Newbie 1024 -- Minimalist Mafia (Game Over)

[Beefster]

Disregard that last part. I forgot to delete it.

[Beefster]

It's just me quoting Kayi BTW.

[RedCoyote]

Vote Count 3

• Beefster

  (Neruz - Kayi)
  
  
  Neruz
  (Mute)
  
  
  Mute
  (Jay)
  
  
  Jay
  (Yenros)
  
  
  Kayi
  (Beefster)
  
  
  Not Voting
  (Mastin - Trendall - Mujex)

With nine alive, it takes five to lynch.
Current Deadline: Nov. 17th, 2010 at 12:00 AM (CST)

[Mujex]

I addresed Heather because she made only a post and I wanted to make the discution going.

Mastin

You mention waiting to vote until someone stood out. And then, you mention Jay standing out...without voting. Care to explain yourself?

If Jay stands out as being scumy that does not necesary mean I have to place a vote. I don't like to abuse my right. I want to be sure of my vote.

[Trendall]

Just wanted to say sorry, was on vacation for a couple of days and couldn't confirm. Best of luck to you all, sorry for the inconvenience I caused.

That's a shame, you have the best avatar here.

Questions like that can be interpreted in nearly any way and aren't even effective at catching scum reliably, at least from my experience.

They don't have to be. Questions like that get more discussion going, which means we have more to go on, which means that it then becomes easier to employ other techniques to work out who the scum is. You're not going to directly work out who is scum and who isn't from their answers to that one question, but that doesn't mean that the question is in any way worthless or scummy.

However, I really didn't find anyone suspicious and decided to just use random.org instead.

Once you didn't find anything suspicious, why didn't you decide to just not vote for anyone at all?

Specific to the "are you excited to play?" question: It tells you one of 2 things: the player is nothing more than excited to play or the player has a power role.

It's inconclusive

, so using it to scumhunt is absolutely ridiculous.

Surely every scumhunting technique is?

The timing of that vote was mainly because of my inexperience with mafia games. See, I had been planning on waiting for a reason to vote for someone, but, since I'm stupid and didn't know exactly how the game worked, I thought there was some sort of time limit to have your votes in by, because on past games I've played, it is usually said that "Day 1 ends on [...] at [...] PM/AM," and if you did not vote by that time you received a thing called a phantom vote. I was worried I'd receive one of them, and thought that I'd better have my vote in by that time, when I posted my vote, so I just decided to go with a random one instead.

I wasn't finding you scummy at all until this post. I find it difficult to believe that you were that worried about not having your vote put in, but not worried enough to like, check Post 1 to see if there was anything in the rules about it. Plus, I'm not really sure exactly what a phantom vote is, seeing as I only play forum games here, but surely a completely random vote is no more useful than a phantom vote?

Also,

Beefster, Trendall

: What do you think of the definitions I gave? Are they good? Is there any you disagree with? (Not really a game question, so much as an SE+IC thing. Call it a "Teacher's Conference", of sorts. )
For that matter, what do you think of my opinion on SE's?

Nothing wrong with them. I'd also add that from what I've seen, some people only either FoS people or vote for them, and FoS can mean 'you are absolutely 100% scummy but I can't vote for you because I'm already voting for somebody who is 110% scummy'. I think they're very player dependent, and it's worth looking more at the content of a person's argument rather than the acronym that they use to define how strong their argument is. A player should be responding to another person's arguments no matter how minor they are. It's not as if you can go 'I'll ignore that, it's only a mFoS anyway.'

As for SEs, the Wiki says that the SE role is only there to make the queue run smoother, and isn't necessarily a teaching role. As such, you probably won't see me doing a great deal of teaching, but if there's something I feel is worth pointing out, I'll point it out, which I think is what all players should be doing anyway, teaching role or no teaching role.

I don't want us to waste much time on RVS. Or the RQS.

Then why did you put a random vote in at all?

It's early in the game. I really don't see why my voting patterns (at this point) are such a big deal. Typically at the start of the game, votes mean nothing. As the game goes on though, they start to become more meaningful. So if a 0 is a random vote and a 10 is a cop-sure vote, where I'm at is about a 1.

If your votes are irrelevant at this stage, than why are you calling out Kayi because you feel that her question was irrelevant?

Quick note: Hmm...I'm seeing a HEAVY link to Kayi and Neruz, in a LOT of their posts.

