Mini 578 - Mistery at Montescuro - Game Over!
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Interesting, I might have to keep that in mind for future games. Hadn't really thought about it much yet.Yosarian2 wrote:Meh. Different reasons. In this case, it didn't seem like another random vote would be helpful. Sometimes I like to random vote on my second post instead of my first, get better reations that way. And sometimes you might not want to random vote at all, like if you don't want to leave something that someone might misinterpret as a breadcrumb, and if that was the only time you didn't random vote it would kind of stand out as unusual, which you don't want. So all in all I try to random vote about half the time, I guess.
Does anyone else find that "fair and balanced" vote count up there a little suspicious? No one coming up with 2 votes out of 10 cast strikes me as odd. We've either got some crazy luck here, or a couple people placing their votes carefully so as not to attract attention.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Correct, putting 2 or 3 votes on someone during the random phase in a game this size is usually pretty meaningless. The fact that it didn't happen by the time 10 votes had been cast makes me think at least a couple people near the end of the voting didn't want to deal with even the light question you just gave to Sensfan and Guardian. Being that afraid of questioning this early in the game seems a little odd.JamesThePhox wrote:I think that's a fair assumption. Not that bandwagoning is a major accusation these days.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I interpreted your statement that I quoted as mostly a joke, because of the . My response was similarly a joke, indicated by the .Guardian wrote:
Why?Macavenger wrote:
I'm starting to think I rather like my vote right where it is.Guardian wrote:I don't wish to answer at this time. My choice was not random, however.
It requires 4 more votes to lynch Fox. Use your votes wisely .
In the event that you weren't joking, then I'm curious why your choice was not random, and exactly what "use your votes wisely" is supposed to mean.
In any event, I think my joke vote has outlived its usefulness.Unvote.
Like Dasquian, I find Vampaneze's post 47 combined with his selective looking random vote the most interesting thing to investigate so far.Vote: VampanezeHunter.He looks like he's trying to keep himself out of the spotlight to me right now, which seems like a great reason to put him in it.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I believe my reasoning is a bit different from Dasquian's. I explained the bulk of it here:VampanezeHunter wrote:Then it would be Macavenger/Dasquian mainly because I still don't see the contradiction so if you could explain.
Macavenger wrote:He looks like he's trying to keep himself out of the spotlight to me right now, which seems like a great reason to put him in it.
This would make more sense if you hadn't also said it when you removed the vote. So, you obviously realized that this wasn't a newbie game, and that your vote was not causing any immediate danger of a lynch, but you quickly moved it anyway. Why?VampanezeHunter wrote:Also I removed my vote because I have only just returned from leaving Mafiascum and have been recently playing Newbie games and it's only 4 to lynch.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
(Italics mine)Near wrote:Vote Yosarian
because he thinks everyone's crazy.
hi everyone!
FOS VampanezeHunterfor not falling for OMGUS trap and voting for Dasquian or Macavenger.
FOS Joudasfor talking weird. Watch for post game restriction.
This post is making me scratch my head.
You're FoSing someone fornotOMGUS voting?
The overall character of it looks like something that belongs in the random vote stage, which we seem to mostly be past... The FoS's make no sense to me. I'm horribly confused.
Are you trying to breadcrumb thatyouhave a post restriction with what I italicized there? I'm trying to come up with wild justifications for how this makes any sort of sense at this point.
FoS: Nearfor warping my brain.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Do you engage in weird theory debates in every game? I know this wasn't directed at me, but I take this as evidence that poor play by scum results in faster lynches. I rather fail to see the point of bringing this up in a game, honestly; it seems better suited for MD.Guardian wrote:How would you respond if I told you that Adel did a study near the end of last year showing that in 200 or so random minis, day ones where scum were lynched were on average about a page shorter than day ones where town were lynched (8.5 as compared to 9.5)? What if I also told you that she said that day ones where the town eventually won were shorter than day ones where the town eventually lost, to an even greater extent, about 2.5 pages (7.5 as compared to 10)?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Yes, I find it faulty. You're speaking about play of the town and scum relative to each other, whereas I am speaking of the quality of play of the scum in absolute terms. The mean day length is meaningless on its own in my opinion; there are related statistics required to paint a better picture. If this answer seems vague, see below.Guardian wrote:- Mac, you say that poor play by scum results in faster lynches.
