Newbie 983 ~ Game Over!

[drmyshottyizsik]

I really wanna hear Haylen's views on who she thinks is the scum pair, cause if she thinks its Prox and hindu then she should unvote prox and get hindu.

[Haylen]

I am intrigued that Hinduragi has managed to coast so far in the game. Other than that, I am not finding him particularly scummy. I need to do a thorough re-read to determine my current stance on players. I will not be posting who I think is a scumteam, because it is generally best to deal with one scum at a time. Dealing with two at once allows to scum to buddy with players more successfully.

[foilist13]

FoS: Switz

[Good and Honest]

Hello, archaebob and foilist13! I was following Newbie 968, in which both of you participated. Quite an interesting game... When I read that both of you had replaced into our current game, I thought: "Oh, these two won't like my playstyle at all"...

archaebob, I don't have multiple accounts. This is my only account on this site. Also, you seem to think that I have another, "normal" playstyle while what I'm exhibiting here is an "experimental" playstyle. No, this is my only playstyle (I'm sad if it annoys someone, that's not intended at all) and I'm proud of it.

foilist13, I'm wondering why you're expecting to frighten me by saying that you'll have me lynched if I don't vote. I have always said that I have no problems with players voting to lynch me if my playstyle is making the game less enjoyable for them. If the majority of players in this game dislike my playstyle and I get lynched because of that, so be it. I'll play in another game on this site where hopefully the group of players will be more tolerant towards my playstyle. The beauty of this game (and any game, actually) is that it can be played in so many different ways. What matters is that one plays the game in a way which is enjoyable for one. You seem to think people should play the game the way you want them to play. I won't play in a way which is not enjoyable for me.

I won't stop writing long posts. It brings much enjoyment to me. I love writing (as I have said earlier, I have always dreamt of being a writer). Again, you want me to write much less, which would decrease my enjoyment a lot. It looks like you want to deny me any enjoyment I might have by playing this game.

If you dislike my playstyle so much and dislike my writing style so much, you should have chosen another game to replace into. It's not fair to replace in and immediately ask me to replace out.

I'll say it once again - if people want to lynch me, I'll accept it. However, the time until the end of the day should be used for as much discussion as possible. Two new players have just come; unfortunately, Haylen won't be able to contribute much more because soon Seraphim will come - that's another person who has to share their comments on the game and another person whom we should interact with. The more participation from everyone, the better.

I totally approve of drmyshottyizsik's idea that everyone should focus on everyone, not only on one or two players. Of course, that doesn't mean that people should stop interacting with drmyshottyizsik but in addition to that they should also interact with the others.

drmyshottyizsik, you seem to aways agree with the most recent observation (unless it has something to do with you) - I noticed the remarkable relation between Prox and Switz and you immediately announced that they were mafia partners; archaebob and foilist13 made accusations against Hinduragi and you agreed with them, too...

Also, you're neglecting some comments and questions addressed to you. For example, you still haven't fully clarified for me why exactly you thanked/agreed with Haylen; you didn't answer Switz's question why at first you appreciated Switz commenting on you and then decided that Prox and Switz are mafia partners... You should pay more attention to these things - it's not good when you don't address comments or questions towards you.

Switz, there's nothing wrong with agreeing with Prox or defending Prox - I just found it interesting that you did this each time you mentioned Prox. I guess I would have expected you to at last ask Prox a question or two - even if only for clarification on something... It has to be said that the opposite relation is much more noteworthy. Prox mentioned or interacted with absolutely EVERY other player in the game (including the two that got replaced), apart from you. I think this is peculiar and I hope Prox will comment on it.

Hinduragi, you stated that everyone was only concentrating themselves on drmyshottyizsik and that we should discuss other players as well - something I was already doing. I talked about the relation between Prox and Switz; I talked about silverbullet999's interactions with drmyshottyizsik... You made it sound like no such things had happened.

