890: Cults of Darkness and Shadow - Game over!

[Seacore]

But the risk that a cult would do that is low, especially earlier in the game. The results of a lie would be damaging to the entire cult in question, and only advantageous in an endgame scenario.

The cults could actually have the role, so they wouldn't be lying. If a cult dreamwalker comes forward claiming to be a town dreamwalker, they'd have the same information, there'd be nothing to catch them out.

I wasn't trying to take on a leadership hat, I was bored at work, so I did some analysis of the difference between this game and a standard game. I stand by my analysis.
I find it suspicious that I'm being bandwagoned just because I've stated my ideas. The fact that I've laid out exactly what I think would set me up for a massive fall later if I started acting against my thoughts. I've been the most transparent so far, yet I'm being focussed on.

Also, what am I supposed to do when I'm accused of buddying?

So far, my cult suspects are on SS's town list, with the exception of mipe. Particularly Discode for his reaction to my Vig comment. It was an overeaction as far as I'm concerned and I'm suspicious of it.

incant:Discode

Might as well start incanting people I'm suspicious of.

[Chaco]

I don't like the buddying between Chaco and Seacore.

You're just jealous you aren't a member of the brolliance. <.<

Anyways, no. If he buddies me, so be it. All it looks like he's doing is what you're falling for. Which would be, if he flips--

Actually, answer this first. If Seacore were Incanted and flipped scum, right this instant. Who would you incant next?

Money says me because he's been buddying me. It's a common scum tactic, and you fell right into it.

Mod edit - duplicate post and request to remove said duplicate post have been removed.

[Seacore]

Also, lets make this clear, I'd vote for Chaco in a heartbeat if he looked scummy to me. But he seemed to understand my points of view and that enabled a better discussion between the two of us.
The idea that town can't chat to people is dumb. Buddying is interesting information but only when added to everything else. Scum are just as likely to buddy with each other as they are with town, because distancing is a well known tactic.

[SerialClergyman]

Thanks for finding a replacement mod and ditching mass suicide. You're a star.

Seacore is still scum. I have no problems with the alliance style postings, and in fact if seacore is scum I think it's probably less likely that the others are scum.

But my problems with his play continue. As much as it's fine to talk about setup, it's information instead of analysis. It's looking protown without doing anything that's harmful to scum.

And your conclusions are anti-town. Asking people not to place votes is anti-town. We need votes for pressure and the worry that we're going to suddenly need to unvote on D1 is ridiculous. Votes create pressure and give us a record of concrete action and are extremely importnat early, certainly more so than worrying about not being able to unvote.

RVS Bandwagons are bad because we can't easily get rid of our pool of incants. I'm fine with regular bandwagons, that's how this game works.

I'm quite happy for SC to have voted for me. I think it's an incorrect decision, but his vote is based on his opinion, I'm definitely not trying to discourage people for voting for people they think are scum. But I'm passionately against the idea of a typical Random Voting Stage since it introduces too many incants too soon. Yes, you can just move them to less at-risk players, but that involves coordination and it's too open to "Oh my god, I'm so sorry, I was unexpectedly away and then you burst into fire"

This is an example of the logical disconnect, as well as two different reasons for the one policy. If the stated reason for being against RVS votes is that there is a liklihood there will be a mislynch, then that is FAR LESS LIKELY under this voting system. If the stated reason is because we lose a no lynch option and people can't unvote, then voting according to suspicions has the same problem. Either way - the position doesn't make sense and looks to me to be stifling attempts at creating pressure.

Saying town tells don't exist because there is more than one team is ridiculous. There are plenty of town tells that will be easy to spot (my favourite - drawing two arguing townies apart and moving the lynch elsewhere, for example). In addition, the way that you catch people who initially have a town read is precisely that they are only hunting one scumgroup. Just because scum are actively scumhunting doesn't mean they can actively scumhunt their own clan. When we're a few days in with a few flips, we'll be able to tell who is concentrating on one side or the other.

Asking the mod if the scum had 4 members was a facetious act. There was never any liklihood of that being the case and the mere process of asking (in thread, not via PM) was showy and unnecessary.

Finally, it's possible that the scum have power roles, but it is both unlikely in a 12-man setup and even if they do, they will be using their roles to combat the other scum group. So if a cop claims a guilty on another player, that other player will be lynched and the cop kept around to continue to search.

But more than anything, it's the overall tone. You're posting a lot more on setup info than you are looking for scum, you're eroding confidence in town tells and power roles, you're pushing hard to look pro-town without doing much and you've contradicted your original reason for being anti-voting.

Scum, imho.

[DeathSauce]

I'm also against people just voting without saying anything else, I don't care what your secret plan is Fara, it still looks scummy. Anybody, scum or town, will ask you the same question "why did you vote for me" it reveals nothing, but makes us harder to hold you to account.