HoS: Kayi, Neruz

. Looking at my post above, they're agreeing with each other a lot, not to mention, supporting each other from attack, and--to top it all off--they're now voting together as well.

This simply happens sometimes. I'm often being accused of being scumbuddies with someone else, when it turns out that me and that person are both just two town players who happen to be on the same wavelength.

--------------------------------------------------------

Right now, my biggest FoS is on Beefster. He's been criticising other people for asking questions that he doesn't deem to be too effective at scumhunting, while not really offering anything in the way of scumhunting himself. He's built up a very tentative argument against Kayi, which was in fact so tentative that Neruz had to jump in and actually explain his argument for him. Apart from that, nothing. If he was saying 'guys your questions all suck' while offering tonnes of awesome, legitimate material himself, it would be fine, but that's not what's happening. He seems very anti-discussion, and it's not sitting right with me. I will wait for a response before voting, though.

[Neruz]

Neruz

, Why'd you vote for Beefster, our IC? (Still GMEOY.)

His avatar caught my attention.


Beefster is giving me pause for thought at the moment; something about his play doesn't seem right for an IC. He's coming across as somewhat erratic and unsure of himself. It might just be the paranoia speaking but i'm really not liking his play at the moment.

Quick note: Hmm...I'm seeing a HEAVY link to Kayi and Neruz, in a LOT of their posts.

HoS: Kayi, Neruz

. Looking at my post above, they're agreeing with each other a lot, not to mention, supporting each other from attack, and--to top it all off--they're now voting together as well.
Current suspect order: Kayi/Neruz (almost enough for a vote), Beefster (individually, my largest suspect, however, I'm waiting for answers), Jay. (His defense is less than convincing.)

Hm, thanks for pointing that out, i missed that. A quick re-read shows that she is spending rather a lot of time agreeing with me. It

could

just be that we happen to have similar opinions, but looking at the rest of her play i'm thinking it probably isn't. She seems to be tunneling a bit much on Beefster, pausing only to address posts directed at her and this is way too early for that kind of attention on a single person.

Kayi, you've made it pretty clear that Beefster has your attention as scum suspect at the moment; have you got anything on anyone else? Any other suspects or things you find suspicious?

Given that it's 5 to lynch, i'm going to leave my vote on Beefster for the moment, but i'm really not liking either of you right now.


Also, as a side note; i'm pretty sure at this point that Jay's vote was just newbiness talking. Admittedly i've always been pretty crappy at telling newtells from scumtells, but that looks like a 'i'm new and not entirely sure what is going on' vote to me.

[Kayi]

@Beef: Weird voting patterns are weird no matter the stage of the game. If your vote on me was mostly random the first time, why did you retire it at all? And then reinstate it? When I first read it, I thought it was a total RVS vote, but your actions made it seem more serious to me. To the rest of it I have nothing else to say other than your defense still seems really weak to me . I'll proceed to rest my case and keep my vote, unless something huge happens that convinces me of your non-scumminess.



@Neruz: When have I actually agreed with you? The only opinion we have in common is not liking the RVS, as far as I've seen, and that has nothing to do with the game itself. And as far as I know, your vote on Beef was a random one, and I've explained mine more than even you considered necessary. That's it. If that's a lot... well, I need my terms redefined. Also, go back and read my posts. I do not only address people who address me. I mostly do so, but when there's nothing new that strikes me as scummy/odd, I don't see why I shouldn't do this.

"looking at the rest of her play..." do elaborate, please. I find this to be too vague of an argument.

I prioritize my suspicions in my head and only express the ones that seem more relevant. It's the beginning of the game, I don't trust anyone and I'm paranoid. I could probably say stuff against absolutely everyone, which is why I choose to keep most if it to myself. No one jumps out at me as obvtown yet. Some of the things that struck me as weird:

Yenros

jumped quickly to vote on Jay saying that he found his random vote scummy. Weird, yes, but how scummy? I posed that question once and he kind of answered, but he didn't answer my concern. I repeated it, I've gotten no answer. Posting it again now. I'm slightly suspicious on them, but not enough.

Jay

's vote and explanation are just... weird. I have no impression either way, but I'll be watching him closely.

I wish

Mute

stopped being mute. I haven't heard input from him at all. I can't possibly know if he's lurking or just away. But he hasn't posted anything relevant to the game

[Jay]

I wasn't finding you scummy at all until this post. I find it difficult to believe that you were that worried about not having your vote put in, but not worried enough to like, check Post 1 to see if there was anything in the rules about it. Plus, I'm not really sure exactly what a phantom vote is, seeing as I only play forum games here, but surely a completely random vote is no more useful than a phantom vote?

