely admit it (first step to admitting you have a problem). You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it, to rationalize your actions to get it over with as soon as possible. And yet in the same post you pride yourself on getting info and talking points going with your vote. I'm seeing two distinct themes that clash.kirroha wrote:That's how I play the first day. I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death, with no information coming out of it.
In this game, information is all we've got to go on, so we need as much of it as possible. Look at all the information that's come out of my short little post.
This just makeskabenon007 73 wrote:I hate it due to the quick lynches that I've seen happen that give no information, not the fact that there is no information.
No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?kirroha 106 wrote:I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?
Again, this post screams scum. Miller is lurking like hell, and even though the defense was still a joking one, that doesn't change the fact that he's saying "Don't worry about Miller". Now kirroha had attacked him, he defended, and now he's saying that she should respond to his defense. This is true, and she does eventually. But the fact remains that he hasn't scumhunted anywhere else, or done anything other than defend himself. It seems so opportunistic I could cry.kabenon007 114 wrote:Miller had to think of something to fill his one line of post. Give him a break, semioldguy.
So, kirroha, seeing as how you still think I'm scum, why haven't you replied to my defense or pushed your interrogation? If you think I'm scum, you should be going after me. After all, it's what a townie would do.
If that's the case, then talkative scum are better than quiet scum. I happen to agree. If that's the case, then why are you voting and targetting kirroha, who is far more talkative than most other players in this thread?kabenon007 135 wrote:If a townie asks a question, and the question is answered, information was generated.
If a scum asks a question, and the question is answered, information was still generated. I'm trying to say that scum, while trying to act like townies, are still able to produce information that can be used by townies. Does that make a bit more sense?
QFT.Wulfy 153 wrote:I'm voting you because you haven't done anything to show how town you are. (ie, scum hunting) ...
...
if you were to dig through the game and show significant, REAL scum hunting effort, your towniness will be picked up on, and I will naturally remove my vote. Suspicion of you, like it has on Kirr, will be with me until your dead, the game is over, or you are proven town enough (of 50% town, let's say) that I can give you the same cursory glance as everyone else.
...just after iamusername called over900 out for lurking, and when Fark really didn't deserve it.CJMiller 66 wrote:FoS: farkshinsoupboth for lurking.
FoS: _over9000
*facepalm*CJMiller 78 wrote:So I'm scum just because I don't post a 15-page dissertation every 24 hours?Pablo Molinero wrote: CJMiller - Enough with the active lurking. You're coasting. Post something more than 1 line.
Unvotefor discriminating against new players.
Vote: Pablo Molinero
A good question! His response:iamusername 98 wrote:If you want to be handled with kid gloves, go join a Newbie game. You're in the big leagues here, son.
Also, why do you single out Pablo, when several other players have made essentially the same point as he did?
...which he doesn't, becaue his next post jumps on the nearest wagon:CJMiller 142 wrote:What do you want me to do? Whenever I do anything, it just makes you all think I'm scum.
Unvotebecause I will remain neutral for the rest of the day.
Then his Asperger's claim.CJMiller 149 wrote:Vote: Kirrohafor acting too scummy to be a citizen
The best course of action would be, of course, to ignore him. But we don't know that, and we'll never know that. We can't have him hanging around all game, waiting to hammer when it counts.semioldguy 176 wrote:If we knew that CJMiller was a 100% confirmed townie, which he is not but let's say he is for the purpose of this question, what do you think would be the best course of action for the town to take under the assumption that his style of posting and voting does not change?
Hmmm.... this smells a wierd to me. Wulfy didn't use insults in place of arguments, he used them as well; thus, it's not a fallacy, just hilarious. But I can understand not liking Wulfy's posting style, so I'll just leave this here for now.Farkshinsoup 99 wrote:One way or the other, it seems like your posts contain a lot of flavour, not much content. You vociferously attack the easy target (kabenon) and come to the defense of someone else for poor reasons. Seems scummy to me.
...
If you're going to start throwing ad hominem attacks at other players, you might want to get your facts straight first. Better yet, just drop the insults all together.
Weak excuse. I live in_over9000 131 wrote: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.
Obviously, leave him alive. Lynching a 100% confirmed townie would be immensely stupid.semioldguy wrote:If we knew that CJMiller was a 100% confirmed townie, which he is not but let's say he is for the purpose of this question, what do you think would be the best course of action for the town to take under the assumption that his style of posting and voting does not change?