Tells can be given off in response to pressure. When someone votes for someone without a reason the accused may wonder why, they may panic or may continue to act in a scummy way. The fact you believe all unexplained votes to be scummy is a tad naive, and there very very useful as far as I'm concerned. I'm not however interested in arguing mafia theory, but suffice to say I'll use my vote as I feel is best.

So you are still claiming that your vote within an hour of the game going live was not a mistaken random vote, but actually had a reason? I'm not buying this. It was a random vote and there is no way you could have expected it to elicit a reaction with meaning. If you think it did, explain it to us, otherwise admit it was a random vote.

[Faraday]

I'm also against people just voting without saying anything else, I don't care what your secret plan is Fara, it still looks scummy. Anybody, scum or town, will ask you the same question "why did you vote for me" it reveals nothing, but makes us harder to hold you to account.

Tells can be given off in response to pressure. When someone votes for someone without a reason the accused may wonder why, they may panic or may continue to act in a scummy way. The fact you believe all unexplained votes to be scummy is a tad naive, and there very very useful as far as I'm concerned. I'm not however interested in arguing mafia theory, but suffice to say I'll use my vote as I feel is best.

So you are still claiming that your vote within an hour of the game going live was not a mistaken random vote, but actually had a reason? I'm not buying this. It was a random vote and there is no way you could have expected it to elicit a reaction with meaning. If you think it did, explain it to us, otherwise admit it was a random vote.

Yes it had a reason.
I don't care if you buy it or not.
How the fuck could you possibly know what I was expecting? You a mind reader.
Obviously it didn't, but that didn't mean it couldn't have elicited a reaction.

Please state why I would pretend a random vote was not random.
Then since you're questioning me on it tell me why it's scummy.

[Faraday]

hey datadanne, who do you think is scum?

[Faraday]

same question to pretty much everyone who isn't incanting/hasn't made their position clear.

[DeathSauce]

Yes it had a reason.
I don't care if you buy it or not.
How the fuck could you possibly know what I was expecting? You a mind reader.
Obviously it didn't, but that didn't mean it couldn't have elicited a reaction.

Seems I certainly got a reaction from you, and I didn't even have to incant you!

Please state why I would pretend a random vote was not random.
Then since you're questioning me on it tell me why it's scummy.

Uhh, your first question is exactly what I am asking you. I'll answer your second question when you answer mine

[Faraday]

Seems I certainly got a reaction from you, and I didn't even have to incant you!

Yeah I hate people asking me retarded questions, SORRY!

Please state why I would pretend a random vote was not random.
Then since you're questioning me on it tell me why it's scummy.

Uhh, your first question is exactly what I am asking you. I'll answer your second question when you answer mine[/quote]
l2read.

[Faraday]

Seems I certainly got a reaction from you, and I didn't even have to incant you!

Yeah I hate people asking me retarded questions, SORRY!

Please state why I would pretend a random vote was not random.
Then since you're questioning me on it tell me why it's scummy.

Uhh, your first question is exactly what I am asking you. I'll answer your second question when you answer mine

l2read


fix'd the tags

[Faraday]

to elaborate on you needing to l2read, I answered the question already by saying it wasn't a random vote.

[DeathSauce]

Thanks for making this easy.

Incant Faraday

You've been trying to weasel around that initial vote since you made it, responding to questions about it with name-calling and cursing doesn't help.

[Faraday]

I didn't call you any names, so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.
Perhaps you could quote them.


--------

You've yet to explain my motivation for pretending a random vote wasn't random. Answer my question.

[DeathSauce]

to elaborate on you needing to l2read, I answered the question already by saying it wasn't a random vote.

Yeah, I know you said that. I asked you how in the fuck you could claim that a vote in a game that was LESS THAN AN HOUR OLD could be anything but random, dipshit.

(cursing and name-calling added in an attempt to converse at your level)

[Faraday]

to elaborate on you needing to l2read, I answered the question already by saying it wasn't a random vote.

Yeah, I know you said that. I asked you how in the fuck you could claim that a vote in a game that was LESS THAN AN HOUR OLD could be anything but random, dipshit.

(cursing and name-calling added in an attempt to converse at your level)

Why does the length the game has been going on matter? Seriously are you saying I can't have a non random reason for a vote after an hour? Why? That's absolutely laughable.


3rd time asking, explain what I would gain by doing this.

[DisCode]

because if we need very few votes, it's easier for scum to control the lynch.

In my opinion this is a good thing. We tempt the scum to reveal themselves. If we need 10 to lynch and it's a town kill, then we've got all those people, plus anybody else that was suspicious to look at. If we only needed 6 and the same thing happens, then that makes it a lot easier.