You can definitely count on my ability to share information on what I think - like I said to silverbullet999, "As I read the game, I'm noticing certain things which I find noteworthy and I either comment on them or ask questions about them". What I'm not fond of doing is specifically saying: "X and Y are my suspects".

And now to the whole "acrhaebob and foilist13 versus Hinduragi" event. Wow, you two have really changed the game.

I'd suggest that the other players take a look at Newbie 968, which I have already mentioned at the beginning of this post. I think doing so will prove useful as you'll learn a thing or two about archaebob's and foilist13's methods. Here is what I have noticed:

These two players have a very aggressive approach towards the game. Sometimes they come up with tricky plans and are more than willing to help each other accomplish them (it sounds like I'm describing some criminals, doesn't it?). As it turns out, this is their way of discovering mafiosi. However, I think the other players in our current game should be careful because I'm sure archaebob and foilist13 will play the same way even if they are mafiosi...

So what about your accusations of Hinduragi? Well, for me they came absolutely out of the blue. archaebob, you seem to be trying to feel what exactly what a player is feeling when they are writing something. You made a similar accusation against podium123456 in Newbie 968 and there you were absolutely right but I don't think this is going to work every time. Your analysis of Hinduragi's writing makes sense. The problem is that when a person tries to convince me of something in the way you and foilist13 are doing it, on a psychological level I somehow refuse to accept it. There could be different explanations for Hinduragi's playstyle/writing style. You may laugh but maybe even Hinduragi's answer to drmyshottyizsik's question "What is your dream job?" could be relevant:

"Mathematics Professor. Anything requiring something below a PhD wouldn't cut it for me. Plus I'll be in a college where I can study up on whatever I find interesting"

I can definitely see how a person with a scientific mathematical approach can play/write the way Hinduragi has done, regardless of role in the game.

I must admit there are a few things Hinduragi has said/done that make me wonder myself. For example, "Shotty, I think you're in the right here that we should all get to know each other a little better. Unfortunately, I have nothing to contribute to the actions of achieving this. Suggestions would be welcomed". Hinduragi, you could have done what I was doing - commenting on other players, asking them questions... As you could see, it wasn't that difficult. Especially if you have a scientific mathematical approach, you probably have an attention for the detail so there could have been a lot of things you could have shared your thoughts on. What you said here sounded more like pretending to agree that other people should be discussed than actual agreeing.

Also, Hinduragi, I'm afraid I wasn't impressed with your reaction to archaebob's and foilist13's accusation. Unlike what you said, I definitely felt you were scared. I don't really mind your thanking them (foilist13, I really don't like generalizations such as "NO townie ever thanked someone for attacking them") but how could you determine them to be the least likely to be mafiosi? How did you decide that by just the couple of posts they made? It certainly seemed like you claimed this just because they were attacking you...

Haylen, I hope you're better now! I'm not sure what "to coast so far in the game" means but it I understand it correctly, you have been allowed "to coast so far in the game" to an even greater extent than Hinduragi. It's true, Seraphim should come soon but even if we won't be able to receive much information about you, at least any thoughts you share on the game could be useful for the other players. I'm looking forward to your contribution!

foilist13, my "character" is completely real. I think you can understand that I'm not feeling happy when you are not only trying to deny me enjoyment from the game but also claiming that "Good and Honest" is a robot with a programmated character and not an individual with real emotions. In your interactions with silverbullet999 in this game you have shown another side to yourself. Please, don't let your "aggressive" side dominate too much...

[foilist13]

@Good & Honest: I have no intention of reading your posts unless I see a vote at the bottom.

unvote, vote: Good & Honest

[archaebob]

@ good and honest -

Cut the BS. I'll take you on your word that this is your only account, but don't even pretend that this isn't a character. It's obvious from the quality of your writing and the general cohesion of your logic that you are an intelligent, disciplined thinker, and that this whole playstyle is one big gimmick. For whatever reason, this site has grabbed your interest, and you're now electing to play in a very specific way because you're the type of cocky smart-ass who enjoys screwing with people and being different from everyone just because it's fun for people of your intellectual capacity and pretension to be constantly on the outside.

