Mastin's thoughts:
Hmm...I *know* that I made the page longer, but...
I couldn't have made it THAT long, could I? That must mean that someone else has posted a wall of text for me to respond to! YAY!
(And then, the world ends, for Mastin begins to respond to it.
)
Yos2 wrote:I agree with you that Iamusername hasn't posted much content.
Then you should have called him out for it.
You didn't.
You said that we hadn't heard from him in a while.
You did NOT accuse him of not posting much content. And I find that odd.
That is a perfectly reasonable reason to suspect him;
But, somehow, YOU STILL HAD PRO-TOWN VIBES FROM HIM.
I can't see anyone but a werewolf having slipped up so badly with that opinion.
I've mentioned myself that we need to hear more from him.
This is NOT the same thing as an accusation.
I will note that nothing in that summery is actually an attack against me.
Oh, yes. Yes it was.
Off the top of my head, I can think of Yos2's reasons for voting Fallen.
Amongst them was that he ignored Yos2's NOT SCUM thing--
Yet many players didn't. As Tarb pointed out, only five DID. Many others also ignored the RVS ploy.
Khamisa, Wulfy, and Kore, for example, didn't address it at all. I did, but I didn't participate.
An attack against your "slightly better than random" vote.
Didn't think my response was scummy, but though FA's was, when others after FA didn't do it, either.
I asked a question about why Yos didn't think it was scummy; he didn't post an answer. (This doesn't count as an answer; it's a further accusation.)
This was a further accusation about your reasoning behind the "slightly better than random" reason.
Tell me, Yos2: What made you use this tactic in this game, rather than an earlier game? Surely, the event where this tactic was first used had come a good time ago; why'd you wait until this game to use it?
You seem to be trying to describe everything I've done in a way that assumes I am scum
So? So what?
It's called a case AGAINST you for a reason.
I've done this COUNTLESS times in my games.
Tunneling.
More tunneling.
More tunneling...
You, uh, get the idea.
Iso-read me in
735 as a cop. My style wasn't because I had a guilty, though. It was because that's how I play.
More examples of tunneling.
And more...
Pretty much tunneling there as well.
Iso reading 742 might not be the best example, as I was also a cop there. How about we look into other games, though?
Attacking Ivan and Chief.
More attacking,
More attacking,
And more attacking.
This continued until I was night-killed.
Iso-reading 763 will provide you with a good, vanilla townie example of this.
Let's save you the time of individual posts and further
Link you to similar play. In this case, that I tunneled on Green and Seraph for most of the game, and from the grave, had tunneled on GLaDOS.
As the doc, I tunneled on who became Henrz. This was mainly due to Henrz's poor defense, and I definitely wouldn't have lynched Philly.
I was convinced that Nabakov was scum, a low point for me,
and so on, and so on.
Conclusion:
LIVE WITH IT. I've gotten, in all of those games, AT LEAST six mafia from my style. I have NO intention of changing it otherwise.
Or better yet, self-vote, give up, accept you're mafia, and that I caught you.
but none of it actually explains why any of my posts woudl be more likely made by a scum then by a town.
Amongst others, there's that one VERY vital post from you:
On that page, you and Iamausername slipped badly. You
-Started accusations on me,
-Immediately after that, stated how we hadn't heard from Iamausername in a while. SEVERAL OTHER PEOPLE hadn't posted for a while; you chose Iamausername SPECIFICALLY.
-Iamausername then shows up IMMEDIATELY after that, and votes for me.
-Then you, in what I see as the first contentful post since your accusations against me, you vote me.
Those four are perhaps the most condemning pieces of evidence in existence.
Yos2 wrote:I really did explain why it was scummy, you know:
[the following is his quote]
Right. My theory was that scum would be all paranoid about responding to something like that, in any way, for fear it would look scummy; I know I would feel wierd about blatently yelling "NOT TOWN!" as scum, whereas as town I might be more likely to just play along and have fun. So once it got going, my plan was to vote the first person who completly ignored the whole thing, on the theory that that was the most likely way for scum to respond to it; I'd expect town would either play along with it, or attack it, but scum would try to ignore it completly. And you were the first to not mention it at all.
[end his quote]
Did you miss that explination?
That isn't an explanation. It still doesn't say why you didn't think MY response was scummy. And, as I said, SEVERAL others ignored it. Only five (including yourself) responded to it, and I had my own response to it, but that STILL leaves, how many? Yea, something like SIX others who IGNORED it.
You didn't count, because you specifically responded to my post.
