Mini 572 - Packrats (game over)

[Mizzy]

Oh for heaven's sake, this is why I hate meta. It's clouding a perfectly good game, and no matter how you look at it, clouding the game is only good for scum.

FoS: Skruffs

for not leaving past grudges behind back in the games they belong in, drawing focus away from the two scum candidates, and being tunnel-visioned. Zindaras' role/alignment in other games has absolutely no baring on his role/alignment in this one. Get past it.

Capricious:

What the hell were those beanpoles you tried to pass off as posts/content? There's a case against you and you're on the lynchlist of at least two people, and that's ALL you can muster? Eesh. And by the way, your opinion that my opinion is false is bullshit.

[Ether]

3 Andycyca (Capricious, Skruffs, Elmo)
3 Rotten Snitch (Mizzy, Andycyca, Sir Tornado)
1 Capricious (eldarad)

4 Unvote (hasdgfas, Rotten Snitch, Y, Zindaras)

11 alive; 6 to lynch.

[Rotten Snitch]

I actually like the Skruffs / Zindaras conversation going on here. But it does not prove anything as to alignment. Again with the Meta. 

I made a brief read through most of the early parts was completely random in my opinion. The whole Meta crap… talk about muddying up the waters. Places suspicions but gives no evidence.

@ Elmo post 46 – You voted me for no reason Hasdgfas in the next post called you out on it.
“voting for a self-voter, eh elmo? How often do you find them to be scum?”
Elmo post 51 - That's not why I voted him, cow.
Why did you vote me?
If indeed my rant on Skruffs came off as scummy, this was well before your vote on me. You had no other reason for voting me. You make a sarcastic remark at Capricious for voting Andycyca and then follow him on Andy’s bandwagon.

Mizzy - Eldrad I haven’t disappeared, just had one hell of a weekend.

FoS Elmo

for getting too excited about bandwagons and really not explaining your reason for wanting to starting one.

[Zindaras]

Why do you like the conversation, Snitch?

[Skruffs]

FoS: Skruffs

for not leaving past grudges behind back in the games they belong in, drawing focus away from the two scum candidates, and being tunnel-visioned. Zindaras' role/alignment in other games has absolutely no baring on his role/alignment in this one. Get past it.

okay, but if you actually looked at my post you would see:

So,

regardless of the fact that you have been scum recently, my actual basis for suspicion on you is on your play in this game

. If you tend to start bad bandwagons as town in other games, give me an example or two. But if you want me to just say "Oh it's zindaras, yay, so happy to see you" then you can forget it, I've been burned and I'm not giving you any benefits until I have a good reason to; a reason, through your actions this game, that you are not giving me.

Mizzy just took Zindaras's "Skruffs says I'm scum because I'm always scum" quote and ran with it, and ignored everything else I said. I think that's called strawmanning, right?

And if you want me to drop the meta, why didn't you scold Zindaras for:
"Sir T obviously fails to acknowledge my personality, don't know if it's scum stubbornness or simply town paranoia."

This is why I said he is playing like a superstar: He's tried to use his *undescribed* personality as a reason to change people's opinions at least twice so far this game; and I don't like that. And I really don't like how you are being two faced about this, MIzzy.


Before I say anything, I want to suggest

and even discouraging other players from doing so.

You can make assertions, but you have to back them up.

"Elmo is giving me "cruise"-vibes. He's basically cruising through the game without really saying anything. " <- was this backed up?

"Why put worthless info in the thread? " <- worthless by your dictation.
'it seems like Y is overanalyzing"
"though Capricious is doing some silly speculation, in my opinion"
"Andycyca's 123 is odd, as pointed out before. Easy talk about distancing." "Skruffs's 130 is flat-out worthless."
"Rotten Snitch's 135 is actually an example of pure WIFOM. Don't see those often. "


None of these comments actually adress anything being said, or encourage discusion at all. The ones that aren't actually denigratory are reviews so vague that there is nothing that can be pulled out of them.