Hell, you probably have a friend who plays this game a lot and are trying to see how long you can go without them realizing who you are. It won't take very long for them to figure it out, trust me.

Also, I'm intrigued that you followed that game so closely. Wow! What are the chances that both foilist and I would just magically happen to replace into this one with you! Small world.

[Hinduragi]

but how could you determine them to be the least likely to be mafiosi? How did you decide that by just the couple of posts they made?

Since you'd like an explanation of the towniest so far, it's because you guys are actually scumhunting and that's all I've heard from you.

It's not the fact that they're attacking me. It's the fact that they just jumped in and.. let's see.. archaebob has made about 3 posts total whereas foil has already gained a good amount of suspicion from me. Up to the post I had made, he wasn't exactly coming off as scummy. archaebob, on the other hand, has one post saying he'll read over the thread, one post stating his reasons for voting me, and one post describing his thoughts on your personality and playstyle.

Also, Shotty, I'm disappointed. You have said you'd hammer Good & Honest if you had the chance, called Prox and I a scum team, switched the scum team to Prox and Switz, and now that two new players come in and vote for me, you instantly switch your vote and call for a bandwagon from a specific player: Haylen. You don't hurt only yourself for this, but it makes it sound like you are giving Haylen an indirect reason to vote.

[Prox]

Sorry, but

V/LA Today & Tommorrow

I might be back sooner, perhaps even today, but there's a chance I might not, so...sorry.

[drmyshottyizsik]

drmyshottyizsik, I noticed the remarkable relation between Prox and Switz and you immediately announced that they were mafia partners; archaebob and foilist13 made accusations against Hinduragi and you agreed with them, too...

I know and i really wish there could be three scums... I read and re-read and re-re-read this thread and I have made my decision. And I have reasons.
For the first of who I think is the scum team is Prox and here's why

So, G&H, I suppose the first and most obvious question to ask before we think about lynching you for your playstyle: Are you scum?

He asked for a claim there is no denying that he asked for a claim.... BUT when he people called him out on it he said

Either way, I'm not really asking for a claim. I don't care as much about his role, as I do his alliance. Or is there not a difference?

NO there is not a difference! Asking hey are you scum or hey do you belong to the scum team makes no difference.
Next thing about Prox

I can see how that'll hurt the town in the long run. unvote; vote Good & Honest

BUT THEN WAIT!! He totally says something different here.

G&H's promise not to vote would make him a less dangerous scum. That, along with the fact that his playstyle is the only currently wrong thing about him, makes me want to decide not to lynch him.

Ok so here he says this as if he assumes G & H is scum but then says there's nothing scummy about him. Hmmmmmm... Why would you do that Prox? Ok so yes he would be a less dangerous scum, but he would be a more dangerous towny! Here, to me, it seems like Prox is thinking from the stand point of a mafioso. After saying it would hurt the town, he switches his view point and starts to not care for about the town.
Next on my list is this quote

Recap:

Shotty is accused of

1. Buddying
2. Contradicting (several times)
3. Opportunism
4. Trying to push away suspicion (repeatedly)

The case seems to be getting more and more solid. We should discuss this more before considering pushing him to L-1 (that's when people usually claim, right?). We're only at Page 5. The mafias I've looked at usually get around page 9.