I responded, alright, but I didn't participate in the activity--
You have yet to answer:
What makes my response not scummy, yet ignoring it to be scummy?
Anyway, it should have been clear that I was just trying to skip making a random vote, and instead went to a "slightly better then random vote".
Which you never removed...
That is, if a random vote in this game would be 45% likely to hit scum, my vote was, I donno, 5% better then that or so.
And, again, why'd you use this tactic THIS game, instead of, oh, say, your last, or the one before that?
It was the second page;
Page numbers mean NOTHING.
I figured it was pretty clear that my vote was not based on much
Yet apparently was enough to keep it on, when at the time, the only thing against FA was the Meta case I had posted, essentially.
just a silly thing I did to get the game rolling and the fact that I wouldn't have voted for you the way FA did there.
FA's vote was something which should've been obvious was random. His explanation of his actions didn't seem to fit my meta on FA. Besides that (and rolefishing), there wasn't anything at the time which would've been scummy.
Note that, while I voted FA for this reason, this was not the reason I kept my vote there as we started to get close to a lynch.
There wasn't much of a case against FA. My main reason for voting FA was a difference in meta, and what I saw as rolefishing. There wasn't anything else against him. (On a side note, I just realized how bad FA's luck is--I've seen him lynched twice on day one as town, now, and once on day two)
Your logic on Kore is...weak.
Lol. Nice defense. [/sarcasm]
Yes, you are correct, I'm not mafia.
But you ARE a werewolf, aren't you?
Your continued push against me, despite my solid defense, you trying to switch reasonings behind voting me, when you realize your original reasoning is extremely flawed, is further proof of this.
That's hardly proof that I'm scum, it's just the opposte.
If you're not a member of the Mafia, then you're either town, or a werewolf. Which makes you more likely to be a Werewolf, from your attitude thusfar in the game. ESPECIALLY with Selective Scum Hunting in factor; selectively scum hunting the mafia is proof that you are a werewolf who wants the mafia dead.
Plus, you're "Kore made one comment about Yos being confusing so Yos killed kore for that" explination is really, really weak;
1: This was actually TWO accusations: One, that of proof you're not mafia.
And if you're denying that and saying it's weak...No, it is not. Other than distancing, partners will almost NEVER express confusion about each other--they can communicate with each other to clarify confusion, if they have daytalking abilities (the mod confirmed this is the case, much to my shock).
2: The other was that you might've night-killed those who suspected you.
YOU made an argument that I would keep players alive if they supported me.
I have found that, people as scum, will do the things they are accusing others of.
Meaning that YOU would keep players alive who agreed with you.
Which is extremely similar to killing players who DISAGREE with you, or even SUSPECT you.
And THAT is valid. Day one suspicions grow STRONGER every time that someone flips town.
Like I said, I wouldn't have night-killed Kore, a prime suspect of mine. Kore would've made for an EXCELLENT lynch today, putting us in lylo tomorrow, leaving us in a good position to win. Instead, I would've killed a pro-town appearing player, such as OGML, you (at the time), and Iamausername (at the time).
Now tell me, Yos2.
If you are saying you are disagreeing with it, who WOULD you kill as scum?
it's hardly like Kore spent most of day 1 trying to lynch me.
You were one of Kore's only suspects. Kore spent most of day two trying to stop Khamisa's lynch. If Kore were left alive, Kore very likely would've gone HARD after someone like you, a suspect day one.
If anything, the most likely explination for the Kore kill is that the wolves knew that their biggest threat was the mafia
There's no way you could even assume this unless you were a member of the werewolves, Yos2. There are THOUSANDS of reasons that Kore could've been night-killed.
Unless you're admitting to being a werewolf, then I really don't see this as something ANY good werewolf would do. Eliminating the Mafia would NOT be my top priority as a wolf; LYNCHING them would be. Lynching a member of the Mafia looks REALLY good, AND would lead the werewolves closer to victory if I were one.
So, yea...
There's not a chance on earth that I, myself, would've night-killed Kore.
The person who I find most likely to have done it, ESPECIALLY after this explanation, is Yos2.
so they decided to try and kill a mafia member.
Poor play. Again, what if Kore were left alive?
Two mafia, two werewolves today (unless Kore's partner were nk'd).
Who would be the lynch?
Kore, an extremely scummy player,
Or someone else, who could theoretically be a werewolf?
I'd definitely, as a werewolf, be pushing for the former.
Especally after the strong arguments OMGL made yesterday linking Kore to Khamisa
It is for this reason that Kore would've been kept alive--a link to a confirmed scum player.
Who here agrees with Yos2, in that killing Kore was a move to eliminate the mafia?