Attempt to look ::wise:: without putting yourself in a position to be analyzed. IE flying under the radar.

Oh. So how can my post not be analyzed?

Never said it couldn't be, I said it was designed NOT to be. Look town without drawing attention to yourself. HOW is that not a scum tell?

and after starting the game the exact same way as you did in a Third game, that you were scum in, in which you started by voting me for a bad reason then dropped it to look town later on.

I've posted this before (where you completely ignored it), but the behaviour in California was completely different from this game. I started off in both games with a joke vote on you. In California, I expanded upon it, actually forcing a wagon and flinging out whatever crap-argument there was.[/quote]
And then you dropped it, when the wagon got tight, and started defending the very person you helped build a case on.

Compared to this game, where I immediately dropped it the next post and went on to other things, there's really no basis for comparison.

Yes, but, you dropped it right after I pointed it out, didn't you? If it was a joking random vote, why did you immediately retract it when I drew similarities between this game and another in which you were scum?

And you didn't drop it, because a few posts later, you popped up with:

I converted Skruffs.
*waits for Cult accusations*

SO you didn't QUITE drop it because you later on did a jokey-attempt at trying to draw attention back to us anyways. ANd I hate things like that because they look innocuous until you are dead and scum and people start analyzing your posts to find ties to people. You're not paragon but you DO know how to play; you've been in over a hundred games, so why would you intentionally lay out breadcrumbs like that?

And then add to that the fact that there is no reason to consider it odd behaviour to begin with.

Oh. Well. If you say so, it must be true - right Mizzy?

We have actually only played three games from the start together (so only three random voting phases). In the third game (Newbie 293), I started by voting voidybuns.

Did you say that she was scum when you did? Did you make a joke about it? How long did it last?

So, regardless of the fact that you have been scum recently, my actual basis for suspicion on you is on your play in this game.

If you tend to start bad bandwagons as town in other games, give me an example or two.

But if you want me to just say "Oh it's zindaras, yay, so happy to see you" then you can forget it, I've been burned and I'm not giving you any benefits until I have a good reason to; a reason, through your actions this game, that you are not giving me.

Starting bad bandwagons? Now, this amuses me, here. Where the hell did I start a 'wagon on you here? You mean Mizzy's vote, which was definitely influenced by mine?

Starting a wagon does not mean getting a wagon off the ground. ANd you ignored about 75% of those paragraphs; which I think should be relevant to you since you seem to eb trying to get people to think of you specially since you have some sort of 'great personality'.

All you have been saying so far about me this game have been spurious reasons for finding me scummy, laced with lies. For example:

Not really. Me and Zindaras have a history, a history in which he wwas factually scum every time but one. So I am trained to be suspicious of him now. I'm still posting out side of that suspicion, but as the number of players dwindle, the more likely i will be to push for his lynch.

"Factually scum every time but one."

Let's check some of the facts here.

Skruffs's games where he was in with me (taken from his current Wiki, which I assume is updated better than mine):
Newbie 293: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Town.
Open 20: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum. <-counted this one

Open 35: Big Love

[: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Scum. <- you replaced out of this one almost as soon as I replaced in, we didn't play together so I didn't count it.
Famous Cats Mafia: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town. <- I had forgotten this one, but I shouldn't have, this is the game you tried to get me lynched despite having multiple investigations clearing me.

Mostly Mute Mafia: Haiku Edition

: Skruffs=Scum, Zindaras=Town. <- You were not in this game while I was in it, I didn't count it.

Mafia 68: Ork Mafia

: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town. <- you were not in this game while I was in it, I didnt count it.

Two-Headed Mafia 2

: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town. <-we were the exact same role, there was no way we could fight each other, I didnt count it.
Meadows of Sorrow Mafia: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum. <-
California: Dantes in Fresno: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Scum. <- the most recent game played and so the bulk of my opinion of your playstyle is based on it.
Kingmaker II: Skruffs=Town, Zindaras=Town. <-the last game I trusted you in.