- That means that the scum playing comparatively worse than the town resulted in faster lynches.
- That means that the town playing comparatively better than the scum resulted in faster lynches.
- That means that good play by the town resulted in resulted in faster lynches.
- That means that if the town played well, faster lynches occured.
- That means that if the town plays well, faster lynches will occur.
I don't engage in theory debates every game.
I agree in general, which is why I thought three times before doing it. In this case though, I actually want to kill this line of discussion off, because I don't like what you're doing with it.Guardian wrote:And for future reference, don't answer questions directly addressed to others. That's a big no-no/scum-tell of mine.mfos: Mac. Anyone else who does the same, after my saying this, I'll find quite suspicious.
FoS: Guardian-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I think it's mildly weaker than my case on Vampaneze; worth a few questions and your own vote, but not exactly something worthy of trying to rally a full bandwagon over.Guardian wrote:Mac, what doyouthink of my case on Foxy?
Which reminds me, since I don't really have much invested in my vote on VH right now...Unvote; Vote: Guardian.If what you're actually doing is scum hunting Guardian, I'd like to see some more persuasive results, or something that actually looks like scum hunting, soon. Right now it looks like random attempts to distract the town. I'm seeing merit in the play of a couple other players who are being obscure right now, but not yours.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
A 2 line suggestion of hypocrisy isn't worth bandwagoning. If you got a some kind of hugely scummy reaction from the accusation, that probably would be.Guardian wrote:Peculiar... what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over? What is the criterion for a case being worth one's own vote, but not being worth attempting to gain further support?
Why do you think your case on Phox does merit a bandwagon?
Obscure play is not inherently bad. Yours, however, currently looks like trying to run the town in circles with inane theory questions, while making vague insinuations against lots of players. Asking lots of questions can be good scum hunting, but right now I feel like you're doing more twisting/distracting than looking for reactions. The discussion about length of days seems entirely pointless; you're leading in a direction so far from conventional wisdom that the discussion clearly belongs in the MD forum, not an active game. I can't see any purpose for making it in a game other than trying to make normal responses into scummy ones.Guardian wrote:What does scum hunting look like? You say my play is obscure... does that make it scummy? Why do you say I attempting to distract the town?
I haven't specifically demanded to know what you're doing yet because I know that if this is some kind of crazy scum hunting that I'm not experienced enough to recognize, revealing that would defeat the purpose. This needs to produce some tangible results or a better case than you have on Phox pretty soon though, or I'm going to start asking some pointed questions in that direction.
I'm currently quite suspicious of how hard you're pushing for votes on Phox. Multiple people have told you they don't find your case worth voting for, and you haven't produced any new accusations, but you're still fishing for more votes. Why?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Apologies in advance for the incoming text-wall; this game has been moving very quickly.
Depends entirely on the content of the paragraph. In this case, most likely not, because I don't think there's enough of a case on Phox to fill a paragraph right now.Guardian wrote:Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?
Depends on the severity. I'd say Vampaneze is every bit as guilty as Phox, if not more so (same end of the random phase 'offense,' moving his vote when a bandwagon built off it). In light of that, why would you be trying to bandwagon Phox over VH?Guardian wrote:Hypocrisy and WIFOM aren't worth bandwagoning?
Partially, this is a tone thing, but:Guardian wrote:Vague insinuations? The only insinuation I see that I've made is that Phox should get more votes.
