Do people agree with this sentiment?bionicchop2 wrote:If a miller dies, we have an easy lynch with you.
Happy birthday, crywolf.
A dead miller would certainly be solid evidence against user. FTR: I have played minis with multiple cops and docs but I think multiple millers would be generally unbalanced.Tommy wrote:Do people agree with this sentiment?bionicchop2 wrote:If a miller dies, we have an easy lynch with you.
Yeah. Two masons in one game? Seems REALLY unlikely. I dont think its ever been done and the game woud be swingy as hell. I think gorcs a better mod than that.Tommy wrote:Do people agree with this sentiment?bionicchop2 wrote:If a miller dies, we have an easy lynch with you.
I wanted to check with players who are more experienced than me whether bionicchop's heuristic was reliable. If so, it means I know what should happen if we find another miller - and also makes iamausername's claim more believable (because more risky). If not, it means I should suspect bionicchop of trying to set up a potential mislynch. I reckon I've got my answer.Ythill wrote:Tommy, after you have your answers (or sooner if you feel it's appropriate) I'd like to know what you hoped to learn by asking this question.
Eh, the claim isnt that risky because millers are very uncommon roles in todays forum meta. So like, its actually a fairly safe claim.Tommy wrote:I wanted to check with players who are more experienced than me whether bionicchop's heuristic was reliable. If so, it means I know what should happen if we find another miller - and also makes iamausername's claim more believable (because more risky). If not, it means I should suspect bionicchop of trying to set up a potential mislynch. I reckon I've got my answer.Ythill wrote:Tommy, after you have your answers (or sooner if you feel it's appropriate) I'd like to know what you hoped to learn by asking this question.
QFT,iamausername wrote: I don't like the way she pushed a Tony wagon in this post without actually commiting to it herself. Feels like she was fishing to see if it would gain any traction, and retracted her 'suspicion' when it became clear it wouldn't.
I agree it seems fishy, especially given that all she had to add to my list of crimes was "talking".iamausername wrote:Unvote, vote: crywolf. I don't like the way she pushed a Tony wagon in this post without actually commiting to it herself. Feels like she was fishing to see if it would gain any traction, and retracted her 'suspicion' when it became clear it wouldn't.
Here is the post. It's dumber than I remember. He suggests, at various times: lynching, counterclaiming, fake-claiming, metagaming, flavor-testing.TonyMontana wrote:Well, I guess it's kinda redundant, whether we imagine he was investigated or not.
We really just have to decide for ourself if we believe user is a miller. Personally, I think he is, but it's a sticky situation, seeing as there's no way to confirm it other than a lynch. Or, heaven forbid, someone counter-claims.
Truth be told, this is the first game I've heard of the role, had to look up the wiki to find out what a miller was, so I don't know how usual the role is. The more frequent milllers appear in games, the less likely it would be for user to be a scum. (ie, doesnt have much risk of a counterclaim)
Nonetheless, I think claiming initially was a good move, if for nothing else than to kick-start the game.
The flavor seemed plausible as well..
iLowell wrote:Here is the post. It's dumber than I remember. He suggests, at various times: lynching, counterclaiming, fake-claiming, metagaming, flavor-testing.
This post reeks of tony trying to bait someone else into opposing the claim.
I perticually don't like this post, and you were also quick to defend Tony in post 90 as well, but in post 68 (sorry none of these are linked) you told Tony to shut the hell up. Why the change in heart?Tommy wrote:Whoa there, Lowell. Firstly, there's no need to be rude.
Secondly, you're putting words into his mouth. He doesn't suggest lynching, counter-claiming or fake-claiming. It's particularly impressive that you accuse him of suggesting counter-claiming, since he introduced that concept with "heaven forbid".
He does indeed appeal to both meta-game patterns and the authenticity of iamausername's piano teacher flavour, but how can those things possibly count as "trying to bait someone else into opposing the claim"? Both of them support the claim's truth!
FOS: Lowell
How was I "pushing" for a bandwagon in that post? (It's post 50) I FOSed him, and that was good enough for me at the time. I didn't go shouting that we need to lynch Tony that moment.iamausername wrote:##Unvote, ##vote: crywolf. I don't like the way she pushed a Tony wagon in this post without actually commiting to it herself. Feels like she was fishing to see if it would gain any traction, and retracted her 'suspicion' when it became clear it wouldn't.
Can I ask what I've done scummy in your opinion before I get a little ticked off at the vote?bionicchop2 wrote:I find it odd that people agree with crywolf looking scummy, but then vote for Lowell.
##vote: Crywolf
Well, I... wait what?crywolf20084 wrote: @Fhqwh: You told User to shut up, then FOSed me, as though you agreed with him. May I ask why you agree?