I know you will cry "You're changing the facts", but the facts change significantly if you look at games where we ACTUALLY PLAYED each other (which are the games that affect my opinion of your game play) versus just games that we both were in at one point or another. The basis of my previous experience with you is in fact based on:
Skruffs's Scum Ratio: 1/6 (17%)
Zindaras's Scum Ratio:

3/6

(50%)
I had forgotten about Kingmaker, because I replaced in close to twilight and died that night.

So, what do we find? Skruffs is pushing the "Zindie is always scum" angle so he can't be held accountable when I turn up town, yet his "facts" are, in fact, lies.[/quote]

You are pushing the "Skruffs is trying to say I'm always scum" angle publicly and ignoring the questions I am asking one - on - one. You're not talking to me, you're talking to everyone else; which suggests that you are not responding to my posts as a way to reassure me but rather as a way to lower other player's opinions of my ability to catch scum.

[Skruffs]

Additionally: It being Day 1, I am purging my system of all the meta-game material and such so that it is out there, and like i said earlier, can be addressed and dismissed. I am pretty sure that everyone would prefer to play stupidly day one rather than day five, and if my beginning assessments are considered in error, than I will continue that. Considering I know Rotten Snitch in real life, I thought it *was* meritted to bring up any information about the game that happened before hand; Zindaras was in the chat room when I Was talking about it with Ether and it's amusing that he is immediately suggesting that I not speculate on who killed her when (of course) that speculation would lead back to him if it was pursued. Of course it also leads back to me and Rotten Snitch, too.

Because I brought that up, I also brought up the meta-analysis on Zindaras. Regardless of that, he *IS* acting fishy, and metas aside I *am not happy* With the way he's playing, it's REALLY getting to me. Mizy has shown up as his buddybuddy, so I am going to investigate her, next. I also have a nother meta I just researched which tells me Zindaras is probably town, but I digress. This is why I am going to investigate mizzy. Her last post struck me as a defensive scum buddy.

[Rotten Snitch]

Why do I like the Skruffs / Zindaras conversation?
It looks like you take one part Meta, add an equal part of the current game. Mix it up, a teaspoon or so of sarcasm. Put it on the back burner for a couple of posts and you just provided a case against someone.

Skruffs has been pestering Zindaras all game and Zin finally broke down and went for the bait. But I still don’t see anything more solid than the possibility that this game will be like the others……

I just see it as planting seeds in others heads of possibilities you cannot prove until lynching or NK's. Which also allows you to back out in day two by saying you never actually saw anything scummy in the current game just in his or her past games.

[Mizzy]

okay, but if you actually looked at my post you would see:

So,

regardless of the fact that you have been scum recently, my actual basis for suspicion on you is on your play in this game

. If you tend to start bad bandwagons as town in other games, give me an example or two. But if you want me to just say "Oh it's zindaras, yay, so happy to see you" then you can forget it, I've been burned and I'm not giving you any benefits until I have a good reason to; a reason, through your actions this game, that you are not giving me.

Mizzy just took Zindaras's "Skruffs says I'm scum because I'm always scum" quote and ran with it, and ignored everything else I said. I think that's called strawmanning, right?

Heh, good try, but I DID read that and find it to be complete and utter crap. Show me a nicely laid out case against him from this game and I'd be glad to listen. So far all I see you two doing is arguing semantics and meta.

And if you want me to drop the meta, why didn't you scold Zindaras for:
"Sir T obviously fails to acknowledge my personality, don't know if it's scum stubbornness or simply town paranoia."

Because I don't scold adults. I just call the shots as I see them. Honestly, I have been complaining about the meta crap in general, but (and I realize this is a bit hypocritical, trust me) personality is important to games to me, too. I play the same way in all my games, and when you play with certain players who have a very bold personality, it's important to keep that in mind.

This is why I said he is playing like a superstar: He's tried to use his *undescribed* personality as a reason to change people's opinions at least twice so far this game; and I don't like that. And I really don't like how you are being two faced about this, MIzzy.

