Yeah, scumhunting and producing discussion was what I was doing. Since we were very early into the game at that time (and still are) I have very little information to work with, so of course some of my arguments aren't going to be too strong. The same goes for your arguments so far.Llamarble wrote:Since he has enough posts with content and seems to be scumhunting but has presented a few arguments I've felt were a little weak, I'm going to do an ISO on Sworddancer. I'll take the angle "why mafia would do the things he did" for the most part. It's possible he's just scumhunting and trying to produce discussion, but I want to look at him a little more closely.
Nope, I really do just like being one the side with more people on it. There are other reasons to, but that is the main one. For example, I also like to try to see through manipulation rather than create it. Both the town and scum have different puzzles to solve, and I find town's puzzle to be funner.His first post answers Ex's intro questions and votes Silent.bothered me a little, as it seems carefully constructed to buddy the group and make a statement that he's not mafia. That said, it's not an awkward wording or anything to work that meaning in, so he might just be honest here. His vote for Silent after Silent's statement that he's only played a single game might have been a vote for a newbie likely to get himself into trouble/defend badly.I like to be on the majority's side, even if we end up doing really badly.
Also, when I said "I like to be on the majority's side, even if we end up doing really badly." I wasn't referring to just us when I said "we", I was referring to all towns that I have been in.
My RVS vote on Silent was. . . well. . . random, and nothing more. Also, Silent has been in a game, I think that is enough to understand a simple thing like the RVS. Also, don't just assume that all newbies are town, they can be scum, to, so if he were to break down and was scum then wouldn't that be a good thing?
If you will read a bit father than that, you would see that my vote on him was to try to encourage him to get into the game. Also, even if I was scum, do you really think that I would try to push a policy lynch on someone so early in the Day? With my vote that was only the second one?In his next post he moves his vote to Damon, who already has a vote from smash and seems to be lurking. This might have been hoping to make a policy lynch go through more easily. Says he likes my nitpicking (could be a bit of buddying, or just encouraging people to scumhunt) and tells me not to be apologetic when hunting, which makes sense.
The nitpicking thing. . . the nitpicking thing. . . Okay, for one, I didn't say I liked your nitpicking in persific, I just said I liked nitpicking in the RVS. I said this because, as I said earlier, I feel nitpicking is a good way to start things out. You were nitpicking, though, and I did like that, but it wasn't really buddying.
Okay, so you did know that I was voting him to try to get him into this game? If so, why did you even waste time with that argument in your last paragraph?After I request somebody bring Damon down from L-1, he does so and explains that his vote was there in the first place to try and get him to talk. Also says "scum might hammer, which would be bad." I'd be more worried about a Townie quickhammering without knowing any better as we'd probably have to lynch them next round and then we'd really be in trouble. Could be following directions and trying to look protown after I say someone should unvote. His FoS at Tomato seems warranted by the dubious L-1 move, but it could be that he's scum pretending to scumhunt and so is fishing for any opportunities to look like he's contributing.
Read my last post and you can see why I said "scum might hammer, which would be bad".
*I read the rest of this paragraph*
fbhfdsnkjsjhnksnskjlkfdsfsswhaaaaaaaaat?
Are you kidding me? I'm almost a little offended here. I might have just unvoted Damon and followed your directions so to look more protown you say? Okay, I'm sorry that I didn't want someone to be quicklynched. Next time someone is at L_1 within less than 48 hours of the start of the game I'll make sure to keep my vote on them. Next time someone puts someone on L_1 this early in the game I'll make sure not to call them out on it also. I mean, really.
Also, has anyone noticed that Llamarble is attacking me based off of something that he could literaly attack anyone with? Basically, he's stating that I
might
just be trying to look like I'm contributing, but really, couldn't you say that about anyone
? I mean, couldn't you just look at anyone and say: "Hey, he could
be just trying to look like he's contributing!" Now I know you could say that you pointed me out because you felt my case was weak, but really, at this point in the game, so is everyone's.When you think about it like that, his argument here isn't really going to get us anywhere.*sigh* Again with the "contribution-fishing" argument that could be applied to anyone.Asks Silent and Tomato why they got on wagons. A good question. Asks Silent why he thought there was a wagon on him. This seems too obvious to be a legitimate question; Sword himself placed the first vote on Silent, which Hayl wagoned onto, explicitly stating she was making a bandwagon vote. Sword unvoted before Silent's post, and apparently Silent failed to notice. This seems like more fishing for an opportunity to contribute. The rest of the post makes it sound like he legitimately forgot about his original vote, but even if he did it's still just Silent getting confused and making a mistake, so the "contribution-fishing" possibility remains.
As you said, I unvoted Silent before he made his post saying that he wanted to jump on someone else's wagon. So it is a legitimate question, even if the answer ended up only being something like it was his mistake. Also, when someone does something awkward, even if I know it was probably a mistake, I'm still going to call them out on it. I didn't forget about my vote, in matter of fact it was the fact that I remembered my vote and the fact that I took it off of him that made me call him out.
As I said earlier, I like nitpicking in the RVS, and that is what I was doing.
Asks if my "I'm excited because it looks like we have a strong town" post indicates I know who the townies are and who I mean when I say we. I thought I was pretty clear initially and so this seems like a weak attack/not very useful question, and thus more contribution-fishing.
And again the "contribution" argument comes out to play. See above. I call out everyone on what I find awkward (aka nitpicking) early in the game.
My vote on you was to add pressure, same with my FoS on Tomato. Also, really. Do you really think scum is going to just always be trying to get these real early quicklynches?Votes me and FoS Tomato (again) telling us to answer his questions "asap." Maybe he's just impatient. His vote wasn't sitting on anyone before this, so perhaps he put it on me after getting a little positive reinforcement from Exemption's post in the hopes that a wagon on me might succeed.
Once again, with so little information of course I have to go after small, little things to begin with it. Most of us, including yourself, have been doing that so don't just go after me for it. Also, how is it possible that my VERY FIRST VOTES could be oriented towards the lynches of townies? Unless I'm mistaken, I have yet to vote beyond the second vote. If you want to go after someone who you think is trying to get the lynch of a townie, then why even bother wasting time on me?Overall, the case for him being scummy has two parts. He has made several posts that sound to me like mafia trying to sound protown by scumhunting (the things he has gone after not seeming very scummy to me makes him going after them seem dubious). His voting behavior seems oriented toward being an early vote on the lynch of a vulnerable townie.
Here you go then.I'd like to hear his and some others' responses to this. I also want to hear what the people on the list of suspects I made earlier think of my accusations toward them.
Phew. . . okay, back to scumhunting then.
With 9 alive, it takes 5 votes to lynch.