This issue sparked up some fire later in the thread, but lets look at it from Prox's point of view as he wrote it.
(what i think happened.) Prox- "Oh look Hinduragi posted a really big bad thing about Shotty hmmmm... what should I do? Oh wait since i have nothing new to say and I am scum I will reiterate what hindu said and put it in a fancy list format so people will read it agree with me and vote him instead of ME!!! hahahahahahaha lawlz."
Next

I call OMGUS

First off this was pretty far into the game (his second to last post btw) and an OMGUS is either
A. If you are mafia- mafia members may use OMGUS votes to throw a random vote out without raising suspicion.
Or B. If you are a towny- Townies use an OMGUS as a random vote close to the start of a game to get discussion started.
LETS ALL THINK. Which did he do? *lightbulb* A!!!
Ok thats what i have on Prox, the person I think is his partner will be revealed in my next post.

[drmyshottyizsik]

The person I believe is his partned is *drum roll please*


I'm not sure. I read both Switz and Hinduragi's post and it seems to me that Switz simply calls it as he sees it, and Hindu is focusing on pressuring me and trying to get me to slip up.
I find neither of these all that scummy they just both make me angry when ever someone attacks me. Honestly if i had to pick right now i would put my vote at Foilist. He immediately attacked Hinduragi, then switched to G & H, I mean its one thing to scum hunt, but to all out try to destroy two people in 11 posts is a little over the top.

[archaebob]

@ good and honest -

And btw, I agree with foilist. You do need to vote, it's not acceptable to just refuse. It's not because we need you to help us lynch people, it's because a player's voting record is one of the most useful tools in determining their alignment. I have no way to read you right now.

The way scum is found in this game is by developing a psychological construction of how you would expect any given player to act based on the things they say and do in the thread. If a player is town, then all their actions will fit into that psychological construction. If they are scum, then they will do things that contradict how they would theoretically act if they were town. Error occurs when the scumhunter has an inaccurate construction of the player under scrutiny, or incorrectly interprets evidence as being either consistent or not consistent with that model.

For example, if Player A acts really combatively in the beginning of a game, insisting on being uncooperative and individualist in his scumhunting efforts, and then later in the game suddenly hops onto a bandwagon without really explaining why, then it is plausible that he is scum. Likewise, a normally malleable player who categorically refuses to answer a specific question is also a likely scum candidate. Therefore, all successful scumhunting boils down to the ability of the town players to form accurate constructions of other player's mentalities.

You, G&H, are playing in a manner that makes this process virtually impossible. Here's why:

1) Your style of play is utterly controlled and scripted -

Nothing that you write is spontaneous and human, because all your thoughts are first processed through this "good and honest" character before being exposed in the thread. In fact, your style of play is essentially to mention everything that could possibly be mentioned in the most logical and non-confrontational way possible. It's almost as if your playstyle has been designed specifically to be easily kept consistent regardless of whether you are town or scum. This makes you unreadable.

2) You do not vote, make suspect lists, or actually attack anyone -

This means that the other primary way of scum-hunting, namely, finding inconsistencies in your dealings with the other players, is also useless against you. By not ever declaring in any hardline, objective way who you want to see lynched, you avoid creating any pattern of suspicions against which your alignment could be measured.

Now, I know you think discussion and comments should be an equally viable substitute for votes in this context. It's not. Believe me, it really isn't. Play that is predicated primarily on commenting lends itself to revisionist defenses, since there is no way we can prove one way or another what you actually meant by anything you said. Votes provide a solid record of who you most wanted to lynch at any given moment. This is much harder evidence to twist around, because each vote actually puts its subject incrementally closer to being lynched. Comments do nothing.

And finally, it's not just about you helping us lynch, or us getting a read on you. Information is created by votes in general. If you vote somebody, they might react to that vote in a way the gives us more information about their alignment. Comments do not apply pressure nearly as much as a vote does. As a result, having one player who simply abstains from voting for the entire game drastically reduces the amount of information that the town has.

You need to vote. Period.

Please don't get yourself killed over this stupid point. As you already know, my enjoying your company in this game is far more important than you sticking to these shenanigans that you've laid out for yourself.

[drmyshottyizsik]

@ Bob, I agree with this statement, but is it worth the Mafia getting a free night kill if we lynch G & H

[Prox]

I'm back.