A phantom vote is when you don't have your vote in by the deadline and a vote is cast for you. When you get a certain number of these (I think it is three) you are automatically lynched. So, a completely random vote is much more useful than a phantom vote.

[Neruz]

@Neruz: When have I actually agreed with you? The only opinion we have in common is not liking the RVS, as far as I've seen, and that has nothing to do with the game itself. And as far as I know, your vote on Beef was a random one, and I've explained mine more than even you considered necessary. That's it. If that's a lot... well, I need my terms redefined. Also, go back and read my posts. I do not only address people who address me. I mostly do so, but when there's nothing new that strikes me as scummy/odd, I don't see why I shouldn't do this.

We've matched opinions on alignment fishing as well as the RVS, you also concured with me about Beef leaving himself an escape route and that was in fact one of the three reasons why you voted him.

I'm not seeing any real proactivity in any of your posts, the only thing i can see is when you asked the question about what alignment people prefer to play, ever since then all you've done is react to other people. That worries me.

"looking at the rest of her play..." do elaborate, please. I find this to be too vague of an argument.

Yes, it is vague, i have less than 4 pages worth of material to work with, and the first page is pretty much worthless to boot. There's not even remotely enough content in the game to have anything more than a few blips on the ole suspiciometer. If i had anything more concrete than this i'd have switched my vote to you instead of staying with Beef.

[Mastin]

Alright, so there's a bit more posting, here, than I was expecting. I was expecting one or two brief responses from each person.

Warning:

People, be careful about constant walling. There's a reason I once had a mod specifically modify my role to have a posting restriction: because I made finding replacements nearly impossible with my post length. You'll also note one of the things people say from time to time is, "You're all Mastin Alts!", "I posted a Mastin", and other such terms. They're not compliments.
The cycle happens something like this: a person (generally, someone who's behind, like a replacement. I was, for example) posts a long post. Someone responds to any relevant points, and feels compelled to add in their own. Often, responses to a single sentence take a paragraph. Then, someone responds to

that

, and of course, it's longer. And it spreads, and spreads, and gets worse, and worse...yeah.

Be careful about post lengths!

You might find yourself trapped desperately behind. Valid points you make might be missed by people browsing, and if you browse to catch up, you miss some points. (I did when I browsed.)

---

One thing I note about Kayi: it seems multiple people are defending her, and she is defending multiple people. Her opening line in this post is defending Jay.

According to your post, we've agreed with voting for Beef. I mean, his RVS vote way before my question, my joke suspicion, and way after that, my actual vote.

This would be valid...
...If Neruz had removed his vote. He kept it on, the joke-vote becoming serious when he began to suspect Beefster. You agreed with him as a joke, but did not vote. You agree with him now when serious, and back it up with a vote. See the connection?

You suspect Beef as well, for the same reasons I do.

This is valid. I do suspect Beef, however, you do not look much better. In fact, you're beginning to look

worse

.

There's also the fact that we don't like the the RVS. You agree with that as well, and I don't think it has anything to do with the actual game.

So why bring it up at all? I brought it up as mentioning I might have a possible bias towards thinking you're town. Meaning, I should factor that in. You bring it up, and it looks like you're trying to create that bias, slide me back towards thinking you're town--same with Beefster. See the logic I'm applying? I've never been much of a fan for buddying. (It's one of my MITs for a reason. Granted, they're tells meant for the RVS, but on occasion, they've ironically proven correct.)
Not sure there's anything in Beef's post I can address well, so on to page 4. (Ahg, I hate walling. "Wait, you HATE it?!?" Okay, I love walling itself. I hate the

consequences

of walling. See my warning at the top.)

---

If Jay stands out as being scummy that does not necessarily mean I have to place a vote. I don't like to abuse my right. I want to be sure of my vote.

[SE]

While I understand your reasoning, you can always change your vote if needed. Excessive changing of votes can look bad. (See Beefster.) Occasional and justifiable changes in votes tend not to. If you think strongly enough that Jay is mafia, you should vote for Jay unless you find a better suspect. Votes left unused are votes wasted.
"Wait, then why haven't you placed a vote, yet?" In my case, I'm debating between two main suspects, Kayi and Beefster. If you have only one suspect, you should vote, barring special circumstances. These aren't really special circumstances. (Special circumstances are situations like they're already at L-1, and your vote would be the hammer before a claim. That might be a risk soon for voting Beefster, but not for your stated suspect of Jay.)
That's my take on voting, anyway. (Beef and Trend, you're free to disagree, though for the sake of the newbies, it's good to say why.)

