Seeing as we may have a flaker, and that flaker was who I was looking at closely, I figure it's only fair to put my thoughts on the guy before his replacement gets here.
POST #1:
Neo-con John wrote:Hello All
Played once before, really excited to play again. It was a random vote game I played on here and that setup led to a lot of quick deaths and rash decisions. I like the idea of asking questions as it seems like it will get everyone a bit more engaged. It just seems like a more sophisticated way to play which I would imagine is why the deadline is set for 20 days!
tracker wrote:
Neo-con John: What is your opinion on lurkers(ing)?
I don't really see how someone could have a positive opinion on lurking, I definitely see it as bad behavior. The more people talk the better it is for the game and the less people talk the more likely we are to make a bad decision as a whole. I plan to talk... a lot, so count on seeing plenty of me.
tracker wrote:
And one final question for everyone: What is your view on No-Lynching? Is their ever a time where No-Lynching would be better than a lynch?
I do not have any experience with a no-lynch so I can only follow the wisdom of my fellow players who seem to agree that a no-lynch actually only favors scum. The argument makes sense as even a bad lynch provides information on others motivations where as a no-lynch gives the town nothing.
He mentions that he plans to talk a lot, and then proceeds not to. This is not particularly scummy, it is just incorrect. What's more interesting is the fact that he willingly admits that he agrees with the previous posts, and has nothing further to add due to inexperience. Acceptable.
POST #2:
Neo-con John wrote:I do not understand. What is it about games with a no lynch rule that makes them more interesting?
Nuttin' new. Just a random theory question.
POST #3:
Neo-con John wrote:Sorry for not participating, long weekend.
So from what I gather so far there have been small fingers of suspicion cast at RPG and PE, a very small finger pointed at Gayle, and what I would describe as a strong finger being pointed at tracker which has actually resulted in a vote. That is 4 out of 9 players that have been accused in some fashion, and I like to think that the group cannot be dead wrong on all four, meaning we have a fairly good chance that at least one of those listed is actually scum.
Now I may have missed something, please tell me if so. I have prepared the following summation of suspicions so far:
Commie X accuses tracker in PS#20 about the questions asked
RPG accuses Gayle in PS#21 for his answer to the no-lynch question, though it later appears resolved in PS#25
RPG accuses tracker in PS#29 for his position on lynching lurkers
RPG accuses PE of possibly trying to "protect" tracker in PS#33
Gayle puts the names of RPG and tracker in bold letters in PS#35 questioning RPG's suspicions and had the following to say about tracker
He asks about the everyone's opinion on allowing a no lynch, but does not give his own until everyone else has given theirs. Then he goes out of his way to explain why a no lynch may be feasible.
He establishes that he is scatterbrained and doesn't have the best memory. A good excuse for a mistake later in the game.
He questions twilight's use of the word agenda, as if he thought twilight was accusing him.
He first advocates lynching lurkers as a policy, and then waters it down a bit with 'if i believe someone to be scum then they're lynch candidate #1'.
A strong case indeed.
This is IIoA, or information instead of analysis. The first half of his post is just recounting what has happened in what was a short game at that point. It is completely unnecessary and ultimately unhelpful for the town. Feeding them information they already have is
active lurking
, and is scummy.
Neo-con John wrote:Overall I am unable to figure out RPG, he is throwing accusations around a bit too much, though this could just be evidence of an aggressive towns person.
Gayle seems to have cleaned up any problems folks were having with his position on no-lynch, his case agianst tracker seems solid.
I completely agree that it looked like PE was trying to protect tracker from RPG's questioning which was pretty harsh, perhaps RPG was onto something? Nothing else PE has done seems scummy though so that doesn't add up right now.
On the first three people who had been suspected, we have very wishy-washy feelings. He gives the reason that has been stated why they were looked at, and then the reason why the attacks died down. All of this had been said by other people. It's analysis, but it is completely un-original.
Neo-con John wrote:Tracker seems very suspicious to me. From the beginning I saw the questions as good for the game but also as really good for tracker as it provides a great cover for scum. He gives the appearance of being pro-town while at the same time collecting valuable information on all of us and maybe even dividing us amongst ourselves. His second line of questions looked to me like someone trying to divert our attention away from the RPG/PE fiasco in PS# 29-33. The questions themselves just seem weak and quickly put together, What is your favorite role?, C'mon. I am not quite quite ready to vote but I am
Seriously considering:tracker
Then finally, the case on which many people up to this point seem to believe: the case on tracker. His only unique piece of information comes here, the line about possibly distracting from the RPG/PE fiasco that took up an entire 5 posts! An his way of distracting everyone? By bringing attention back on himself. We have a re-iteration of everyone's case on tracker, and then an absolute bogus argument.
POST #4:
Neo-con John wrote:PE-I meant the questioning was harsh. I also was agreeing with RPG that it seemed as though you were trying to remove the attention on tracker, who... if scum, is a scummy move on your part as in this scenario you would be his scum partner.
So I would like to ask you, Paltry Excuse, what do you think of tracker and why did you get in the way of RPG's questions?
I'm the first one to question his words, and so he comes back at me. Slightly, peripherally OMGUS, but not entirely. The first short paragraph is a re-iteration on what has been brought up about me.
The second is in two parts. First, what I thought of tracker. Fair enough. The next question is obviously trying to put blame on me. Why did I get in the way of RPG's questions? This is a real attempt at blame-shifting. He says the only way what I did could be scummy, is if tracker is. The second part of the question seriously questions my behaviour, and accuses me of something. I take it you think I'm scummy. Which means you're essentially blaming two people in one post, without any new information on your own.
POST #5:
Neo-con John wrote:^ Agreed
The next time we hear from John is this. He agrees that tracker should post his findings. RPG has most recently said that he finds my first paragraph in my response to John as townie. Without ever giving a response or comment to me, John has now moved on to his favourite target, tracker. As soon as his argument lost favour, John gives up his claims.
POST #6:
Neo-con John wrote:imkingdavid wrote:
RPG wrote:I still have that game on my watched topics, and I re-read all of what I wrote. I got prodded, had short sentences,
didn't even talk to my scum-buddy (who got killed in D1, which I wasn't entirely active on.) Which, if you'll see, is exactly how I'm not playing now.
So are you admitting to talking to your scum buddy this time around?
This is an interesting piece of evidence here. I understand that this could have been an innocent unintentional use of words but it also could be a Freudian slip. If so it suggests that
(1)RPG is scum;
(2)RPG's scumpartner is one of the people he has not interacted with yet.
Ill do the research later on who RPG has and has not ben in contact with, unless someone else would like to.
If true, it would mean that tracker is not scum as he and RPG have communicated with each other, or a deeper unrelated ruse could be at work. Perhaps RPG's scum strategy is to strongly accuse his partner right off the bat in order to throw the rest of us off.
Admittedly I am speaking from a position that is already highly critical of tracker so I do not know how objective this actually is, but I do believe this new piece of evidence is something worth looking at. Though I am not even really completely sold on the idea that RPG is scum. Like I said it could just be a misuse of words.
Holy crap-muffins we have nothing new in this post! We have IKD's catch based on RPG's wording. Then we have an explanation of what it could mean. Then we have the promise of more about it. Then we have how it relates to tracker. Then we have... nothing? Wishy-washy opinion on whether RPG or tracker is scum, I guess.
I find you very scummy, Neo-con John.
Vote: Neo-con John