(Italics mine)Guardian wrote:Macavenger wrote:I think it's mildly weaker than my case on Vampaneze; worth a few questions and your own vote, but not exactly something worthy of trying to rally a full bandwagon over.Peculiar...what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over?
This was the best concrete example I could find. You are questioning ordinary statements about reasons for actions in a way that seems to imply that they are scummy, when there's nothing scummy about them. It feels like you're trying to plant an impression of scumminess over ordinary statements, which I think qualifies as making insinuations.
Guardian wrote:
Justify this.Macavenger wrote:Asking lots of questions can be good scum hunting, but right now I feel like you're doing more twisting/distracting than looking for reactions.- See above.
- I get the distraction point from the fact that you are barraging so many questions at everyone right now that it seems people are having a difficult time fitting their own scumhunting in around reacting to your questions. You are dominating the thread. The majority of posts I see are either you or people reacting to you. This theory debate you started doesn't seem to be progressing the game at all. You appear to be trying to force people to react to you more than think about the game for themselves.
-
A great example of the twisting I'm talking about. He's not even voting Near, let alone asking for a bandwagon on him. You're either not paying attention here (which I findGuardian wrote:
Why doesn't Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'? Why is Near worthy of a bandwagon for one small instance, but Phox isn't?Evilgorrilaz wrote:FoS: Near
Failing to OMGUS is not scummy.highlyunlikely almost to the point of absurdity based on your other questions), or you're trying to twist his argument into something it isn't.
Based on my points about twisting and such, I feel you're fishing for certain types of reactions that benefit you, not honest reactions. This doesn't look like scumhunting, it looks like witchhunting, in the Salem Witch Trials style.Guardian wrote:I'm not sure why what I'm doing looksthatcrazy; I'm trying to garner responses and reactions from players, and I'm trying to get people to justify their actions and opinions.
Happy with my vote on Guardian right now.
Near wrote:Explain. How can anyone think that my post was serious unless you were trying to look for a victim for your a bandwagon.
This. We had pretty well exited the random voting phase by the time you posted that. Since you gave no indication at the time that it was a joke, why would you expect anyone to assume that?Dasquian wrote:Well, I thought it was serious, because you actually did FOS him and gave a reason, and gave no signs of it being a hilarious gag. Saying it was a joke seems like a cop-out afterthought.
Furthermore, this wasn't posted until late on page 3. There was nothing more relevant you could have done then other than make joke FoS's? You still haven't contributed anything this game other than mocking people who took your post seriously, despite 4+ pages of content with some very interesting stuff from Guardian, as well as reactions to the same. Why don't you post about a couple players you find suspicious and why?
(Italics mine for emphasis) I endorse this product or service.Joudas wrote:I see what you are classifying as WIFOM, but I don't really see it as being WIFOM. No, I don't think that that level of WIFOM is meritorious of my vote this early in the game. I find my lack of a vote (and FOS of you) a more useful state of affairs, yes. The lack of a vote because there's nobody I have any desire to lynch right now based on what we've seen, and the FOS because while what you're doing could be considered scum hunting (by pointing a lot of fingers and raising a lot of often-moot or frivilous points and gaging the reaction people have),I don't like your methods, at least not at this point in the game. The way you're doing things puts people on edgewhich makes them watch what they're saying much more closely. A better method, in my opinion, is to let the conversation flow early on, and start grinding down on folks once they've had a chance to incriminate themselves, not try to get them to incriminate themselves by grinding down on them.
I think it's a very mild scumtell. As you say, scum would be more concious of it. I pursued the issue with Vamp mainly because it was the biggest thing I had to go on at the time. Obviously I'm much more interested in the weird stuff Guardian has been doing now, as I'm getting much bigger scumvibes from that.Joudas wrote:As for the whole 'everyone voting different folks during the jokevote stage' ongoing discussion, in all honesty, I don't see this as being particularly scummy. Chances of anyone getting lynched because of one of those jokevotes are so slim it's not even worth mentioning. It could be a matter of someone not wanting to draw attention to themselves by ganging up, sure - but town or scum, who wants to draw attention to themselves? No one. Sure, scum would be more conscious of it, but this early in the game? This is a null tell.