[/SE]

I agree with most of what Trend says here, with two exceptions: 1--SE's. Like I said, I'm old. I still remember playing games where two ICs were required. When it was lowered to one IC and one SE, the SE was still expected to teach, though not as much. The SE acted as a lesser version of the IC, and more than that, they were also what a player was expected to be in a few games, whereas the IC is what they eventually would be. To me, that means the SE should still try to teach.
2--the point about Kayi and Neruz. I know it doesn't always apply. If it did, the related MIT tell would not have the disclaimer around it stating it's best not to use it out of the RVS. However, in this case, I'm beginning to believe it does. Strong town alliances are not unheard of, but they are uncommon, and most of the time, come from more experienced players. Strong scum alliances, on the other hand...

Hmm...I see something questionable.

Beefster is giving me pause for thought at the moment; something about his play doesn't seem right for an IC. He's coming across as somewhat erratic and unsure of himself. It might just be the paranoia speaking but i'm really not liking his play at the moment.

In that same post, he goes on and says

A quick re-read shows that she is spending rather a lot of time agreeing with me. It

could

just be that we happen to have similar opinions, but looking at the rest of her play i'm thinking it probably isn't.

She seems to be tunneling a bit much on Beefster

, pausing only to address posts directed at her and this is way too early for that kind of attention on a single person.

Note the slight hypocrisy? Neruz has addressed others pretty much just as often as Kayi has--not very often, compared to his focus on Beefster. He shows doubt about Kayi, yet continues to think Beefster is his best vote.

Neruz:

Do you honestly believe the scum would go after their buddy on day one? If so, why? If not, well, that's certainly the tone I'm getting from suspecting

both

Kayi and Beefster, so could you explain why it wouldn't be true?

---

At this point, I'm liking the Kayi-Neruz scumpair more than I was before. I probably will be voting for Kayi, but I'll wait for answers.

[Beefster]

I don't want us to waste much time on RVS. Or the RQS.

Then why did you put a random vote in at all?

Tradition, habit, for fun. I never expect it to last more than 2 days and it's harmless, so I just go for it.

[Beefster]

@Beef: Weird voting patterns are weird no matter the stage of the game. If your vote on me was mostly random the first time, why did you retire it at all? And then reinstate it? When I first read it, I thought it was a total RVS vote, but your actions made it seem more serious to me. To the rest of it I have nothing else to say other than your defense still seems really weak to me . I'll proceed to rest my case and keep my vote, unless something huge happens that convinces me of your non-scumminess.

Why do you insist on dwelling on this? Find something new to accuse me of. It's not a big deal.

At first I did it without thinking. Then 2 guys came along and made some pretty valid points that made me think, so I unvoted. But then Neruz came along and reminded me of why I found it scummy in the first place, so I revoted. It's exactly what it looks like.

But since you continue to dwell on this, I'm starting to become legitimately suspicious about you. I'm not liking how you have reacted to votes that were more or less testing for reactions. Your defenses don't come off as genuinely townie- more as deflecting suspicion. (and to some extent, reflecting suspicion back at me)

[Yenros]

@ Mastin: when I asked Beef about his vote on Kayi, it was because I didn't understand his point. Also, where you say I'm now doubting Kayi, I don't see the doubt, I try to answer her question as best i can with only one game, then I don't understand how it can show alignment and ask. In both cases they are "I want to learn and understand" questions.

@ Kayi: I didn't answer the last one because I just got on to see it. As I stated in my post about time and all, I only know for sure I will be on about this time everyday. I don't know how to better explain, but I will try. It's the fact that now, when we have more information, Jay is choosing to put a random vote, no comment on anything else that had gone on, like Beefster and Kayi, he's doing nothing more then defend himself.

@ Jay: You just said that you didn't want to recieve a phantom vote, so you random votes? If you are afraid of the end of the day, then why would you random vote, and not try to find reason so that someone you actually find suspicious is lynched? And like Trendall said, if you were so worried why wouldn't you check with the mod about deadline or phantom votes?

[Kayi]

Trying to keep it a bit shorter... Trying.