Before I re-read, I'd like to note that unless G&H is scummy, he's not a good lynch for today.

On a further note, my opinions on G&H "contradicted" only because I changed my mind. I was undecided, and then became decided. I will stay decided.

[foilist13]

G&H is not scummy, however we have no choice but to lynch him if he does not change his playing habits. I don't think you fully grasp that there is not another option.

[silverbullet999]

*Hopes Good actually throws a vote down or something of that sort*

Good what's your record with this playstyle btw?

[Prox]

Hey, I'm here. In a bad mood if it shows.

Hi, these are my thoughts/responses to the game, as I read them (I didn't go back and make these posts). Keep that in mind as you read.

My point of that "attack" on you was not to attack you it was to prove how silly your claims were.

Bull. The point of your attack was to attack me for attacking you. If it wasn't an attack meant to attack me, why did you vote for me? Please note that the bulk of your "attack" on me was focused on using the same points I did against you.

ok i did miss understand you here, but you just contradicted your self again. You just explained how ask for his alliance is like asking for a claim,,,,,, but earlier you have repeatedly said you didn't ask for a claim.

I call Misrep.

This post does not compare alliance to role, but contrasts the two. I did not ask for a claim; I asked for alliance.

I used the exact same points on you that you used on me. I used logical points to defend myself and then attack you. So if you are calling me scummy, then you have a problem with yourself.

You said the points were silly...
Aside from that, the difference between my attack and yours is that it didn't also serve as a defense.

I am going after you and this isn't easy at all. You are the one who has it easy trying to attack me.

This doesn't discredit the opportunism of your previous votes. Also, it tends to be easier to attack scummy people than it is to attack less scummy people. That should be obvious.

I bond, i don't buddy up . Buddying up is choosing a single buddy to befriend and share blame with.

It'd be better to define bonding than to give an inaccurate definition to something who's definition I already linked you to.

Note: This defense seems to be focused on moving the attention to me rather than defending yourself.

YESSSS, but it won't happen, and if it did then i would be getting pressure to hammer. I don't like his style, at all and i find it anti-town the first half of the game, Also if we lynched him we could stopped talking about lynching him and get on with the game.

Or we could just stop talking about it. This is stupid. It's like your saying "just because I want this guy to be lynched, it's better to go ahead and lynch him so we can go ahead and focus on lynching someone scummy". Just...wow.

To tell you the truth, I'm not really comfortable with talking about suspects in general.

Ok, this is where I draw the line. If you aren't going to vote OR talk about suspects, how are we going to know your opinion???

Later you said to Prox: "If you attack me I will attack back, it's how it works man". I can't agree with that. Not everyone who accuses you of something in a game is going to be a mafioso.

This is nice to say. You should bold things like these so I'll be more likely to read them. Nonetheless, how does this things shotty make you feel? Do you think he's scummy? Do you think he's cool? Both? Hm..?

Why do you say "WE" - I don't think anyone else has stated that they want me to contribute in a particular manner?

He just assumed. Correctly, too. Take it from me. I also want you to contribute in a particular manner. But I'm good on tolerance.

For now.

Each time you have mentioned Prox, you have done one of two things - either agreed with Prox about something or defended Prox from something said by Haylen or drmyshottyizsik. On the other hand, so far Prox has mentioned you a total of ZERO times!

I'm against buddying.

SCUM TEAM: Prox and Switz.

This is why I talk more about you in this post than anyone else. Switz doesn't say stuff like this. He makes sense. I don't have to tell him that. I focus on people like...you. People I have a problem with, ya'know?

I guess that's a "be careful what you wish for" moment. But here's the truth: I'm "defending" Prox because Prox is scumhunting, I agree with the evidence he's turned up, and no one's provided a convincing case against him. To a lesser extent, I suppose I'd support Hinduragi as well, although he hasn't had a strong case against him and hasn't done as much scumhunting.