What do people think of the idea of a Guardian/Near/VampanezeHunter scumgroup? Vamp acts like he's trying to avoid attention, then disappears when he gets some anyway. (Bit early to accuse him of outright lurking yet.) Near has been acting oddly and not contributing. Guardian has, well, reread the first half of my post if you missed it for my thoughts on him. Guardian has also been slinging questions wildly, but has asked only one light question of Vamp, and none that I've seen of Near. Some of his questions could almost be interpreted as defending them, in fact. (Why is Vamp more vote worthy than Phox, and similar.)
Also, since I know some people like to make a big deal over this, no, I don'tknowthere are 3 scum in the game. I'm making an educated guess based on the fact that this is a 12 player mini normal. Without introducing odd mechanics that require a theme game it seems most balanced; unless this is a mountainous game, which I doubt from the way people are acting.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I'll respond to Guardian's comments a bit later tonight when I have more time (going golfing with some friends in a few minutes here). A couple quick notes I do have time to make right now, though:
I think Phox's latest post is pretty townish. I do agree that 38 was a little bit off, but honestly that is so minor compared to what I'm seeing out of several other people right now that I'm pretty surprised Guardian is still pushing that angle (see his scum list 2 posts above mine, Phox is number 2). While his behavior has been worht commenting on, the case is so weak compared to what several other players have done I just don't see the point right now.
I'd also like to note in advance that, while I'm still very suspicious of Guardian, I am considering moving my vote to Near soon. Near has been postingextensivelyin several games over the last 19 hours, but hasn't posted in this one at all, despite a lot of content and several people asking him to. Honestly given his level of activity elsewhere on the site right now, I think an accusation of lurking is justified, on top of the previously mentioned odd entrance and lack of content. If Near doesn't post something useful very soon, I will likely be voting him.
Interested in seeing what Vamp has to say once he catches up.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Elaborate. What do you find interesting about that statement?Guardian wrote:
Interesting.Macavenger wrote:
Depends entirely on the content of the paragraph. In this case, most likely not, because I don't think there's enough of a case on Phox to fill a paragraph right now.Guardian wrote:Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?
I think I can accept this answer; that will be partially based on your answer to one later, though.Guardian wrote:VH also merits bandwagoning. I'm more interested in Phox because I see him as about equally guilty, but there is much more resistance.
As I said, that was simply the example of it that stuck out the most to me. Your choice of the word peculiar there implies to me that you find my logic wrong somehow. Many of the questions you've asked come across that way to me. The fact that you seem to be doing this to a number of players is a reason to find you suspicious in my opinion, yes. I believe further discussion on this point here will just be duplicating general comments I intend to make at the end.Guardian wrote:
Me finding your logic peculiar is a vague insinuation of your scumminess? This is a reason to find me suspicious?Macavenger wrote:
(Italics mine)Guardian wrote:Peculiar...what is worth rallying a full bandwagon over?
This was the best concrete example I could find.
You seem to be trying to force the interpretation that several players actions are scum. To me, that helps scum more than town, so I think this makes you more likely to be scum.Guardian wrote:
Positing this is true, why is this bad? Is being suspicious of everyone and trying to interpret everyone's actions in a scummy way indicative of me being scum?Macavenger wrote:You are questioning ordinary statements about reasons for actions in a way that seems to imply that they are scummy, when there's nothing scummy about them. It feels like you're trying to plant an impression of scumminess over ordinary statements, which I think qualifies as making insinuations.