@Neruz - I had genuinely forgotten about the escape route thing. I used it as an explanation of my point - why did I think his defensive arguments weren't good enough. I pretty much told him "your reasoning his weird" and, paraphrasing, he said "I'm known for a weird reasoning/vote." I... don't see how that could be perceived as anything else. But I don't want to get into the Beef thing again. I've said enough.

@Mastin - Ha. It would be stupid for me to try to get you to believe me just because we've agreed on a few things. Agreement and disagreement mean nothing more often than not, and that's exactly my point. I wanted to indicate how this a shaky thing to rely on. That's all I'm saying, and I don't mean to imply anything else. When it comes to the voting thing, if you look at the timing, Neruz's suspicion on Beef became serious after I expressed finding Beef's arguments slightly suspicious, and his vote seemed to become official on Page 4 when he said he was keeping his vote. Brought up the RVS thing because I wanted to acknowledge having noticed it. Also, it's hard for me to address people when they haven't done anything to actually catch my attention. If my radar doesn't react while reading their posts, I proceed.

@Yen - Seems odd that you find Jay's defending himself weird, seeing as after you voted you've exhibited the same behavior you're condemning. That is, doing nothing more than defending your vote and addressing only when addressed.



On an unrelated note, and stating my thoughts on everyone else: Mute should appear - not liking their muteness. Got my eye on Yen and Jay as well, Yen more than Jay. Trendall and Mujex haven't said anything that could get caught in my radar. I'm mostly neutral about Mastin and Neruz. I think Mastin will prove himself guilty or innocent after a few days/deaths because of the way he posts. We'll see about Neruz - I have no way of trying to determine if he's saying the truth or not.

[Jay]

I was panicking when I posted my random vote, because i was worried I'd receive a phantom vote and that I'd look like a bad player (which I surely do now). When you panic you make stupid decisions without thinking them through, which was what I did.

Yenros, I find you slightly suspicious because of the way you are accusing me. I still do not really understand why you find my random vote scummy, and the way you said that you do not know how to explain better doesn't help. I didn't want to look like that guy who says "You think I look scummy so I'm gonna say that you are too!!!" but that note about not being able to explain made it seem more suspicious. Mafia who want to look like town sometimes make a large effort to find mafia so that people think,"Wow, he's trying so hard he must be town!" Until you are able to explain yourself better, you are my main suspicion.

Also sorry if there are some typos in here, I'm using my phone to write this.

[Neruz]

Neruz has addressed others pretty much just as often as Kayi has--not very often, compared to his focus on Beefster. He shows doubt about Kayi, yet continues to think Beefster is his best vote.

Actually at the moment i'm about even on both Beefster and Kayi, although with each passing post Kayi is looking scummier and scummier. And i havn't really focused on Beefster, looking at an ISO of my posts, my first piece of actual content towards the mafia game itself is ISO 11, where i commented on Beefster leaving an escape route. My three posts following that have primarily consisted on noting that both Kayi and Beefster are my prime suspects and responding to your inquiries.

If you include the fishing discussion, less than half my posts have involved Beefster.

Neruz:

Do you honestly believe the scum would go after their buddy on day one? If so, why? If not, well, that's certainly the tone I'm getting from suspecting

both

Kayi and Beefster, so could you explain why it wouldn't be true?

I've seen (and once pulled off) a gambit where the scum night kills their buddy on n0 and then rides through the game on a redirector claim. Do i think scum would go after their buddy on day one? Absolutely, if they thought it would work.

However, i'm nothing like certain on either of them at the moment, i still remain open to the possibility that they're actually both town and have managed to look scummy by accident. It happens all the time.



In a related note; Mute and Mujex appear to be lurking at the moment. I'm only seeing a couple of posts from both of them, and Mute's last post was on Sunday.

RedCoyote

, can we get a prod for Mute? He's all AWOL.

Mujex, i know you're there (unlike Mute who might not be), want to actually get involved in the discussion instead of active lurking around the fringes?



I find it very interesting that Kayi picked up on Mute, Yen and Jay not being very active, but

completely

missed Mujex (one of the SE's no less) active lurking his heart out. She's done a relatively good job on picking up on all the other players who aren't participating much, but not Mujex.

[Mute]

I wish

Mute

stopped being mute. I haven't heard input from him at all. I can't possibly know if he's lurking or just away. But he hasn't posted anything relevant to the game

I'm still here. The name "Mute" isn't just a name, it has some relevance to my personality. If I see a time to talk or say something I will, like if I'm addressed (like now) or would like to add something to the discussion.

