Tasky (4) - Friend, PranaDevil, vollkan, Andrius
Xite91 (1) - NicoBolas
Sando (1) - Tasky
Andrius (1) - seraphim
vollkan (1) - Scott Brosius
Friend (1) - Xite91
Not Voting (3) - Max, TheLonging, sando
So now you're claiming it's a gut feel on your end? You actually said this at the time:Tasky wrote:For me saying "nice try" feels scummy...
Now you're just contradicting yourself, you had a reason, that scum wants to point out something, and now it's gut. Guts a great thing isn't it? You don't have to justify it, you don't get called out on it later.Tasky wrote:scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...
If a player thinks somebody is scum, they can individually target them. If a player thinks somebody is town, they can target them and possibly reveal useful information.Tasky wrote:I don't agree with this... giving everyone free choice let's scum more room to dodge discussion... and you are forgetting that scum could be hiding in the crowd during day and not let you spot them, so that you never even think about talking to them at night... but since by the mentioned method everybody has to talk to somebody, that's just not possible...vollkan wrote:Definitely not.Tasky wrote: I think we should agree on some pre-fixed order for neighborizing, otherwise scum could avouid having to talk too much more easily...
there should really be a good reason not to hold too such a pre-fixed order...
IMO, the everyone-targets-the-person-right-under-them-in-popularity-way is a good one, since it can not be influenced by scum...
Yes, it makes it slightly easier for scum. But it also prevents town from targeting where they think they can have the most impact.
if you think somebody is scum, you say it in the thread and then by the method there are usually two neighbors who can do the interrogation... it is highly unlikely that both are scum, so that at least on interrogation will be done by a townie... and if your reasons for thinking someone was scum were good, that townie will understand them and do a good interrogation
Completely agree with this.Max wrote:
Here is my opinion on outline of proposed actions towards neighbouring:
1. Enforced "You must pick this person" - Opposed
I as the most popular person and an adequate scum hunter feels that I should be allowed to pick whoever I wish. Say I felt like picking a scummy person to pick at some argument then I want to be able to do that. Say I want a townie to argue with I want that possibility too.
2. Explaining Choices of Masonships - Support
I feel that this is necessary. Scum cannot hide behind their actions saying "I had to". Only ranks 11/12 have no choice of who to pair with and that means that everyone else's choice can be analysed.
3. Claiming Tonight's choices in advance - Opposed
Do I really need to explain why? It would give scum information going into night one that the town would only use day 2.
Seriously. This conversation needs to be finished pretty quick. It's evident people will have different abilities however as this is the most powerful tool town power (I guess) we have to use we should make sure we don't forget the more important one. Lynching.
Explain this.Sando wrote: Xites wall-o-text seems like scum desperation.
What is the point of this? He has been explaining why he thinks your case is crap; in which case I'm happy for him to say that he thinks your case is crap.xite wrote: Those bolded times? That's all the times he responded to my case by saying, oh you're wrong but in your terms mostly, or your case is null or such and such. Dismissing it as nothing... Just seems like an interesting reaction to me, and it seems to make the rest of you think the same way
I always said it was gut:Sando wrote:So now you're claiming it's a gut feel on your end? You actually said this at the time:Tasky wrote:For me saying "nice try" feels scummy...Now you're just contradicting yourself, you had a reason, that scum wants to point out something, and now it's gut. Guts a great thing isn't it? You don't have to justify it, you don't get called out on it later.Tasky wrote:scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...
I see my including of the gut argument as a deliberately weak argument (although I didn't include it whit that in mind, thinking about it, I'm happy I did)...Tasky wrote:this is just gut, but the "nice try though"-thing really feels scummy... scum usually wants to point out that they just avoided something they feel is a trap...
this seems a threat to me:Sando wrote: How did I threaten you? Iremovedmy vote specifically to give you some breathing room to claim. I did not want a quick-hammer to come in, especially as I believe there had been 3 votes on you since the last count, and it would be fairly easy for scum to come along and hammer then claim they didn't realise it was the hammer.
Sando, you are blatantly trying to make up inexistent contradictions, you manipulate what I say by quoting only partially and all that just so you don't have to admit your attack was wrong in the first place...Sando wrote:Pretty sure Andrius put you at L-1, Trasky needs to claim. Vote goes back on if the next Trasky post isn't a claim.
I think this has to be considered logic:NicolBolas wrote:@Tasky I read thru your posts and it is interesting how you are reacting to Sando's admittedly weak attack. Instead of proceeding with logic, you accuse him of being scum because he pointed fingers at you. Do you have any better reasons than just that Sando attacked you?
as I already said, the OMGUS argument is invalid here... a lot of people happen to have a vote on me, if I were to attack only those who don't, because otherwise it would be OMGUS, I couldn't scum-hunt at allTasky wrote:how exactly do you make the equation ["take advantage of someone" = "asking someone a question"] ?Sando wrote:Tasky and Xite are both obvious targets today. I feel more strongly about Tasky, Xite is a pretty easy target for some of his posts I feel, and Tasky has taken advantage of this:
Not much, but he's taking the opportunity to throw out attacks without actually calling someone scummy, FOS/Voting them etc.Tasky wrote:so you really think depriving us of the only weapon we have against scum, discussion, will be good for town?
wowowo... if everybody who likes to post wall-o-text was scum, we'd have to lynch almost everybody on MafiaScum...Xites wall-o-text seems like scum desperation.
putting those two things together it looks to me like Sando came here, saw the case against me and Xite and wants to join it... but he doesn't want to look like he is just blindly following the others, so he looks for some (rather poor) excuses to do so...
this looks very much like scum trying to get on a bandwagon...
therefore UNVOTE:
VOTE: Sando
Volkan wrote:+2. Noob scum throwing out a fishing line to see if there is support for an utterly insane idea.