More twisting. I never asserted that the majority of what you were talking about was theory, simply that I didn't think the theory discussion was helpful. The majority comment refers to the way you ere dominating.Guardian wrote:
I disagree strongly with the assertion that all, or even the majority, of what I've been talking about is theory. I also disagree strongly that my 'dominating the game' is at all indicative of me having anti-town motives.Macavenger wrote:I get the distraction point from the fact that you are barraging so many questions at everyone right now that it seems people are having a difficult time fitting their own scumhunting in around reacting to your questions. You are dominating the thread. The majority of posts I see are either you or people reacting to you. This theory debate you started doesn't seem to be progressing the game at all.
I notice you seem to have stopped posting in this dominant/questioning style recently - why?
As for dominating being indicative of your motives, I think we both know you've said... other... things about that in the past. (Unfortunately I don't believe I can say more about this point without referencing an ongoing game, but Guardian should know what I'm talking about.)
If you're scum, obviously getting townies to react to your questions in a scummy fashion would benefit you, as it makes it easier to lynch townies. Many of the subtle insinuations I've seen from you give me the impression that you are trying to get townies to react in such a fashion. The fact that you haven't asked any questions of this type to a couple of suspicious players also leads me to this view.Guardian wrote:What sort of reactions would benefit me that aren't honest reactions? Why would townies react in a non-honest way to my questions?
Correct, although see also my comment on Near in my previous post. His lack of content/lurking is rapidly catching him up with you on my scumdar.Guardian wrote:
I assume you're serious now, as there is no smiley face?Macavenger wrote:Happy with my vote on Guardian right now.
I'd have to dig up one of my old E&M textbooks to be sure, but I think based on the composition of light necessary ot produce the color orange, this actually isn't the case. Admitting that I'm right?Guardian wrote:
The color blue could also be seen as orange if you're wearing funny glasses.Macavenger wrote:Some of [Guardian']s questions could almost be interpreted as defending [VH and Near], in fact. (Why is Vamp more vote worthy than Phox, and similar.)
Now that you've suggested it, yes. I consider it more likely that you're trying to push weak cases against people that aren't your scumbuddies.Guardian wrote:Have you considered the possibility that I'm trying to get reactions out of suspicious people that Idon'tsee anyone else focusing on?
Basically, I'm getting a gut feeling from Guardian that he's trying to twist and distort town statements into scummy reactions. His posts just seem a little bit off to me. I've been able to pull up a few specific examples supporting my feeling, which I think makes pursuing it legitimate. He seems to be trying to cast suspicion everywhere, not just on legitimately suspicious people.
Guardian, your last post seems to imply that you're happy with Phox's response to you. Is this correct? Are you dropping your case on him for now? Why or why not?
I'd also like to see some elaboration of your suspicions about Pyro. I agree that he's been doing a bit of agreeing with people this game, but I'm also seeing original content from him when he does.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I think Joudas just jumped in and explained my problem with Guardian's posts better than I've been doing. The part where I disagree is in the likelihood of being scum because of the way Guardian is questioning.
This is the part that makes me think scum. Further, something in the way Guardian's questions are worded makes me think he's trying to pull that sort of reaction out of townies.Joudas wrote:It's just as easy for town to say something you could (mis?)interpret as scummy as it is for scum to do so, and it comes off as trying to find someone to latch onto, keeping the fingers pointing to avoid any fingers coming to rest on you.
I'm still not really happy with Guardian's answers to me. However, after reading around for a bit I'm going to put my feelings about Guardian down to a major difference in writing style for the time being. Depending on future developments, I may come back to this later.Unvote: Guardian; IGMEOY: Guardian.
The other half of the reasoning for that is I'm getting really frustrated with Near's silence. It's been over 2 days since he's posted in this game now, despite repeated calls for content. In the meantime, he's made 25 posts in other games. It's blatantly obvious at this point that he's willfully ignoring us here.
Vote: Near
That's L-2.
Near, post something useful, or die.
FoS: VampanezeHunterfor not following up with his thoughts yet, plus previously mentioned reasons.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
My vote on you had very little to do with that post. It was mainly from the fact taht your play this game has been lurk, make a few posts with no content, lurk more. Which is useless at best, scum at worst.Near wrote:First, I want to say that I was really joking.