When I say 'very few', then I mean 'very few'. A lynch with 10 players on board is way overreacted as it's very unlikely it will happen. Luckily, due to the change in rule, it's very unlikely this will happen as well for now.
And disagreed. Do you know how easy it is to have an influence on a lynch when you need only a few votes? It's very hard in this case to seperate the town from the scum.

I also don't understand why people are so suspicious about my pro-town comment. I'm talking about "pro-town tells" being things that actively make you think they are hunting for scum.
If you are including in "pro-town tells" the absence of "scum tells" then thats cool.
That's the only one I think can be trusted, because everything else could be scum hunting scum.

Now onto the scummy bit of the linked post, which is about the pro-town bit. It seems a way to give us the impression we can't clear each other and doubt everyone. Not liking that one bit.

Also, I completely disagree with DisCode on his vig comment. It benefits one scum team to actively hunt the other to extinction, then to come after town, because they can't trust that the other scum team doesn't have the same plan. Thus their night kill would likely be used in a vig way. If they have a dreamwalker then they will really be scum hunting.

You don't get it, do you?
Vig wants town to win. Mafia wants mafia to win. Therefore, vig kills players that are scummy or distracting/useless, while mafia kill players that are dangerous to them. Huge difference.
Also, it's notable how you discredited somebody (I believe Serial) for wanting to trust into a guilty/innocent result, while you want to trust in two whole mafia teams. At least the cop can be town-sided.

The problem with getting too high an incant population early is that it has a lack of accountability to hold people to in later days. An "accidental" multi-lynch could happen by somebody being "unfortunately away" from the game.

Are you talking about later days now? Because this whole argument started, because players started to state that random votes are bad in this game. I'm pretty sure there won't be random votes in later days.

Also, you're very scummy for trying to control future lynches:

5)Anybody who votes to make the votes uneven is viewed suspiciously, whether the person who dies flips scum or not.
6)Anybody who votes within the last hour of the last deadline is viewed extremely suspicious, probably an auto lynch.

Though I didn't ask any questions to you, Chaco, you may respond to my comment about post 47, which can be found in post 62.

Also, Seacore, I did not vote you based upon you thinking that mafia will act as vigs. It was something I disagreed about with you and disagreement is not a scumtell.
The 'boohoohoo' - speech of you being targeted was very

touching

scummy. As for the accusation against you of buddying, it seems that you don't have any troubles responding to it in post 77 (Two posts below the post I'm now commenting on). This is already scummy, but that you're now trying to play 'victim' after having stated this:

Hehe, I was about to comment on the buddying too, I'm happy for you to note it, I know that it can look suspicious sometimes, but I enjoy finding someone who sees eye to eye with me.

just makes it worse.

Money says me because he's been buddying me. It's a common scum tactic, and you fell right into it.

According to this, you believe that Seacore is playing a common scum tactic. Meaning you think he's scum. Yet, no incant. How come?


Going to look at the arguments between Faraday and Death now.

[Faraday]

Also; I've already given my reason as to why my vote wasn't random, so I'm not sure why you're asking HOW IT COULD BE NON RANDOM AFTER AN HOUR, when I've explained.


Perhaps you need to explain why I'd pretend a random vote is non-random though.

[DisCode]

Death, your opinion of Seacore and Chaco, please.
And answer Faraday's question for once as you're trying really hard to evade it.

That's all regarding that discussion. I'm now off to mourn for the minutes I've lost due to reading that

[mipe]

same question to pretty much everyone who isn't incanting/hasn't made their position clear.

DataDanne, Seacore and Faraday. Pretty much in that order.

[DisCode]

same question to pretty much everyone who isn't incanting/hasn't made their position clear.

DataDanne, Seacore and Faraday. Pretty much in that order.

Reasons for the last two?

[Chaco]

@Dis: Because I wanted to see how far he'd go. Because that, in my opinion isn't enough to incant him yet, and if I were at that time don't you think he'd stop what he's doing? Leaving me without further buddy esque posts to look into.

[DisCode]

So your opinion of his buddy posts to you is?
Also, what's your general opinion about 'buddying'?

[DisCode]

EBWOP
Already reminded you of this in the big post. You've got nothing to say in response to this, Chaco?

Post 47
Scummy post from Chaco. First of all, the 'soft push' against those players who have already incanted (For those who don't know what I mean, see: 'That can be considered scummy since' in the linked post)
Second reason is combined with post 49 as you were talking about the players who had voted today in post 47. Yet in post 49, you're denying you did talk about today.

[Chaco]

Well, normally, when someone buddies me I generally respond with,"Do not invoke me." But I was interested in his alignment, so wanted him to further it.

Also, @98: No, not really. Your soft push makes no sense since the push would be to get them to vote, however I wanted the contrasting. I felt like incanting a bunch without need to is pointless.

And I used today as an example, but the purpose was for later days. Since you, obviously, cannot

un

incant.