Technically, had Sando voted Tasky (which he was willing to do) Tasky would have been at L-2, which is acceptable claiming ground.Friend wrote:This is too soon for claiming. While I still think Tasky is the scummiest, we need to talk more. Sando seems a little too aggressive.
Teehee, youre funnyMax wrote:Xite, get a grip. Your caseisweak. It can be forgiven, however, as Friend shouldn't shrug it off just because it's a weak case. It isn't well formulated and in the first few pages I don't feel that friend should have said that he thinks people are town. Though that's not enough to lynch someone.
Questions to All
- Do you feel that The Playeroneabove you on the ranking list is scum?
- If you had to choose now who would you lynch?
- Who do you think is most town at this time?
I would like evidence and from these 11 posts I will determine who I feel is town and scum.
First, Uhm, if it was a free choice, scum could just pair up with scum (if you're going with the idea that scum want to avoid townies like the plague)NicolBolas wrote:@Xite- I saw the same thing that friend did. What i see in the bolded parts is friend not getting your case against friend, then you are now using that against friend. I do not like this. Friend is not dismissing your case as nothing IMO, it is your case that is weak. I am not sure what you mean by "easy targets much?". What i saw was Tasky and Sando attacking each other. It just struck me oddly. About the neighborzing thing, my concern is not in night three, but night two. Hypothetically, if scum knew the plan for neighborzing, they would be able to eliminate both of an single person's neighbors, rendering that person worthless in discussing what happened during the night. Also, a preset plan prevents the town to scumhunt during the night.
2) I would lynch xite. I feel that his case on friend is useless, and when attacked for it, he seems to be panicking a little. Pulls out crap reasoning, really.
First one, i was just curious how we were easy targets.Sando wrote:andXite wrote:First, other than the wagon on one and the extreme suspicion on the other, how are we obvious targets?So I'm silly for suggesting that you and Trasky are easy targets for being the top 2 suspects, not to mention the reasons for being the top 2 suspects, but you feel the need to attack NicolBolas for bringing up 'easy targets'? Hypocritical much?Xite wrote:First, easy targets much?
Oh, I'm sorry, don't recall you saying why, just recall you saying it was and shrugging it off.Friend wrote:Oh, should have explained the xite vote - he's my second suspect, mostly for the extremely poor case he laid out on me + pushing said case after I explained why it was poor.
If I'm not leading the conversation I don't work well. You remember that. I was right with my scum leads but, well, as I hadn't led the convo therefore I was doomed by the leading scum mofos.3: Me, obviously, anyone not saying this is scum? Probably Max or NicolBolas, Max is controlling conversation at this stage and while I find that townie, I'm also very wary of it. NicolBolas has basically been adding good content, and has been fairly non-scummy, but isn't as contributing as some others.
To clarify the extent of your case against xite, could you please list your non-gut points briefly? Reason being is that, if it is true he only singled out a weak argument to attack, that is a valid scumtell; but the sheer size of your exchange with him means that each individual point isn't clear.Tasky wrote: I see my including of the gut argument as a deliberately weak argument (although I didn't include it whit that in mind, thinking about it, I'm happy I did)...
the big difference in discussion between a townie and scum, is that scum want's to get information, and will agree with the "opponent" if they say something right... for a townie, it's not about winning the argument, it's about discovering the other's alignment...
scum on the other side, want to score points and want to win arguments... the way you attacked my "gut-feeling" argument, which in fact is (by far) the weakest of my arguments you are looking for a quick win over my arguments... the problem with that is that you do as if nullifying that argument will kill the whole case, while you still have to attack the other, the strong arguments...
if you were really interested in what I am saying, you would discuss more the major points (the one about you looking for reasons to copy other people votes without looking like copying)... instead, what did you do? you went for the weak argument, the one that wouldn't stand a chance alone if you really had a way to nullify the other arguments... and why? to make me look stupid, to score points in our discussion..
and that is a scum-tell, since townies don't want other people to look stupid, they want to find out their alignment...... (actually I had enough scum-tells, but now I'm even more sure)
Xite wrote: Sando seems a little too aggressive.
+2Xite wrote: Aggressiveness is not bad, but I think Sando is being a little overagressive. Scum is usually more aggressive than town.
Why is it getting stronger?Xite wrote: First, I admitted that my original case was weak, but it's getting stronger, at least in my mind.