Open 221: unclean - Day 3

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Let's turn up the heat a bit.....

Vote Crazy

Do you agree with Izzy's case or with Migwelloni's case?

Izzy's case is meaningless because I think it's clear my interest in weasel words comes from my own experience as scum, and obviously I'm not just making it up.

As for Migwelloni's case, I have no idea what he was getting at. If you do, I'd actually prefer you to explain it rather than him.

I wouldn't even call it a case, considering I haven't even voted for you.

[Crazy]

Basically, I put a vote on Crazy to pressure him and see how he reacted. When he didn't react right away, I got impatient and unvoted.

I responded to your post. Were you expecting me to freak out or something?

I wouldn't even call it a case, considering I haven't even voted for you.

Perhaps not. You can substitute in the word "argument" or "suspicion," then.

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

Seriously, your case seems well thought out, but you didn't explain any of that in Post 25. You just mentioned the prod request. Why is that?

After we've had a few people examine prod request, it seems that it was likely (more weasel words) an innocent, "Hey mod, let's get started asap" rather than, "I'm scum and I'm looking to present myself as an active and constructive member of the game within the first two hours to establish a good foundation to hide under."

Agree or disagree?

Agree. Well, kinda. It could also be scum wanting to get into the game, and being able to have the town become active. So Neutral, but doesn't necessarily mean scummy.



Alrighty, although this probably doesn't warrant a vote, it seems like now is the time to use votes as pressure.

unvote, vote: shatteredviewpoint

You still have your vote on Crazy, so do you believe in his case? Why, or if not, why do you still have that vote on him?

[Shattered Viewpoint]

@Johnny: Clued in. It took some thinking, but I got there.

@SSSSSSS: Yes. Crazy still looks suspicious to me. All that Miller speculation, and the semantics debate. I just don't like it.

My vote stays. Until I find scummier scum, of course.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Basically, I put a vote on Crazy to pressure him and see how he reacted. When he didn't react right away, I got impatient and unvoted.

I responded to your post. Were you expecting me to freak out or something?

I wouldn't even call it a case, considering I haven't even voted for you.

Perhaps not. You can substitute in the word "argument" or "suspicion," then.

Neither of those are really quite appropriate. I don't think it says anything about how scummy you are, I'm just saying you're wrong. It's a philosophical debate on how to play mafia more than anything.

[Migwelloni]

Basically, I put a vote on Crazy to pressure him and see how he reacted. When he didn't react right away, I got impatient and unvoted.

Albatross was saying that I should have left my pressure vote on a little bit longer, cause he wanted to see how YOU reacted to the situation. But, I went and fucked it all up.

Clued in brotha?

So you think that Albatross was trying to set a trap? Setting traps is a scummy thing to be doing; town should be able come to reasoned conclusions without the need for scummy tactics.

[Alduskkel]

Done right, voting for reactions can be a good tool for scumhunting.

But Johnny Rotten didn't do it right, since he didn't keep his vote there long enough.

[Excedrin]

Vote Count

Migwelloni (2): Crazy, Albatross
jmj3000 (1): MehPlusRawr
Crazy (2): Shattered Viewpoint, Migwelloni
Shattered Viewpoint (1): smashbro_of_the_SSS

not voting: Johnny Rotten, jmj3000, Alduskkel, DizzyIzzyB13, dRool89

[Albatross]

Neither of those are really quite appropriate. I don't think it says anything about how scummy you are, I'm just saying you're wrong. It's a philosophical debate on how to play mafia more than anything.

Philosophical debates are nice and all, but any thoughts on any players' actual alignments, Dizzy?

If I may be so forward, may I suggest a vote on Migwelloni?

[Crazy]

Neither of those are really quite appropriate. I don't think it says anything about how scummy you are, I'm just saying you're wrong. It's a philosophical debate on how to play mafia more than anything.