I don't really find what he's done as scummy...it's just my opinion. What I find scummy is your quip earlier about, "Ooh, he was promised a scum role" followed by this "I don't trust him because he's always scum."

I don't mind listening to legitimate cases against people, I really don't. I can see why you don't like his "personality" defense, but that one thing isn't nearly enough for me to do anything than

IGMEOY: Zin

, whereas your "superstar" play leads me to want to vote for you. (I'm not voting for you yet because I don't like flipflopping votes and I want to see some more from RS before I unvote him.)

Rotten:

Wb and I hope things are okay with you IRL. My vote is still currently on you but I'll be watching how you post very closely and if I see a change in your over-defensiveness, I will consider unvoting post haste. I also want to see your thoughts on Skruff's meta-posts and on all the smoke-and-mirror play that has been done to pull attention off of you and Capricious.

[hasdgfas]

Caprcious's posts 192-195 are a load of crap. You can't seriously pass that off as the best contribution you can muster, in addition to 194 being full of Craplogic(TM). I'm very confident in you being scum, because if you were town, I feel you would have found other things to comment on besides just what you did. There has been lots of discussion since your previous posts, and

that

is what you comment on?

vote: Capricious

Can someone point me to the case against Andycyca? Because I really don't see it.

[Rotten Snitch]

Mizzy- I actually don't think Skruffs is trying to pull the attention away from me. I think he is waiting on a better time to bring the heat back on me. I don't know what his intentions are now but he was too quick to write me off like he did. I will admit that my previous posts seemed scumy although it was not my intent. I saw something in Skruffs posts. Although it was WIFOMy on my part I apologize. I still get a tingle when I read Skruffs posts.......call it love.... or call it suspicion.

[Skruffs]

Mizzy:
You are saying that I am using Smoke and Mirrors to pull attention from two other players; which begs the question: Why are you so deadset in having one of only two people lynched today and so against explorations into other venues? Do you have a vested interest in other players NOT being investigated/criticized?

[Skruffs]

I'm not saying zin's superstar/personality things are lynch worthy, I am asking for people to

IGMEOY

Zindaras - the idea of which seems to really ruffle Mizzy.

[Skruffs]

And if you want me to drop the meta, why didn't you scold Zindaras for:
"Sir T obviously fails to acknowledge my personality, don't know if it's scum stubbornness or simply town paranoia."

Because I don't scold adults. I just call the shots as I see them. Honestly, I have been complaining about the meta crap in general, but (and I realize this is a bit hypocritical, trust me) personality is important to games to me, too.

What are you saying here? That I'm not an adult? That Zindaras isn't trying to coerce Sir T to meta him? That Zindaras *is* using a meta to clear himself, and that's okay, but it's not okay for me to bring meta in as part of my reasons for suspicions of him? You realize I am analysing Zindaras's

personality

as town or as scum, as the basis for the perceived meta, right?

Also: The "Give me a well thought out case" means nothing to me and is usually a scum tell: you are putting the basis of whether something is a good case solely to be judged by your own discretion, and you are saying in the above post that your discretion is based on a player-by-player basis.

If I said "Give me enough money and I will give you a kiss", I've eestablished two things:
1) the amount of money needed for a kiss is a variable; otherwise I would have said "Give me a nickel", etc. Inasmuch, I can make the amount of money required for that kiss as much as I want it to be, or even not have an amount at all and just allow you to think I have an amount.
2) I'm a hooker, and am only willing to partake in the kissings IF I am financially obligated to.

Since Kissing (or in this case, scumhunting) is the entire point of TOWN'S existance in this game, an unwillingness to scumhunt automatically, indeed, needing to be coerced or bribed by another into scum hunting (or at least agreeing with said scumhunting) does NOT strike me as pro-town.

Please do not take this to indicate I'm calling you a hooker, it's just a metaphor. Similarly, I am not breadcrumbing being a roleblocker.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy:
You are saying that I am using Smoke and Mirrors to pull attention from two other players; which begs the question: Why are you so deadset in having one of only two people lynched today and so against explorations into other venues? Do you have a vested interest in other players NOT being investigated/criticized?