Nope! Glad we cleared that up.Sotty7 wrote:Hiiamausername Post 162 wrote:Hi, Sotty! Are you scum again?Sotty7 wrote:Hey, hey.
Nope. Are you?
Yes, plenty of chances. Over a good proportion of these 8 pages, CJ has been asked, demanded, cajoled, to provide any sort of content by just about everyone else in the game, and he is still refusing to do so. I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out the magic words that are needed to persuade someone to actually play the game they signed up for. If CJ is not going to contibute (and clearly, he is not), then he needs to die. Simple as that.Sotty7 wrote:Plenty of chances? It's only page 8 and yet you are just willing to give up on trying to get him to provide any sort of content? A lynch -1 vote at that. I pretty much agreed with what you had posted before this. Why are you so keen to get an end to this day?iamausername Post 162 wrote:Players like CJ are incredibly frustrating, because it's pretty clear that he would be playing exactly the same useless way if he was town or scum, and the chances are that he's town, just because there's more town than scum (unless CJ is the mod, of course). But either way, he's never going to be of any help to town, and we can't afford to let him slide by, because he might be scum.
We've given him plenty of chances to get his act together and do something to help the town, and it's clearly not going to happen, soUnvote, Vote: CJMiller(THAT'S L-1, Y'ALL)
Well, you know, just a single line that actually goes anywhere towards finding scum would be an improvement.CJMiller wrote:So I'm supposed to post a wall of text every single post or I'm lurking scum?
No, it's not WIFOM to say that kabenon is smart enough to think about the consequences of his actions. If I was saying that this proves that he is town, that would be WIFOM. But see the last sentence.Wulfy wrote:WIFOM defense to a WIFOm accusation? That's kind of new.iamausername wrote:I doubt it. Jumping on the first wagon you see without thinking and hoping for the best would be incredibly short-sighted scum play. Even on the off chance that no one noticed it at the time, and it lead to a town lynch on that day, it would certainly get him in trouble before the end of the game. kabenon's been on the site for 2 years, I'm pretty sure he has enouh experience to know what a stupid plan that would be.
I certainly think it's possible that kabenon is scum, but I think whatever his alignment, he definitely did think about the consequences of his Percy vote.
I was pretty clearly talking aboutWulfy wrote:Considering you vote CJ later in this post, this screams irony. If Kirr is scum, then you realize CJ isn't scum. HOWEVER, while questioning Kirr's "wagon hopping" vote, you...vote...CJ... this is contradictory.iamausername wrote:And what do you call that kirroha vote CJ just made, if not wagon hopping for the sake of wagon hopping?Wulfy wrote:I feel as though many people, some of whom are probably scum, just decided to land on CJ who, although obscenely anti town, hasn't techinically done anything scummy. Has he been...anti town? Yeah... lazy townie possible? Definitely. Scummy?
ehh.... not really. By the book, wagon hopping for the sake of wagon hopping is scummy.
Who said this?Percy wrote:Various players were saying that the best thing to do would be to concentrate on a subset of the players
I responded:semioldguy 38 wrote:I think getting started on them is getting us out of the random voting stage and will hopefully lead to some content. It's early and we don't have much to go on, getting started on them will start giving us more to look at.
I couldn't find any other quotes. Artem talked about it:Percy 46 wrote:I'm determined to keep things in the random vote stage, looking at everyone and yes, fishing for reactions before we go tunnelling in on any subset of players.
I understand his position, but everyone was doing exactly what he described. Whether my wagon had any merit, whether Psycho was scummy and whether CJMiller was scummy. We'd barely heard peep out of several other players. I felt that there was silent complicity in semioldguy's original sentiment.Artem 48 wrote:I don't think the entirety of our playerbase is stupid enough to tunnel-vision on 3/12 of the players, without calling out lurkers.
Iaaun and kabe?Wulfy Post 185 wrote:Unvote; Vote: iamausername
My scum list now has two people.
I do see your point with the last sentence there. I do think a game packed to the brim of long wordy posts can run away some players. Personally I like a little balance, a good back and forth and “big” posts when needed.Percy Post 187 wrote:I acknowledged earlier that the fuckup was mine; I can't put actual suspicion down on the table and expect people to not talk about it, and continue on as if it never happened. In my mind, I wanted to keep getting the kind of info I was getting from the RVS, but putting my thoughts down at the same time. This is impossible, but I still like the RVS.