Right now I still can't finger who to cast a vote on, and my vote to Neruz was a random vote I'll admit. I'm suspicious of a few people here, but for now I want to see how things unfold before I begin to make any decisions for one set person to vote on.

unvote: Neruz

[Mute]

Damn Tab key, meant to hit preview. =_=

I tend to check back on this game at least once a day, so that would explain a lot of my lurking.

[Mujex]

My english sucks, I can't keep up with you dudes, the SE doesn't help either, sorry for the inconvenience. I asked for a replacement.

We're sorry to see you go. I'll start looking for a replacement.

[Neruz]

Och, Déjà vu.

[Mastin]

But I don't want to get into the Beef thing again. I've said enough.

[SE]

It's good that you're trying to keep your post shorter. However, this is not the correct route to take. You have focused a good case on Beefster, and are mainly focusing on defending yourself. That's good, however, simply trying to make yourself look less suspicious than Beefster will not save you from the noose. You need to--at every available moment--expand the case in any way you can, until you really have nothing left. Basically, be careful to balance offense and defense: too much of either, and you have a far greater chance of being lynched. (In my first game--one I got replaced in--I was completely against the idea of defending myself. Guess who was an almost-immediate suspect? In some games, I was completely defensive with no offense at all. All I did was get myself lynched, without making a good case for the town to use, leaving my death completely pointless. In others, I was all offense, completely disregarding my defense for pure attack. It didn't work well. And--one thing to watch out for--sometimes, you can try to balance both, but end up tunneling OMGUS-style on your attackers and convince yourself they are scum. [I was notorious for this. Out of all the things I'm infamous for {there are a lot}, this is perhaps the worst.]
These are ALL things you want to avoid. It's a hard balance to find, but when you lock onto it, you'll be one of the best players on the site. It's remarkable how many players only know how to do one well at a time. Manage to do both well, and you have an advantage.)

[/SE]

Mastin - Ha. It would be stupid for me to try to get you to believe me just because we've agreed on a few things. Agreement and disagreement mean nothing more often than not, and that's exactly my point. I wanted to indicate how this a shaky thing to rely on. That's all I'm saying, and I don't mean to imply anything else.

This did not seem like your intent to me. Like I said, it still feels like a minor attempt at buddying.

When it comes to the voting thing, if you look at the timing, Neruz's suspicion on Beef became serious after I expressed finding Beef's arguments slightly suspicious, and his vote seemed to become official on Page 4 when he said he was keeping his vote. Brought up the RVS thing because I wanted to acknowledge having noticed it.

I will need to look into this, because that's not how I remember it.

---

Have to leave, now. Be back at...oh, probably some time between 3:30 and 4 pm.

[Mastin]

Yenros, I find you slightly suspicious because of the way you are accusing me. I still do not really understand why you find my random vote scummy, and the way you said that you do not know how to explain better doesn't help. I didn't want to look like that guy who says "You think I look scummy so I'm gonna say that you are too!!!" but that note about not being able to explain made it seem more suspicious. Mafia who want to look like town sometimes make a large effort to find mafia so that people think,"Wow, he's trying so hard he must be town!" Until you are able to explain yourself better, you are my main suspicion.

There are a few problems in here. First, you mention, OMGYouSuck. You're obviously aware of the concept of voting your voter, or suspecting the person who suspects you. You claim that your reason for voting him is different.

[SE]

Nobody believes anyone who suspects their voter. At best, they'll think they're tunnel visioning on their voter, OMGUS Confirmation Bias. Really, REALLY bad to do that. (Trust me; I did it all the time. It was NOT good.) At worst, they'll think you're desperate scum.

[/SE]

The second is your use of the "Too Townie to be Town" fallacy. It's possible someone who is putting a lot of effort into the game is scum trying really hard to look like town...Or, Occam's Razor can be used, that is, the simplest explanation applies: that they are, in fact, just town.

---

Sorry, out of time, again.

[Mastin]

I had a post, but just lost it.
Be back later to re-say what I wanted to.

[Jay]

But I am really not only saying that I'm suspcicious of him because he voted for me - I know better than to do that. I've seen the strategy that I mentioned (I think you called it Too Town to be Town) work before, and I'd like him to explain why he finds me scummy better, because I still do not understand him. That's why I didn't vote for him - I want to give him a chance before I jump the gun on something.

[RedCoyote]

Bump