Debating what to do now that Near's posted. Will most likely post again later today.
Mod: Prod VampanezeHunter also please?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I think I'm going to leave my vote on Near for the time being. I'm rather underwhelmed by the scum hunting in his most recent post. It's going to take a bit more contribution than that for me to move it.
Near, is there anything you think makes me look scummy other than this really tenuous "link" to Phox?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I feel like now is a good time to mention that it's been almost 3 days since Near's "oops I've been prodded here's some stuff" post, over 2 days since I asked him a direct question in response to that post, and he's yet to post here again. Meanwhile from his post history, he's posted 33 times in other games since the post here, 28 since my question for him. He just doesn't seem to want to post in this game unless he's been prodded.
This leads me to conclude that leaving my vote on him was the correct choice.
Repeating for Near's benefit:Why do you think I'm scummy? Do you have any case other than the tenuous link you suggested between Phox and myself? Is there anyone besides myself and Phox that looks scummy to you?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I vehemently disagree with this. Joudas and I were attacking Guardian at various points for what we saw as crap logic. Calling this scummy as a defense of the target of said crap logic is a terrible idea - it discourages townies from combating bad logic, which is something they need to be doing, as it is most commonly a tool of scum.Coron wrote:
meaning you didn't take actions directly to defend him, but rather took actions that would defend him, without precisely "defending" him.Coron wrote:with oblique defence
I've even stated at a couple points that I think Guardian has a possible point about Phox, I just think he tried to blow it way out of proportion, and called him on that.
If you think what Joudas and I said against Guardian was wrong, point out why, and call us scummy for that. Don't claim we're defending Phox and call it an indication of a scum group, when we're doing something townies should be doing.
FoS: Coron
I'd also like to hear why you think PyroDwarf is the scummiest out of the group you mentioned. I'm not really feeling the case against him just yet.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Coron wrote:You list the people who had weird to just slightly off reactions to the early wagon as my possible scum? That was not really my attention, other than the three I said I found scummy that's not what I was saying.
This looks a fair bit like you calling the five of us scummy to me. If I'm interpreting the rest of your argument correctly, you settled on a Pyro/Joudas/Phox scumgroup, but I don't think it's unreasonable at all to be classifying those five as people you listed as suspicious.Coron wrote:Yup, JamesThePhox was mildly bandwagonned early, then there was an unexpected reaction by Joudus, Macavenger, pyrodwarf, and to a smaller degree singing librarian and Yos. For some reason a bunch of people jumped to his defense.
This is all pretty clearly scum hunting directed at Sensfan, especially when taken in the context of the rest of Pyro's posts. He even says he doesn't see anything wrong with Guardian moving his vote to JtP there.Coron wrote:PyroDwarf wrote:uhmm, okay. Sensfan, what does this mean?
Why did you move your vote so quickly? It doen't make sence to me. why not just leave it on macavenger? Guardian, why the mystery?sensfan wrote:
I voted you because you had 2 votes already.
It looks to me as though you are undermining the people attacking JamesThePhox, and to me, that seems like a suspicious activity.PyroDwarf wrote:I think SensFan is more suspicious than VH. It wasn't his vote on macavenger, that could pass as normal random stage voting. But why change it to JtP right after guardian? Guardian vote's change seemed to be a response to Macavenger's "even vote count" comment, as did SensFan's vote on Macavenger. But moving it to the person that another player just voted for? Why not have 2 players with 2 votes? I think I'll keep my rand. vote and pot a FoS on SensFan.
I'm still not feeling the case on PyroDwarf. Right now it's looking like a case being drummed up by scum looking for an easy lynch. I'm not totally opposed to pressuring him a bit and wouldn't mind seeing some more content from him, but I still think he's most likely to be town at the moment.