Who here agrees with me, in that--as werewolves--it would be best to leave Kore alive to be lynched today?
*raises hand*
it seems pretty obvious why Kore was killed.
NOTHING like that should be OBVIOUS to ANY player, EXCEPT for the one who KILLED Kore. This is FURTHER proof that Yos2 is a werewolf.
FA clearly didn't understand why lynching the claimed cop on day 1 was a bad idea.
I wouldn't say that. To be honest, I was ignoring his attacks against CJ. Instead, I was focusing on his Meta and rolefishing instead. So I didn't exactly see the whole conversation that well. But this explanation sticked out like a sore thumb. You were explaining to him a concept which I think that he should've already known, and you also threw in some wifom where it wasn't needed.
Well, either that, or FA was pretending not to in order to try to lynch a cop.
You're casting doubt...on a player who is NOW CONFIRMED TOWN.
This seems like an attack...against a dead player...who can't even defend himself anymore. That's just...wrong. Seriously, seriously...wrong. (I know this feeling all too well. The attacks that I have to endure some times without the capability to fight back...makes me sick.)
The best way to find out which one of those was true was to explain it in some detail, and judge the reaction.
This did NOT seem like what you were doing AT ALL.
The reaction did not impress me as pro-town, so I didn't remove my vote.
I agree, in that FA wasn't particularly Pro-town...but to not remove it from the reaction? I definitely am not buying it.
Was that the reason I voted FA? No, but that wasn't what I was asked.
It is to me. When people ask what the case against a player is, to me, that means what was YOUR reason for voting that player.
You're trying to make it sound like I was lying here,
And what's the problem with that? I think you are, I think you're caught werewolf DESPERATELY trying to fight back, pushing for my lynch with WHATEVER you can get a hold of.
but no, I answered the question truthfully and correctly,
Not in my eyes.
If by "selective scumhunting" you mean "selectivly hunting for people who are scum", then yes, i was doing that.
Don't tell me you seriously didn't know what I was talking about, Yos2. You've been playing for years, correct?
Reasons are not always necessary
1: Yes. Yes, they are. Reasons are ALWAYS necessary for a vote.
2: I'm going to quote you on this in my response to some of your points, just to prove you false.
especally when you're right.
Oh, yes. The bandwagon was correct. It landed on scum, a Member of the Mafia.
But no.
It wasn't pro-town.
Selective Scum Hunting is hunting for a specific faction. In your case, you were hunting Mafia members, but not Werewolves. Why?
Because you are one, of course.
So, I'm scum because I didn't buy your "proof" that your lurking somehow wasn't a scumtell?
Yes.
Yes, you are.
I beat you at your metagaming game.
A pro-town player would admit defeat on the points they were making.
Not you.
You switched to other, even WORSE reasoning upon learning that I had defended too well against your accusations.
Look; meta aside, lurking is *ALWAYS* a scumtell, ok?
No. It is NOT.
-I lurked in 735. I was waiting for enough responses for me to throw together a long post, and wanted extra feedback before posting my own. I had waited until Kieraen had given himself up as the last scum, before claiming cop, for example.
-I lurked in 742. Pretty much the same. I was building a case against AceMarksman (although, really, the main thing against him was Chainsaw Defense against someone who I knew was guilty), but still, wasn't posting in that time. When Jeff voted me, I claimed.
-I lurked in 760. Tried building opinions, and failed miserably several times. I wasn't contributing my all to the game.
-I lurked in 763. I fell six pages behind. It was originally due to laziness and not wanting to log into the game. It later became serious and I fell behind due to it.
-I lurked in 141. Because of it, I fell one page behind, and from then on, was ALWAYS behind and never caught up.
-I lurked in Inventor Mafia rather some bit. And even active lurked.
Guess what?
I WAS TOWN IN EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.
That's just ME.
And some players are ALWAYS known for lurking (such as, say, killa seven).
I've seen scum lurk. I lurked in 688, Kier lurked in 735, MiteyMouse "lurked" in 762, Papa Zito faked being gone (something I did in 735 and 742) in 762 as well, but other than that, no examples come to mind.
I've seen town lurking far more recently than scum.
It's a null tell these days.
Perhaps it was a scum tell back in the day, when you first started playing.
But now?
No.
Scum lurk more then town,
Not in my experience. I've seen town lurk more than scum in my dozen or so games.
and lurking is also anti-town.
I agree. It IS anti-town. But
-ANTI-TOWN IS NOT SCUMMY,
-NOR IS ANTI-TOWN A SCUM-TELL,
-NOR IS IT ANY KIND OF SIGN OF SCUM.