Aw, shucks. Sorry, I just had to say this. Won't mention you again. Unless you do something dynamic/scummy.

Now I also noticed that in the same post this quote was excerpted from you accused me of being mafia and partnering with Prox. Just now, I see that you accused Prox of partnering with Switz. Would you explain this please?

You see, this game is split into two factions. The people who think shotty is scummy, and the people who are too inactive/quiet to say/think so. The first faction is the one that we all need to try to lynch.

@ Goodface - Listen, whoever the fuck you are, I love that you're trying out this pretty little pet experiment of yours on this totally obvious multiple account, but it's annoying as hell. Just saying.

9th.

Jeez, your terrified, aren't you? I can almost feel your fingers physically trembling as you write this. This type of nervous energy, of way overdoing your efforts to sound logical and consistent and unabrasive is text-book, and I mean text-book scum. How many times in this post do you say something, and then immediately qualify it to make sure you haven't left yourself open to attack? A lot.

You'll have to convince me to believe that only scum can do this.

Please try super hard not to lynch either of us, as we're just getting warmed up here with this whole scumhunting thing.

By either of us, I think you mean foilist? Either way, I hope to have some of the fun for me, too.

Town almost never keep that cool of a head under fire.

Are you sure?

PROX!!!

Tunnelling?

G&H is not scummy, however we have no choice but to lynch him if he does not change his playing habits. I don't think you fully grasp that there is not another option.

Sigh. You're probably right.


Shotty's probably just vindictive. Either way, the pressure is gone. I need to think, now.

I be back ASAP, but I won't be able to post my thoughts tonight.

[drmyshottyizsik]

My point of that "attack" on you was not to attack you it was to prove how silly your claims were.

Bull. The point of your attack was to attack me for attacking you. If it wasn't an attack meant to attack me, why did you vote for me? Please note that the bulk of your "attack" on me was focused on using the same points I did against you.

I used the exact same points on you that you used on me. I used logical points to defend myself and then attack you. So if you are calling me scummy, then you have a problem with yourself.

You said the points were silly...

You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...
You said the points were silly...!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly!! I attack you using the same logic that you used against me, neither of us had a valid point, thus silly.
And I voted for you because of the same logic that you voted for me.

[Switz]

@Silverbullet:

The only other thing jumping out at me is that he's spent most of his time focusing on trying to translate one statement Shotty's made, and is just agreeing with the arguments.

Could you sort of clarify on this a bit more? I would understand if you said I've been focusing on Shotty's attitude with lynching/voting Good... but I don't know if that's what you mean.

Shotty's attitude is what I'm talking about here, I suppose. What caught my eye is that series of posts where you keep trying to get Shotty to answer your question about whether he would have hammered G&H if he got to L-1. Looking at it again though, it's not especially scummy, since most of those posts were trying to get Shotty's attention. As long as we're discussing it, though, did you ever get a satisfactory response?

@Arch:

I can understand your argument against Hinduragi, but I'm not sure I necessarily agree with it. Couldn't his self-analyzing, overly-qualifying writing style be an indicator that he's newbtown as much as newbscum? The way I'm reading it, those same efforts to sound logical seem more like a less experienced townie trying to make their arguments sound logical so the rest of the town will follow them. Not to mention the remainder of Hinduragi's posts aren't seeming especially scummy to me. Are there any other scumtells you're picking up in his play thus far?

And what do you think of Hinduragi's response to your questions? You don't reference them at all in your next post, where you're attacking G&H instead (an attack I'm growing to agree with, btw).

@Foilist:

I really have no idea what to think of you yet. On the one hand, you and Arch are starting to turn me around on what to do with G&H. As scummy as I think Shotty's playing, G&H is appearing to be more of a danger to the town so far.

But then you're trying to push the Hinduragi wagon for a while, which I really don't think has much logic or evidence behind it. You eventually begin to focus on G&H again, but your accusations on Hinduragi strike me as taking advantage of another's good-sounding argument. The fact that Shotty too jumps on it only accents that, both votes seem like the same sort of opportunistic action.