Coron's attacks against people scumhunting and arguing against bad logic or theory are not sitting well at all.HoS: Coronwith threat to vote if I don't see something different soon. I really wish I had two votes right now, as I don't want to unvote Near until I see something useful from him.
I'm also still suspicious of Guardian, both for previously mentioned reasons, as well as his immediate willingness to follow the replacement of a scummy player not sitting well. He's a very firm third behind Near and Coron at this time, though.
Looking forward to seeing Yosarian's and Phox's reactions to Coron, as well as the results of gorrilaz and librarian's rereads. Also very much need to see more content from Sensfan. In fact,Mod: Please prod Sensfan.He hasn't posted here since the 29th, and that was just a simple I'm here.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
His only votes have been a random vote for me, and a vote for you when you followed up scummy posting with a massive lurk. I'd hardly call that bandwagon hopping.Near wrote:Seriously, I don't have much to say except the fact that looking at his vote history, he was trying to bandwagon from best lynch target to the next.
On top of that, you're still contributing nothing to the discussion. There's been plenty to talk about.
Confirm Vote: Near
I'd like to see 6 votes on Near at this point; I'm curious to see what (if any) kind of claim/content we'd get from him at L-1. It's pretty obvious that's the only way we'll get him to post anything of substance.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I don't think anything of tossing a third vote on a player page 2 in a game this size, Pyro. It's very likely that was exactly what Sensfan said it was: trying to start some conversation. That's pretty much the entire point of the random voting phase as I understand it - get a few votes on someone to see how they react. Random pressure is all you have in the first page or two. I don't think there was anything wrong with his voting. I'm not happy with his lurking, obviously, but that's what prods and replacements are for.
Phox still strikes me as townish, but there's enough suspicion and reasons floating his way that it can't be all scumpowered (if it ever was). I'll probably try to do a careful reread focusing on him tomorrow."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Ok, I've reread again, with a specific eye towards Phox, and I'm still not seeing the case on him. Could someone who's suspicious of him currently lay out a comprehensive case or do a PbP on him or something?
Also after rereading, I feel like Dasquian has been sorta coasting somewhat - would like to see more content from him. Sensfan also definitely needs to start posting more. I can see reason for being very curt early Day 1, but certainly after 9 pages you must have some significant comments by now, Sensfan?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I've read through the last couple of pages a couple times now. Surprisingly little content to catch up on, actually.
I see Guardian's point on Dasquian - it's occurred to me several pages back - but I think he's once again blowing it way out of proportion. I'm also somewhat reassured by the higher amount of content in Dasquian's more recent posts.
I also understand what Coron said about the Near lynch not quite feeling right, to a certain extent. Paradoxically though, his recent increased posting has actually helped dispel that feeling in me. I'm more comfortable lynching him now than I was a couple days ago.
I still don't like Guardian's methods this game. He's moving back up my scum list somewhat.
Coron seems more townlike recently."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Because we're playing Mafia.Guardian wrote:Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment?
I'm tired of playing your everyone-has-to-justify-everything-to-me game. Justify why your vote-hopping, immediately following the replacement of a player you agreed was scummy, and holier-than-thou attitude are indicative of a pro-town alignment.Guardian wrote:
Why? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed a bad thing? Is focusing on players that have gone entirely unnoticed -- and are likely scum -- a bad thing? Justify your statement. Why are my methods indicative of a pro-scum alignment?Macavenger wrote:I still don't like Guardian's methods this game. He's moving back up my scum list somewhat.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
You're the one who's been spouting off about how using meta is bad this game, mister.Guardian wrote:You'd be surprised at how many games I'd finished and realized that we'd have won had the town just trusted me implicitly.
You'd also be surprised at the shockingly few times that doing so would have switched a town-win to a town loss;
I'm also totally confused by post 301. Despite seeing several things in it I shouldn't like (buddying with me, radical change of posting style, conclusion that duck = scum that I'm not sold on), I get hit with this overwhelming townvibe when I read it. Very confusing.