Note:

No. I don't think you could be more wrong about this. There are plenty of odd or weird things that are said during a mafia game. The vast majority are not, in the end, scummy or evidence of scumminess. These things are worthy of note, because they could form part of a case against a player when put in a wider context, but alone are just... weird. I'm sure you've seen it plenty of times - people word something in an odd way, draw an unusual conclusion from evidence presented, take an unconventional analytical approach, etc. These things are odd. They are not necessarily scummy.

Frankly, this approach seems liek a weaselly way to attack someone whilst giving yourself some kind of policy excuse to fall back on later... which is more scummy than the behaviour you're accusing other people of.

[Crazy]

Migwelloni, please respond to my post #54.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Neither of those are really quite appropriate. I don't think it says anything about how scummy you are, I'm just saying you're wrong. It's a philosophical debate on how to play mafia more than anything.

Note:

No. I don't think you could be more wrong about this. There are plenty of odd or weird things that are said during a mafia game. The vast majority are not, in the end, scummy or evidence of scumminess. These things are worthy of note, because they could form part of a case against a player when put in a wider context, but alone are just... weird. I'm sure you've seen it plenty of times - people word something in an odd way, draw an unusual conclusion from evidence presented, take an unconventional analytical approach, etc. These things are odd. They are not necessarily scummy.

Frankly, this approach seems liek a weaselly way to attack someone whilst giving yourself some kind of policy excuse to fall back on later... which is more scummy than the behaviour you're accusing other people of.

Hence the continued conversation leading to further analysis leading to the new conclusion of "wrong, but not in and of itself scummy".

[Johnny Rotten]

Basically, I put a vote on Crazy to pressure him and see how he reacted. When he didn't react right away, I got impatient and unvoted.

Albatross was saying that I should have left my pressure vote on a little bit longer, cause he wanted to see how YOU reacted to the situation. But, I went and fucked it all up.

Clued in brotha?

So you think that Albatross was trying to set a trap? Setting traps is a scummy thing to be doing; town should be able come to reasoned conclusions without the need for scummy tactics.

When did I see that Albatross was setting a trap? I said that I put a pressure vote on Crazy, then took it off too soon, thereby screwing myself AND Albatross.

Also, who says that traps are scummy? If you can cleverly word things causing scum to out themselves, what is the harm in that?

Consider yourself

FOS'd

for twisting my words around.

[Crazy]

Hence the continued conversation leading to further analysis leading to the new conclusion of "wrong, but not in and of itself scummy".

Okay.

[Migwelloni]

Also, who says that traps are scummy? If you can cleverly word things causing scum to out themselves, what is the harm in that?

Semantics are a scummy trait. Play with words all you like, but I will question your motives every time.

[Johnny Rotten]

Again, who is talking about semantics?

For someone who is trying to condemn me for trying to draw out scum, you are doing a bang up job of twisting my words around.

[Migwelloni]

Again, who is talking about semantics?

For someone who is trying to condemn me for trying to draw out scum, you are doing a bang up job of twisting my words around.

You are too concerned with setting traps than actually provoking real discussion.
The thing with traps is that if you set them correctly you can make town players fall into them. All you have to do is convince a few other town players to pile on board and you'll have insta-lynched a town player.
Don't use traps, instead you should foster real discussions.
Maybe I should move my vote over to you.

[MehPlusRawr]

Forgot about this game, it's my first one in Little Italy. Whoops.

dRool, do you prefer to play scum or town?

He answered roughly the same as me. Why didn't you ask me the same question? (I prefer playing mafia goon to VT, by the way. It's more fun to hunt for PRs than to attempt to lynch scum, mostly because I'm bad at the latter.)

Shattered's request to prod people sounded more like a "Mod, please tell everyone the game has started" instead of a "MORE CONTENT POST PEOPLE POST", which is neither scummy nor pro-town.

Crazy's weasel words business doesn't always apply, but as he said, Drool's reaction was more scummy than the initial use of "odd"

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

Again, who is talking about semantics?