Now you're just putting connotations into my words that aren't there.

We have two players who seem to be in the top scum-candidate lists of most people (looking at the voting and FoSing and what not) and we've been waiting for them to come back from lurking. I'm not talking about lynching either one of them, unlike some others have been. I just want to make sure they are not allowed to slink off into a corner when they have things to answer for because you can't keep the spotlight off yourself.

I'm happy, as I said, to look at cases on other players, if you bother to show me something that's not bullshit.

What are you saying here? That I'm not an adult? That Zindaras isn't trying to coerce Sir T to meta him? That Zindaras *is* using a meta to clear himself, and that's okay, but it's not okay for me to bring meta in as part of my reasons for suspicions of him? You realize I am analysing Zindaras's personality as town or as scum, as the basis for the perceived meta, right?

No, I'm saying that I didn't "scold" you for anything; and I don't intend to "scold" anyone. I'm calling out scummy behavior when I see it, which it not really the same thing.

How else do you fight meta-based cases? You fight fire with fire, meta with meta. I'd highly prefer it if everyone, INCLUDING Zin, dropped the meta bullshit and play this game, in the here-and-now. I've said that before.

Also: The "Give me a well thought out case" means nothing to me and is usually a scum tell: you are putting the basis of whether something is a good case solely to be judged by your own discretion, and you are saying in the above post that your discretion is based on a player-by-player basis.

Okay, now this is just laughable. Asking you to present a solid case is a

scumtell

? What orifice did you pull THAT from?

I don't expect cases to be 100% in line with my own line of thinking; I'm asking you to present a case against a player you think is scummy that isn't based on bullshit and meta, and hopefully has more than 1 case-point in it. I'm judging whether or not the case is a good one not just on my own opinions but on the opinions of others, too, and the CONTENT of that case. I also think that everyone else would agree with me that a 1-point case based on meta-warring is not a good reason to do anything but eye Zin, which I have already done and intend to do.

I'm not asking you to scumhunt for me even remotely. I am, and others are, already scumhunting; you want us (not JUST me) to switch our focus onto someone you think you have found?

Show us why we should.

That's all I'm asking.

[Capricious]

Caprcious's posts 192-195 are a load of crap. You can't seriously pass that off as the best contribution you can muster, in addition to 194 being full of Craplogic(TM). I'm very confident in you being scum, because if you were town, I feel you would have found other things to comment on besides just what you did. There has been lots of discussion since your previous posts, and

that

is what you comment on?

vote: Capricious

Can someone point me to the case against Andycyca? Because I really don't see it.

Right, I'll admit I have nothing else to comment on. My intellect is too low to understand the Skruffs-Zindaras dispute, and when you erase all those posts, what else is there? RS-Mizzy? That feels to me like exchange between two towns, while Andycyca charges in to take advantage of it.

[Y]

I don't have much time, so it'll be short. I hope I'll be able to elaborate later.

Skruffs is using meta-game info, but using only games they both played together. Although I understand that you can't know him without playing with him, you also can't discard all the games you didn't play together.

It seems like you're pushing a move that can't really be proven, especially if you have no concrete info from this present game.

You did the same with RS: You have accusations and theories, but none has any real connection to the game.

Vote Skruffs.

[Skruffs]

You are voting me because my suspicions and theories are ... not connected to this game?

What are they connected to?

What are you getting at, exactly? I am working with the information I have: This game is not giving me enough so I am pulling in outside information to be discussed and used or ignored, and everything I am saying *is* based on the game, but like Mizzy and Zindaras, you are ignoring the parts that actually have to deal with this game, and focussing on the Deliciously Easy Scapegoat of Using Metas.

This coming from the person who suggested that the mafia might be newbies who didn't know who the stronger players were,

followed by your own suggestion that they would know strong players would be protected and so targeted a player unlikely to be targeted.

Is this a situation where you are acussing someone of doing the samae thing you did, aka a newbie mistake? Cuz I thought you only did that as scum.