It's anti-town. Not beneficial to the town.
Not pro-scum. A sign of their alignment.
There's a HUGE difference.
In any case, the reason I especally suspected you for lurking dosn't have anything to do with daytalking, or experenced players
Yes. Yes, it does.
Your reason for suspecting me for lurking was BECAUSE YOU SAID THAT I FEAR SLIPPING UP AS SCUM, which IS RELATED TO DAYTALKING AND EXPERIENCED PLAYERS. I gave quotes to PROVE this as the case.
so all those arguments were completly irrelevent to my suspicions.
Yea...you're caught scum. You're lying between your teeth.
You've said,
essentially,
"The last time I saw Mastin as scum, he lurked a lot",
"Mastin fears slipping up as scum, and tends to post less often as scum",
etc.
Want me to bring up the REAL quotes to prove it?
Yet NOW you say you were NOT saying that was the case, despite it being PERFECTLY CLEAR that you WERE.
Yos2's caught scum. I think we can all agree to this. I will rest assured knowing that, if I am lynched, he'll go tomorrow. (Wulfy suspected Yos2, OGML suspects Yos2, I suspect Yos2, I believe Tarb also mentioned suspecting Yos2...who here doesn't suspect Yos2? Especially after he's pushing so hard for my lynch with BS'd [For my aggressive posts? I mean, COME ON! That's something I've been doing ever since I started playing. It's a scum tell for me to be acting NICE in a game.] reasons?)
But, preferably, that won't happen; instead, he'll be lynched today, I'll be night-killed for turning the lynch around, and Iamausername will be lynched tomorrow as his scum buddy. Then the rest of the town can decide to either spare Wulfy or lynch the poor Mafia person.
The way you exploded
I started playing again, where before, I had stopped. LOOK AT INVENTOR MAFIA. You should SEE the EXACT SAME PATTERN THERE. I started out not contributing anything, and then EXPLODED with my posts, defending myself. I was about to provide a case in attack, when I was lynched then.
and OMGUS voted me
1: It was not OMGUS--I saw a SERIOUS slip from you, and a pattern in the actions of you and Iamausername.
2: EVEN IF IT WERE OMGUS, guess what?
MY META SUPPORTS ME.
-I attacked Kier and And in 735. I had a guilty on And, and suspect Kier, but nothing else.
-I attacked Ace for defending Kronos/Khan by attacking me, what I saw as Chainsaw Defense.
-I attacked Mikek in 763 for defending Ivan/Chief.
And so on, and so forth.
when I didn't instantly buy your explinations?
I gave my proof. You didn't believe it until it was CLEAR that I had dominated you in the meta argument. AT THAT POINT IN TIME, you SUDDENLY switched to OTHER even WORSE reasoning for keeping the vote on me.
Then. Don't. Be. Scum.
I never am.
Seriously, I can count with half a hand the number of times I've been scum. The number of times people have accused me of being scum?
Yea, every single game I've ever played, with possibly one or two exceptions.
Uh, I just asked you to clarify what you were talking about
And I did.
So, what are you talking about?
You mentioned Iamausername, OUT OF ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE WHO HADN'T POSTED A GREAT DEAL. You mentioned him as being pro-town, WHEN HE HADN'T EVEN CONTRIBUTED MUCH.
I called you out for it, and pointed it out. Then you got FAR heavier in your attacks against me.
How would it be a pro-town thing to do to respond to an unreadable wall of words with another unreadable wall of words?
Pay attention to the bolded:
Mastin wrote:This would be pro-town to do
(it gives a more solid view on your opinions for everyone,
most importantly, me
)
, but you're not pro-town, are you?
It not only lets people see your thoughts better, but allows for me to respond better to your accusations. Only quoting PART of the message only delivers PART of the POST.
I want the rest of the town to get what I'm trying to say,
The best way to do this is to quote, part for part, what I had said and respond to it, so we know EXACTLY what you were saying.
and not just skim past it.
If people don't want to read, then they should go watch a movie. Not play a text-based game. If people want to read less, then they either
1: Avoid games where I am playing,
or
2: Don't attack me.
In the games where I am least suspected, I have the shortest posts. (Want references? I can give 'em.)
So I responded to the relevent points in a short, succint, logical manner.
You did not. You quoted the weaker parts of the argument, cutting out the explanations and evidence supporting what I had said.
Being clear and readable IS the pro-town thing to do, Mastin.
My posts ARE clear and ARE readable. They have a specific format which is easy to follow. It takes TIME to do so, yes, but again, if people don't want to read, then they can go to a movie, watch television, and/or play a video game for all I care.
