MOD EDIT:
Off the mark: 1 (ces)
Eletriar 1 (the fonz)
inhim: 2 (Daquian IH)
CES: 1 (Pie)
1.Dodgy wasn't lying about his experience. He has been here this long. So he should not have acted like that.OTM wrote:Man, IH is now looking scummy to me after that argument. Perhaps I am just paranoid.1Dodgy was clearly certifiably nuts, so I don't know how much analysis of his posts is helpful. From my read-through, I got the feeling he was just plain pissed off about the suspicion he was getting from Fonz and Dasquain.2Now, if he was mafia, why he would he get pissed off enough to quit the game over being "found out"? It doesn't make sense to get pissed off over your opponent's good play unless you are 5 years old.3The scenario of Dodgy being pro-town and getting pissed about Fonz's "scumtrap" seems more logical to me. I could be totally wrong, like I said it is tough to analyze the postings of a crazy man. If he is scum, then he is INCREDIBLY immature and I guess I just like to give people a little more credit than that - even people who are nuts.
It also doesn't help, from my perspective, that IH is defending other people who have tripped my scumdar, Nanook and Kilem.
Yes, it seemed desperate, yet the whole time he did not use an illogical argument, he did not back down and stood by his stance, did he not? Not to mention that points and arguments he brought up in the beginning of the game.Inhim wrote:And, even with it, I still want to lynch kilmenator. IH, I guess fault me for not knowing The Fonz "uses metas more," but I think in this game he's scummy for pushing his argument for so long. It just cries of a desperate attempt.
WOW RUDEIH wrote: 2.WIFOM, this is null imo, especially with some of the arguments Dodgy was throwing around.3.They were logical points, and not a "scumtrap", clearly you did not read those posts.
WIFOM applies to scum posting within the game who are trying to be deceitful. You can't use it in regard to meta-game actions, like quitting and throwing a hissyfit. Sure it's possible Dodgy was still "playing" the game throughout his whole tantrum, but I don't find that likely.
QFT.The Fonz wrote: If we're talking blindly following experienced players, try Sweenytodd on for size. I unvoted upon his replacement, but combine InHim's 'I think this day has run its course' when the mod had just told us there's another replacement coming who won't be able to contribute immediately, and saying he would be happy, albeit with warning, to hammer someone on whom he hasn't even attempted to state a case, and he looks scummy as anything.
I never saw a scumtrap. Would you quote it for me this is what I was questioning and saying you didn't read about.OTM wrote:I read through the entire thread, bub. All the logical points were building off the suspicion generated by the scumtrap. There was a whole avalanche of arguing there, but the scumtrap was the snowball that started it.
That's a scumtrap.The Fonz wrote: Nowhere in particular. But Dodgy's complete overreaction was exactly the kind of thing I was hoping for when placing my third vote. I can't speak for Dasquian, as I probably wouldn't have placed that vote.
Plus, Dasquian's quickly following-on with the fourth vote allows us to have the mini equivalent of the 'second vote debate' in newbies.
Unvote
Vote: Dodgy
No, I did not say a specific reaction. I said a reaction like that, which starts conversation.OfftheMark wrote:Now you're just talking semantics. To me, if I take an action while looking for a specific reaction from scum, that's a scumtrap.
It was the kind of thing he was hoping for. What would have happened had Dodgy not responded in the way? The game would have stalled.TheFonz wrote:Nowhere in particular.But Dodgy's complete overreaction was exactly the kind of thing I was hoping for when placing my third vote. I can't speak for Dasquian, as I probably wouldn't have placed that vote.
Plus, Dasquian's quickly following-on with the fourth vote allows us to have the mini equivalent of the 'second vote debate' in newbies.
Unvote
Vote: Dodgy
He didn't back down, true, which is part of why (as I mentioned with my unvote) I backed off forIH wrote:Yes, it seemed desperate, yet the whole time he did not use an illogical argument, he did not back down and stood by his stance, did he not? Not to mention that points and arguments he brought up in the beginning of the game.
Pretty sure my suspicions of pete d have been right where I left them. But good job trying to clear your partner's name, again. Also, I don't believe I said you were "more town" but rather that I'd let you be for Today.The Fonz wrote:If we're talking blindly following experienced players, try Sweenytodd on for size. I unvoted upon his replacement, but combine InHim's 'I think this day has run its course' when the mod had just told us there's another replacement coming who won't be able to contribute immediately, and saying he would be happy, albeit with warning, to hammer someone on whom he hasn't even attempted to state a case, and he looks scummy as anything. He stated that he found me more town now due to my responses, but what on Earth happened to his suspicions of pete d?
Eh, maybe if I feel it's justified.@InHim: Please put in order of most-least likely to be scum and why:
Me
Pete
OTM
Kilmenator
No, thats not why he got mad. He repeatedly stated he got mad because a more inexperienced player was accusing him of things.Off The Mark wrote:The reason is could be an alignment indicator, is because Dodgy got pissed. And it makes more sense, to me, to get pissed when you are a townie stumbling into another townie's scumtrap (perhaps a poorly planned one) and then as a result Fonz says "Haha look who I caught!" But it is also a possibility that Dodgy is simply a sore loser and he got pissed for being legitimately found out as scum. That seems incredibly immature, like I said.
If this is the case against me, you basically just called CES scum, because I am distancing from him... and you think I am scum... that doesnt make much sense at all...pete d wrote:Pretty much as per my previous post. I think you stayed out of discussion for the most part and haven't commited to anything; your posts in regard to theCES situation seem to be trying to put pressure on whilst keeping yourself distanced.
the switch was not necessarily a switch, scum are bound to play WIFOM with us or they are going to kill CES... either way, I wasnt following the Fonz, I was stating my opinions.gorckat wrote:EBWOP: That should be NK'd, not lynched.
Like I said, I ahve been busy, so my content has been down, plus I am involved in way to many games at this point, but voting me because my suspicions are not what you think, doesnt make me scum, maybe I just look at things from a different perspecitve. And who is it that I have been suspicious of that you have not thought was suspicious?Off the Mark wrote:The player who is consistently showing up on my scumdar is kilmenator. She has not posted a lot of content and when she does, her suspicions tend to run counter to my own, so that is where I am most comfortable placing my vote.
vote: kilmenator
So how do we get any information from a crappy reason to lynch, with no useful interactions?Nanook wrote:The only case I see against Kilm is that he's posted a total of 5 times since May 14th, all consisting of 2 sentences or less, and his last two posts both stated that he'd read the thread and get back to us .. One on May 30th, the other today.
I'm sure there are other reasons prior in the game, but from what I see of a quick glance of just his posts, that's what I got.
Um, no, what I meant was that you were keeping yourself distanced from the situation, not from him. If I thought CES was scum, I'd say so.kilmenator wrote:If this is the case against me, you basically just called CES scum, because I am distancing from him... and you think I am scum... that doesnt make much sense at all...
So why aren't you voting for CES.kilmenator wrote:CES- DOdgy was scummy, and then the claim was retracted, and now he is just flying under the radar for the most part, most of his posts have been pretty useless and have added nothing. Also, the LAL applies here for me, because retracting a claim, pretty much means the first player lied, therefore making that person a liar.