Also, what is the rationale for you FoSing me? Was it tied to the earlier post (which doesn't seem justified) or did you just throw it out there for no reason at the top of page 8?

@Shotty:

Shotty, you've now managed to jump on practically every bandwagon possible except the one on you. You immediately support Arch against Hinduragi (who, coincidentally enough, is attacking you) and as soon as Hinduragi posts his rebuttal, you jump off and are soon going against Foilist. And speaking of which...

I find neither of these all that scummy they just both make me angry when ever someone attacks me. Honestly if i had to pick right now i would put my vote at Foilist. He immediately attacked Hinduragi, then switched to G & H, I mean its one thing to scum hunt, but to all out try to destroy two people in 11 posts is a little over the top.

If you think Foilist deserves a vote then why the hell don't you vote for him? I mean he has no votes at all right now, yours won't push him over the edge. Softvoting (or whatever the term actually is) is scummy. Also, you describing Foilist as someone who attacks one person right away and then switches to another is a nice example of the pot calling the kettle black, don't you think?

@Hinduragi:

While I do generally disagree with the bandwagon against you, I do think that you're not doing enough to actually defend yourself. Arch and Foil (and Shotty, to a certain extent) all have accused you of being scum, and all you've done in response is calmly answered their questions. That's good, but it's really not enough to clear you. You're off my list of targets for now, but I will be keeping an eye on you.

@Haylen:

Before/during your reread, I'd really appreciate it if you could answer this question Prox asked earlier; you don't have many posts and this one jumps out at me.

Nice.

So, G&H, I suppose the first and most obvious question to ask before we think about lynching you for your playstyle: Are you scum?

Why are we asking for a claim on Day One? I call rolefishing

Unvote
Vote Prox

I still don't get it. Did you say this to evoke a response from me, or because there wasn't much there to vote for and you wanted to end the RVS, or because you wanted to misrep me?

I don't see how someone with so much expirience could misinterpret me in this way.

FoS

@Prox:

I'd comment on your rebuttal to Shotty but everyone knows we're scumbuddies now so I won't bother. [/sarcasm]

@G&H:

At this point, I think I'm going to have to side with Foilist and Arch. If you don't take a more active (read: voting and actually scumhunting) role, we're going to have to get rid of you, because you're a liability to the town.

Unvote, Vote: G&H

[KittyMo]

[2] drmyshottyizsik - (Hinduragi, Prox)

[2] Hinduragi - (archaebob, drmyshottyizsik)
[2] Good and Honest - (foilist13, Switz)
[1] Prox - (Haylen)

[0] archaebob - ()
[0] foilist13 - ()
[0] Haylen - ()
[0] silverbullet999 - ()
[0] Switz - ()

[2]

Not Voting

- (Good and Honest, silverbullet999)

With

9

alive, it's

5

to lynch!

Deadline is at Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 9:00:00 PM (Los Angeles time)

Flavor

(that girl isn't me, if you were wondering, though that is my cat)

[drmyshottyizsik]

MOD: Switz changed votes right before your count.

*thanks for kitties =)

Riiiiight. >>; I fail at skimming walls of text when I have a headache; my apologies. Thanks for telling me! ~KittyMo

[silverbullet999]

@Switz

As long as we're discussing it, though, did you ever get a satisfactory response?

Not sure if it was satisfactory? But in my mind I was happy with his answer and thus haven't pursued it further.

[Hinduragi]

@G&H: You should really reconsider your playing style. If you're scum, it really would be next to impossible to tell just wtf your true intentions are. It makes the game less enjoyable for others since there is no way to see what your intentions and actions would be. You can say whatever you like about one player, but when it comes down to it, you may want said player to survive because he's your scumbuddy and you'd never even consider voting for him. But we wouldn't know that anyways because you don't vote or even make a suspect list. To hell with even considering you'd give out a claim L-1 since you already shot that down when Prox asked you about it and you answered in G&H Iso 2.