People can either live with my walls of text,
Choose to avoid them at all costs,
Or they can take steps to make sure I avoid making them, such as, well, NOT ACCUSING ME FALSELY OF BEING SCUM.
Unreadable posts only are good for scum trying to smash their way out of a corner.
The thing is, the longer a post is, THE MORE LIKELY IT IS THAT SCUM WILL SLIP. So if people read, line by line, a long post, THEY FIND SCUM MORE OFTEN.
What the hell?
Let me translate this into what Yos2 wants to say, but can't:
"Ah, SH*censored*! He's right! Umm...I'll have to be more careful in the future. Umm...let's try reacting to it in the most pro-town way I can think of."
I was commenting that I wanted to hear more from Iamusername.
SPECIFICALLY Iamausername, though. THERE WERE MANY OTHERS WHO HAD NOT CONTRIBUTED A GREAT DEAL,
AT THE TIME OF THAT POST.
You singled out a SPECIFIC player and said that it'd be nice to hear more from them.
Even more condemning, SHORTLY AFTER THAT, Iamausername DOES show up, and basically votes for YOUR "suspect" at the time, Me.
In other words, I was complaining about his lurking.
Wanting to hear more about a player is NOT the same as complaining about lurking. They are two ENTIRELY different things. Wanting to hear more from a player is essentially asking for a prod/for them to contribute more. Complaining about lurking is just that: COMPLAINING ABOUT LURKING.
I also said that I did have a pro-town vibe from the posts he did make, which is true.
This. Is. Utter.
. You've EVEN ON THIS PAGE
THAT YOU HAVE SUSPICIONS OF Iamausername. Want the quote? I'll give it to you if necessary. You're TOTALLY contradicting yourself, Yos2. You. Are. Caught. Scum.
How the hell is that a "scum slip"?
Hmm, let's review for the tenth time...
-You accused me of lurking, essentially, setting me up as one of your top suspects.
-You then, OUT OF ALL THE PLAYERS WHO YOU
HAVE MENTIONED,
MENTION Iamausername.
-Iamausername VERY SHORTLY AFTER THAT
show up, WITH A VOTE ON
, when I just so happen to be
TOP SUSPECT AS WELL.
-Then, in your next contentful post, YOU MAKE IT OFFICIAL AND
ME. You even put me at L-1.
It's pretty much just a streightfoward statement of fact
On a SINGLE SPECIFIC player. You could've said that about MANY other players at the time. You chose Iamausername...why?
Yea...that's a scumslip, Yos2.
an attempt of mine to prevent someone from lurking
This, ITSELF, EVEN ALONE, contradicts your supposed town read on Iamausername. BY YOUR OWN ADMITION, YOU ARE SAYING LURKING IS A SCUM TELL. Which
CONTRADICTS WITH A TOWN READ.
while at the same time stating my current opinion on that person.
You cannot both say they are lurking and that you have a pro-town read on them, when you put so much weight on lurking being a scum tell.
Those are all important, pro-town things to do.
1: Again, they contradict themselves, and
2: SEVERAL other people had contributed EQUALLY LITTLE AT THE TIME OF THAT POST. You chose Iamausername OUT OF ALL THE POSSIBLE OPTIONS.
The fact that he posted after I complained that we needed to hear more from him is *EXACTALLY WHAT I WANT TO HAPPEN WHEN I DRAW ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT SOMEONE IS LURKING.*
AKA, wants your partner to post after you notice he has not...
At least half the time, lurkers are still reading the game, they're just being quiet;
And Iamausername proved this by posting a weak case against me. You seriously didn't have suspicions over that?
Oh, right.
You IGNORED that post.
usually if you point out that they're lurking, they show up.
1: Many others had been contributing about the same amount at the time as Iamausername (read: not very much at all). You chose Iamausername out of all those options.
2: And the fact that Iamausername showed up just after that should've proved he was lurking, no?
Why'd you ignore this fact?
Answer: He's your scumbuddy.
Which is why pointing out lurkers is a damn good thing for pro-town people to do.
Yet you chose ONLY Iamausername,
AND
He showed up immediately after wards, confirming your supposed suspicions of him.
Again, you seem to just be taking everything I say, and trying to put a scummy spin on it.
I'm only seeing what's really there:
Scum.
I have to leave, right now, but might I point out this?
As if confirming everything, the very next post after Yos2's is, as I thought, Iamausername. They are caught, they know it, and they are going to stop at NOTHING to get me lynched before them.