I think it makes lurkers talk. Notice that CJMiller is already complaining that the posts are too big, and it's all too hard, and most people are saying "Oh, he's probably just a townie!". Big long posts about things that have nothing to do with most players breeds lurking,especiallyif that's how the day starts.
CJ is probably one the most frustrating players I have come across and I have only had one exchange with him. In an ideal world a replacement would happen and we'd actually get someone whoiamausername Post 188 wrote:Yes, plenty of chances. Over a good proportion of these 8 pages, CJ has been asked, demanded, cajoled, to provide any sort of content by just about everyone else in the game, and he is still refusing to do so. I'm not going to waste my time trying to figure out the magic words that are needed to persuade someone to actually play the game they signed up for. If CJ is not going to contibute (and clearly, he is not), then he needs to die. Simple as that.
And please do not try to stretch the length of the day to meet some arbitrary guideline for what is acceptable. If we reach a point where a majority of players agree that one player should be lynched, THAT PLAYER SHOULD BE LYNCHED. We don't need to sit around discussing the philosophical implications of that lynch to make sure we use up all the time until deadline hits. Why are you so keen to make sure the day doesn't end yet?
This is a good point, actually. Vig kill would be better, and looking over the setup, it seems pretty likely that we have one. A lot of the possible roles seem to revolve around the "bulletsmith" role, which is not one I've ever seen before, and it's a really interesting idea. Outguessing the mod is bad, I know, but I think it would be odd for Tarballs to think that up (or steal it from whoever did) and then not actually use it as anything other than a false possibility to throw us off.Sotty7 wrote:You're right when you say they just play the same awful style no matter if they are scum or town so it's almost a coin flip lynch. When there are better cases out there, in my opinion at least, I don't want to lynch a player for just being bad. Right now if he keeps this up, I think he is best served as vig fodder. Unless the mafia Gods hate us and we have no vig.
I kind of think there's always some other avenues of discussion going on, though. And there's really no one besides CJ that I think has got by without saying enough.Sotty7 wrote:And no. I'm not one of those players who say “days must be at least 20 pages long!!” Lynches feel quick to me if they are pushed though while there is still other avenues of discussion going down or players that still need to add to the thread. Like Farkshinsoup and Over for example.
You're only thinking of wagons as being useful only in lynching. What about pressure wagons? They generate information quickly. By your logic, couldn't it also be said that voting only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is scum? I was not intending to have you lynched, I would have jumped on whoever the wagon was.Percy wrote:The case against kabenon007See, this is bullshit. Getting on wagons only serves the town if the person who is going to get lynched is actually scum. Not thinking and jumping on a wagon headed for a town lynch is just about the stupidest thing I can think of.kabenon007 60 wrote:Wagons are used to lynch. Getting on them serves the town.
How have I resigned myself to a bad day? I've been working damned hard if I do say so myself to generate information, I haven't lurked like some, I have not avoided anything on purpose. I have addressed everything brought to me, I have questioned those I feel deserve questioning. How is that resigning myself in any form of the word "resigning?"Percy wrote:I find kabenon007's rationale rather contradictory. I feel that he's basically resigned himself to a bad day, bemoaning how no information will ever get generated, and attacking those who attack him.
I found this post interesting. His response:Pablo Molinero 72 wrote:"That's just how I play" is an insufficient excuse for scummy actions, although you freely admit it (first step to admitting you have a problem). You say that you hate Day 1, due to lack of information we get from it, to rationalize your actions to get it over with as soon as possible. And yet in the same post you pride yourself on getting info and talking points going with your vote. I'm seeing two distinct themes that clash.kirroha wrote:That's how I play the first day. I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death, with no information coming out of it.
In this game, information is all we've got to go on, so we need as much of it as possible. Look at all the information that's come out of my short little post.
kabenon007 73 wrote:I hate it due to the quick lynches that I've seen happen that give no information, not the fact that there is no information.
You confuse me with this post. The post wasn't about jumping on a wagon, nor about bemoaning the fact that lynches aren't good. It was me refuting kirroha's statement. Where did you get the idea, from the post quoted here, that I was saying anything about jumping on wagons? If your read the post, you would see I was talking about the difference between not liking Day 1 because you can't get information (which is how kirroha interpreted) and how I don't like Day 1 because people just go "Haha, I'm a chargin my lynch lazer!!" and speed lynch the hell out of someone, not giving them time to defend themselves and creating a useless day (which is what I said in that post.)Percy wrote:This just makesnosense to me. Why is jumping on a wagon (without analysis) a good idea? And even if it is a good idea, why bemoan the fact that the lynches aren't good?
