Ok, back and catching up:
Hohum wrote:[...] because you've been nothing but argumentative for the last 2 pages[...] I can't help it here everyone would rather argue with me than talk to me.
Lawl. Need I say more?
MightyMouse wrote:You are using strong arm tactics with several of us in this game.
Just playing devil's advocate here... MM and Sajin, how do you believe strong arm tactics leans between townieness and scumminess? I've given my opinions... but would like to hear yours? Attacking Hohum's methods is just illogical unless you explain how you think those methods can point to him being scum rather than just a dick.
Zorblag wrote:Scien: [1] For one as concerned about the voting with the mechanic we be using in this game Scien no has impressed Troll much at all with the two votes him has cast. Both feel as though them be reactionary rather than based on particularly strong reasons. [2] Troll no be sure whether the quick unvotes make them better or worse in Troll's assessment but it does add to what Troll sees as the tentative nature of Scien's play. [3] Actually, on the whole Troll thinks that Scien seems to be focused on the structure of the game and the play more than the players. Troll might normally think that was scummy but in this setup (and given what Troll knows of how Scien plays as scum) Troll leans away from that.
Eh, a lot here. Let me try and hit it all:
[1] Eh, both of those votes were used as pressure votes. IIRC, both people had repetitively dodged questions or explicitly said they were not going to answer them. The votes were placed in an attempt to try and force answers. After answers were given in both cases I backed off. That doesn't mean I don't suspect them anymore, but rather they started talking and now we can continue discussion.
As for what you are saying about how this works with how I believe votes matter differently than vanilla mafia? Neither of these two people were close to lynch, I doubt I would have behaved the same without very careful consideration if that were the case.
[2] Meh that's for you and the town to decide. The above gives my motives however, and I think that my opinions about the game as a whole will support those motives.
[3] I always am at the start of a new game. Sorry, it might add to the whole signal to noise, but talking about random neutral stuff that actually pertains to this game is a good way for me to get to hear people's stated opinions and for me to start forming my own opinions on them. My focus on game and plays eventually tends to switch to a more wholeistic view of a player when I have seen more content out of them. I have a few games of meta that should support this too.
Hohum wrote:[Talking about Sajin] He even later stated that he can see how his early posts could be interpreted as a scum tell (post 41) but attempts to reason that latching on to early scum tells is in of itself a scum tell (post 41, my response in 61, his in 62). The notion that I dare question him over a possible scum slip is anti-scum hunting (quite a large scum tell) at best, and downright ludicrous at worst.
Holy crap. This is interesting on several levels.
1) I actually think I agree with some of it. This is strange and new to me, as it is a point made by Hohum. (I kid... I kid...)
2) Others opinions, and some minimal personal experience tells me that talking about you past plays while calling them scummy is actually pretty scummy in itself. My experence comes from replacing in as a scum player in a past game.
If you talk about your past play in these cases, you will often fall for a trap like this. You will want to appear town and examine yourself, when you should already know why you played as you did. You will call yourself scummy as an attempt to show that "you are one of the gang", and by gang I mean townies in this case.
However, in reality you going to the trouble to claim that you do indeed look scummy makes no sense from the shoes of a townie. They would explain their mistakes for the mistakes that they were. They would point to the fact that making the mistakes is not scummy in it self. Basically they would have NO reason to say that "Yes your guys concerns are justified, now here is how I am going to attempt to get out of this hole." They would attempt to get right to the getting out of the hole.
3) I agree with Hohum's claim here. You saying that "yes I look scummy", then picking the loudest voice out of the group to rag on as 'taking advantage of it' is just silly. You apparently forgot the whole 'yes I look scummy' part of your argument.
[still catching up, but I would like to keep the post length down...]