The idea is that since I want to always be honest in a game of Mafia, I would be expected to answer a question about my role in a game. However, Prox later did find out that in my first game I have addressed this situation and that I'll remain silent when I'm asked this question.

When it comes down to it, I'm not sure if PL'ing G&H is really in the best interest of the town since there's a 22% chance he's scum. The thing is, noone would be able to get an accurate read on him unless we had a cop.

Let me review my thoughts on his playstyle once more to be sure if I want to bandwagon on something with a 78% fail rate:
-Will only vote if there's a 100% chance for him to be sure if the player he's voting for is scum. (This would be okay in a newbie game if we have a cop. In other games, he'd never vote because it could be an insane cop and the cop wouldn't know he's insane. Just too many possibilities for him to not be 100% sure about voting. However, for this game, it would be alright. However, this means no D1 vote. If he's scum, we won't know shit about him come D2.)
-Won't ever claim. We'd never figure out his true role.
-Will be honest. (Doesn't mean shit either. If we lynch him and he's scum, he could just as easily be as hypocritical to his scumbuddy as he is to a townie)
-Has fairly long posts. No content that could hint at an actual alliance, role, or any suspicions will be in it.(Again, this won't help for shit)

For now, I'm going to ask G&H one last thing: Will you change to a playstyle that would be enjoyable for you that can also give us a read on you?

If you say no, I'll fully support a lynch on you.

For those wondering why my viewpoints on G&H have changed, I got bored and wanted to see how other games on ms were like. I looked at some and read through them and realized just how ridiculous G&H's playstyle would have been if he was in any of the games.

[foilist13]

@Hinduragi: You are so scummy. I'm not even sure I can explain how scummy you are. Everything about that last post is clearly designed to avoid drawing an attack.

unvote, vote:hinduragi

My hope right now is that a cop will investigate G&H and take the pressure off us having to lynch him. If that does not happen though, then we have no choice but to lynch him.

@Switz: I'll get to you later.

[Hinduragi]

@Hinduragi: You are so scummy. I'm not even sure I can explain how scummy you are. Everything about that last post is clearly designed to avoid drawing an attack.

Go ahead and try to explain it then. I'm sure it's suspicious, though. I knew that before I posted it. As for avoiding an attack, no. I said earlier that I thought G&H's playstyle wasn't something to lynch for. I changed my mind after reading through other mafia games. It's as simple as that. I already figured out what you do. You haven't even listed any reasons or statements from bob you agree with. You just voted me. As for voting G&H, yes, everyone's listed reasons. I can see how that would work out.

It is clear that you are trying unbelievably hard to avoid attracting animosity or attention.

And I'm doing the opposite now and that makes me suspicious too. Awesome. You'd vote me no matter what I do.

See, now I'm becoming more convinced that you are scum. Town almost never keep that cool of a head under fire, which means you are infact trying to appease us rarer than convince us our views are wrong. No townie ever thanked someone for attacking them. You are scum. I'm sorry you got caught this quickly, but you do what you gotta do, ya know?

Now we have to figure out who your scum partner is...

If you were so sure I was scum when you posted that, I see no reason to vote for someone you can't read.

[foilist13]

Look at your post.

Go ahead and try to explain it then. I'm sure it's suspicious, though.

This is one of many many examples. Look at the way you structure your response. If you were a townie you would be adamant that I am wrong. You however, have chosen to say there is merit to my suspicion, but I just happen to be wrong. That is classic scum mentality. Rather than attack my argument or me, you tried to diffuse the situation by appeasing me and being nice to me. This has absolutely nothing to do with the content of your posts, who you're attacking, or who you suspect. This is about the simple structure of your writing and your attitude towards the other players. You have a scum mentality.