Players who spend all their time saying that the information isn't good enough, without trying to scumhunt and generate information themselves, are trying to sow confusion and muddle the waters. This is how I see kabenon007's posting playing out.
No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?kirroha 106 wrote:I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?
kabenon007 114 wrote:Miller had to think of something to fill his one line of post. Give him a break, semioldguy.
So, kirroha, seeing as how you still think I'm scum, why haven't you replied to my defense or pushed your interrogation? If you think I'm scum, you should be going after me. After all, it's what a townie would do.
Sigh, you don't speak sarcasm, do you? How is that first line not sarcastic enough to say that I'm making fun of Miller, condemning his actions through use of sarcasm? But I guess sarcastic "defense but not really defense" screams scum?Percy wrote:Again, this post screams scum. Miller is lurking like hell, and even though the defense was still a joking one, that doesn't change the fact that he's saying "Don't worry about Miller". Now kirroha had attacked him, he defended, and now he's saying that she should respond to his defense. This is true, and she does eventually. But the fact remains that he hasn't scumhunted anywhere else, or done anything other than defend himself. It seems so opportunistic I could cry.
kabenon007 135 wrote:If a townie asks a question, and the question is answered, information was generated.
If a scum asks a question, and the question is answered, information was still generated. I'm trying to say that scum, while trying to act like townies, are still able to produce information that can be used by townies. Does that make a bit more sense?
So here in this post you are saying that it is better to leave someone you think is scum alive... because they are more talkative? I call shenanigans on that shit. If you've found scum, you lynch them. You don't say, "Oh, well, you're scum, but you're providing information to the town, so I'll leave you alive and instead lynch a townie." You kill the scum. That's how the game is played, and that's why I'm voting for kirroha. I'm not going to leave her and go after the silent scum. It's easier to find the talkative scum, because the more they talk, the easier it becomes for them to slip up.Percy wrote:If that's the case, then talkative scum are better than quiet scum. I happen to agree. If that's the case, then why are you voting and targetting kirroha, who is far more talkative than most other players in this thread?
Wulfy 153 wrote:I'm voting you because you haven't done anything to show how town you are. (ie, scum hunting) ...
...
if you were to dig through the game and show significant, REAL scum hunting effort, your towniness will be picked up on, and I will naturally remove my vote. Suspicion of you, like it has on Kirr, will be with me until your dead, the game is over, or you are proven town enough (of 50% town, let's say) that I can give you the same cursory glance as everyone else.
Once again accusing me of not scumhunting. I addressed this above, I don't feel like addressing it again. It seems like I continue to defend myself against the same attacks, over, and over again. Most of this post was a complaint that I am not scumhunting, one I do not agree with. I have sought information, I have given information, I have accused (multiple people), and I have attacked. How does that not amount to scumhunting?Percy wrote:QFT.
Truth is, there is no such effort. kabenon007 wants to get by with the cranky, "I hate Day 1 let's lynch someone and get it over with!", defensive posting style, and it's seriously scummy in my book.
Because I think his RVS playstyle is hurtful to the town, but I don't think he had a malicious motivation for it (due to his arguing, I got the feeling that he didn't realize that it's hurtful).Sotty wrote: Why do you think Percy is anti town and not out right scummy?
I believe he claimed vanilla when he answered my question about what he thinks of my claim.Percy wrote: He's not even willing to claim at L-1.
L-1, I believe.username wrote: Unvote, Vote: kirroha
Iaaun-Actually, not on my scum list.Sotty7 wrote:Iaaun and kabe?Wulfy Post 185 wrote:Unvote; Vote: iamausername
My scum list now has two people.
What do you think about kirr and CJ?
However, WIFOM=circular reasoning. You assume that because he is experienced, he would know the consequences of his actions, and used this as a defense to his play. When called out, you provide the same wifom again. Well, by your reasoning, older players can go through day 1 blind and there actions shouldn't be considered scummy since they're old enough to not do scummy things as scum. This is wifom and stupid.iamausername wrote:No, it's not WIFOM to say that kabenon is smart enough to think about the consequences of his actions. If I was saying that this proves that he is town, that would be WIFOM. But see the last sentence.Wulfy wrote:WIFOM defense to a WIFOm accusation? That's kind of new.iamausername wrote:I doubt it. Jumping on the first wagon you see without thinking and hoping for the best would be incredibly short-sighted scum play. Even on the off chance that no one noticed it at the time, and it lead to a town lynch on that day, it would certainly get him in trouble before the end of the game. kabenon's been on the site for 2 years, I'm pretty sure he has enouh experience to know what a stupid plan that would be.