For someone who is trying to condemn me for trying to draw out scum, you are doing a bang up job of twisting my words around.

You are too concerned with setting traps than actually provoking real discussion.
The thing with traps is that if you set them correctly you can make town players fall into them. All you have to do is convince a few other town players to pile on board and you'll have insta-lynched a town player.
Don't use traps, instead you should foster real discussions.
Maybe I should move my vote over to you.

In his post, Johnny Rotten isn't talking about traps. You bring up a point that either a) was not being talked about or b) a point that was over.

Why do you keep bringing this up?

[Alduskkel]

Again, who is talking about semantics?

For someone who is trying to condemn me for trying to draw out scum, you are doing a bang up job of twisting my words around.

You are too concerned with setting traps than actually provoking real discussion.
The thing with traps is that if you set them correctly you can make town players fall into them. All you have to do is convince a few other town players to pile on board and you'll have insta-lynched a town player.
Don't use traps, instead you should foster real discussions.
Maybe I should move my vote over to you.

So, we're talking about traps set to catch scum, right? But Mig is saying that traps that catch town are correct.

Vote: Migwelloni

. Sounds like he's thinking like scum.

[Excedrin]

Vote Count

Migwelloni (3): Crazy, Albatross, Alduskkel
jmj3000 (1): MehPlusRawr
Crazy (2): Shattered Viewpoint, Migwelloni
Shattered Viewpoint (1): smashbro_of_the_SSS

not voting: Johnny Rotten, jmj3000, DizzyIzzyB13, dRool89

[Crazy]

Migwelloni, please respond to my post #54.

Also, what did Johnny Rotten do that was a trap? When he voted for me? How is that a trap?

@SSSSSSS: Yes. Crazy still looks suspicious to me. All that Miller speculation, and the semantics debate. I just don't like it.

I'll accept your "semantics" accusation for now, though I'd naturally disagree. I like language, though, and not all language-related discussion is bad.

What I want to know is why my "Miller speculation" is scummy. As in, what was my intent in doing that?

[Shattered Viewpoint]

Migwelloni, please respond to my post #54.

Also, what did Johnny Rotten do that was a trap? When he voted for me? How is that a trap?

@SSSSSSS: Yes. Crazy still looks suspicious to me. All that Miller speculation, and the semantics debate. I just don't like it.

I'll accept your "semantics" accusation for now, though I'd naturally disagree. I like language, though, and not all language-related discussion is bad.

What I want to know is why my "Miller speculation" is scummy. As in, what was my intent in doing that?

I love language as well as the next guy, but your whole "discussion" of the thing was merely a distraction, I think.

As far as your Miller thing, I never speculate on anyone's intent, because I'm not sufficiently evolved to read minds. (Yet.) However, scum skim, and you skimmed the rules. QED.

[Crazy]

As far as your Miller thing, I never speculate on anyone's intent, because I'm not sufficiently evolved to read minds. (Yet.) However, scum skim, and you skimmed the rules. QED.

Everything that is scummy either has to be scummy because:

a. Many scum intentionally do it because it helps them.
b. Many scum unintentionally do it because of their subconscious thought processes.

Now... why would a scum be more likely to skim the rules than a townie? That seems pretty irrelevant to me.

[Johnny Rotten]

Again, who is talking about semantics?

For someone who is trying to condemn me for trying to draw out scum, you are doing a bang up job of twisting my words around.

You are too concerned with setting traps than actually provoking real discussion.
The thing with traps is that if you set them correctly you can make town players fall into them. All you have to do is convince a few other town players to pile on board and you'll have insta-lynched a town player.
Don't use traps, instead you should foster real discussions.
Maybe I should move my vote over to you.

You say AGAIN that I am setting traps, which nobody has said, but you. You say that I am using semantics, when again, only one saying it is you. Oh yeah, and you are twisting my words left and right.

How do you spell scum?

Vote - M-I-G-W-E-L-L-O-N-I