[Mizzy]

I am working with the information I have: This game is not giving me enough so I am pulling in outside information to be discussed and used or ignored, and everything I am saying *is* based on the game, but like Mizzy and Zindaras, you are ignoring the parts that actually have to deal with this game, and focussing on the Deliciously Easy Scapegoat of Using Metas.

You pull in outside information, we discuss it, and then ignore it because of how irrelevant and bad it is. You offer 1 case-point that has anything to do with THIS game, I discuss it with you and discard it because of how flimsy it is.

Yes, indeed, you are

such

the oppressed pro-towner. No one

ever

listens to you (even though we do) and we're all just jumping on you because it's

convenient

(even though there's already two other active wagons) and I'm

clearly

scum because I disagree with you.

Unvote. Vote: Skruffs

[eldarad]

My intellect is too low to understand the Skruffs-Zindaras dispute, and when you erase all those posts, what else is there?

Heh. As much as I *want* to believe, this isn't true. Interesting though how you use sarcasm to avoid saying anything substantial.

My vote on Y was not based on a misunderstanding, don't trivialize it like that.

What was it based on then?

You still haven't answered this.

I actually like the Skruffs / Zindaras conversation going on here. But it does not prove anything as to alignment. Again with the Meta.

I don't understand why you'd like a conversation that doesn't tell anything about alignments. It may be an interesting conversation (to you) but it doesn't belong in the game thread.
The complete irrelevance of the Skruffs-Zindaras argument really bothers me. Skruffs is attacking over things

that didn't happen in this game

.

Skruffs - if your objective was to get players to overcome a natural 'Zindaras is so awesome and cuddly' reaction then fine, it's already worked. I don't see why you're still pushing this angle.

[Mizzy]

My intellect is too low to understand the Skruffs-Zindaras dispute, and when you erase all those posts, what else is there?

You are

not

a moron. If you

must

hide behind the "I'm too stupid to contribute" shield, then for the love of god, don't be intelligent early in the game and

then

spout it? Be stupid the

whole time

.

Fos: Capricious

[Y]

You are voting me because my suspicions and theories are ... not connected to this game?

What are they connected to?

What are you getting at, exactly? I am working with the information I have: This game is not giving me enough so I am pulling in outside information to be discussed and used or ignored, and everything I am saying *is* based on the game, but like Mizzy and Zindaras, you are ignoring the parts that actually have to deal with this game, and focussing on the Deliciously Easy Scapegoat of Using Metas.

You're using outside, mostly irrelevant, information. By discussing it, we get to even more information not connected to the game. It's a circle.
We're at page 9. Remove all the metagame talks and see how you're left with almost nothing. Adding even more metagame information gets us less in-game information.

This coming from the person who suggested that the mafia might be newbies who didn't know who the stronger players were,

followed by your own suggestion that they would know strong players would be protected and so targeted a player unlikely to be targeted.

Is this a situation where you are acussing someone of doing the samae thing you did, aka a newbie mistake? Cuz I thought you only did that as scum.

I'd suggest you read the game before you start accusing people. The player who wrote those arguments is Capricious, and I confronted him about it. I remember what I said or not said, so please don't try to put words in my mouth. Thank you.

[Y]

I looked up and I know what post you're referring to (40). I said what I said not as a suggestion, but just to show Cpricious how easy it is to dismiss his argument (Which was based on metagame).

[Capricious]

My intellect is too low to understand the Skruffs-Zindaras dispute, and when you erase all those posts, what else is there?

You are

not

a moron. If you

must

hide behind the "I'm too stupid to contribute" shield, then for the love of god, don't be intelligent early in the game and

then

spout it? Be stupid the

whole time

.

Fos: Capricious

No, I am being honest. I don't know what to make of all that at all.

[Mizzy]

No, I am being honest. I don't know what to make of all that at all.

Oh. Well, honestly, it doesn't mean anything. To me, anyway. It's all bullcrap WIFOM meta to me.

[eldarad]

*points at post 218*
Capricious, respond.