I certainly think it's possible that kabenon is scum, but I think whatever his alignment, he definitely did think about the consequences of his Percy vote.
Then who is the second person on your scumlist?Wulfy Post 195 wrote:Iaaun-Actually, not on my scum list.Sotty7 wrote:Iaaun and kabe?Wulfy Post 185 wrote:Unvote; Vote: iamausername
My scum list now has two people.
What do you think about kirr and CJ?
Kabe-On my probably scum list
Kirr-If I view her with the same eyes I'd give zwetchenwasser stupidity, she looks like dumb townie...
CJ-Looks like an idiot. Not particularly either alignment, just an idiot.
It wasn't clear to me that it was over when I made my random vote. I intended to prolong it if I could. I like the RVS to go until we've had about four posts per player.Sotty7 190 wrote:I don't hate the RVS I just don't see the need to prolong it when it becomes clear it is over, so your actions were very weird to me. How long would you have preferred the RVS to go on for?
Resignation:kabenon007 192 wrote:How have I resigned myself to a bad day? I've been working damned hard if I do say so myself to generate information, I haven't lurked like some, I have not avoided anything on purpose. I have addressed everything brought to me, I have questioned those I feel deserve questioning. How is that resigning myself in any form of the word "resigning?"
Emphasis mine. I think this post demonstrates a willingness to let bad Day 1 lynches be acceptable, and I can't disagree more.kabenon007 71 wrote:I jumped on a wagon then as well. Now why would that be, kids? That's how I play the first day.I hate the first day with a passion, more than likely because of my IRL mafia experiences of people just randomly bandwagoning someone to death,with no information coming out of it.
...
I believe that my vote should have rested with Percy because, as I said, he was the scummiest at the time I voted. This was because a)there is never much information to go on in Day 1and b) because he was the one exhibiting the scummiest behavior.
Yeah, I don't think I misinterpreted anything. You are saying that Day 1 is crap because people rush to lynch someone without talking, but at the same time you jumped onkabenon007 192 wrote:The post wasn't about jumping on a wagon, nor about bemoaning the fact that lynches aren't good. It was me refuting kirroha's statement. Where did you get the idea, from the post quoted here, that I was saying anything about jumping on wagons? If your read the post, you would see I was talking about the difference between not liking Day 1 because you can't get information (which is how kirroha interpreted) and how I don't like Day 1 because people just go "Haha, I'm a chargin my lynch lazer!!" and speed lynch the hell out of someone, not giving them time to defend themselves and creating a useless day (which is what I said in that post.)
There is reason enough - they might be scum, they just haven't slipped up yet. No reason to tunnel in on the active posters.kabenon007 192 wrote:Why would I start interrogating people if I don't see a reason to interrogate? I saw inconsistencies and scumtells in kirroha and Miller, and I'm watching Wulfy. Also, I don't think your scum, even though you're attacking me. If what you're saying is true, that I only find scum on those who attack me, then wouldn't I be suspicious of you as well? And _over9000 as well? Granted, I don't think his post was as attacking as yours, but still.
(I made an error with my quote tags. The quoted post was kabe's, and the question was addressed to him)Percy wrote:No, seriously, quote it. Go back through your posts and quote your valuable information. I can't find it - has anyone else had any luck?[s]kirroha[/s] kabenon007 106 wrote:I've already posted what information I have. Should I quote all my previous posts whenever I post for your ease of reference?
I'm saying that it's odd that you identify just how bad lurking scum are (worse than talking scum, that is), but make no attempt to root them out.kabenon007 192 wrote:So here in this post you are saying that it is better to leave someone you think is scum alive... because they are more talkative? I call shenanigans on that shit. If you've found scum, you lynch them. You don't say, "Oh, well, you're scum, but you're providing information to the town, so I'll leave you alive and instead lynch a townie." You kill the scum. That's how the game is played, and that's why I'm voting for kirroha. I'm not going to leave her and go after the silent scum. It's easier to find the talkative scum, because the more they talk, the easier it becomes for them to slip up.