Several people have already commented on this, but this is just so terrible it's worth bringing up again. It's like the opposite of the "too townie" fallacy: I'm so scummy I couldn't possibly be scum!Near wrote:So you seem to think I made a slip here. Don't you think my saying this was too deliberate to be a slip?
This seems to have been posted while I was writing the rest. So, you're claiming that you've made a WIFOM statement which somehow nullifies someone's argument now? Is there a reason this isn't a scummy crock of shit that I'm not seeing?Near wrote:This was the point of my argument . That is, if I was deliberate and careful, this would be WIFOM which would nullify what Guardian said initially: "Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip ."
Difficult to read =/= scummy. In fact, difficult to read almost directly implies neutrality; if you can't read the person well they shouldn't be near the top or bottom of your scum list. It's not a good reason to lynch someone most of the time, better to pressure them and target them with investigative roles if any to try to read them better. Much as I disagree with some of Guardian's methods this game, he's certainly right that being opaque can be good for town if done in the right way. I'm feeling pretty neutral about Guardian currently, possibly with a slight scum leaning but moving back towards town. I go back and forth on him a lot this game though.Near wrote:
I thought the bolded part of your post makes you scummy. Can you guess why I thought so?Guardian wrote:Yeah but, Mac has the significant difference that he's also been focusing on moredifficult to read targets, like me for example. And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town, so, ya know, there goes that.
As a note about Guardian's investigative role tip though, while I agree with that based on what I've seen of Yosarian's reputation, I'd much rather being seeing investigative roles target Guardian tonight. Kinda have to wonder if that "tip" was to try to stop people from investigating him. Worried about what they might find Guardian?
Talking about how you could WIFOM this stuff is different from actually doing it how?Near wrote:I'm simply denying that I am a scum, which goes without saying. What did you mean by "if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you"? What are you saying! Did you think, if I were a scum, I would fall for this trap? Anyway, even if I were a scum and Dasquian was my scum partner, I might even say Dasquian was my partner to make it look like he's not. This is wifom and won't provide any information even if I were to turn scum when lynched.
Don't like this. I'm much happier with a Near lynch than a Dasquian lynch right now myself, but bandwagon size should not be a factor in determining your vote unless forced to make a lynch by deadline mechanics. At least, not for a townie.Dasquian wrote:So you're going to vote Near then, right? Given you think that there's a 68.3% chance I'm bussing him, it follows that you think we're both scum. Near has the bigger bandwagon.
Very much don't like this. Scumhunting on more targets than you think are scum is a very good thing, because chances are even the best townie isn't always going to be right about his first however many. There's nothing wrong with having multiple conflicting theories about who could be scum, as long as each theory is self-consistent. You can discard incorrect ones as alignments are revealed and continue pushing on the ones that still seem viable.Coron wrote:++ to suspicion of Joudas, as he shows absolutely no consistency in who he thinks is scum, other than avoid the other people I think are scum, in the past like 3 days he called me and Guardian scum and then completely flip flopped into agreeing with Guardian and all this time leaving his vote on Near, even after his last post where he said it was scum's plan go get Near lynched. I mean, this is nonsensical.
This is the second time I've seen Coron arguing that what I would consider normal scum hunting tactics are scummy, and I don't like it even a little bit, especially since he replaced someone who seemed to be trying to avoid attention.
Also, Joudas doesn't agree with Guardian. He comes to a similar conclusion as Guardian based on very different reasoning. Saying he agrees with Guardian could be suspicious twisting of what he's saying, in this context.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
The point you're missing here is that, from what you've said here, there are two possibilities:Near wrote:Honestly, at this point, I am wondering if you are actually thinking about what I am trying to say OR if you are just trying to make me look scummy in anyway possible.
-1. Guardian said: "I hate mafia, because I have to convince people of stuff I'm pretty sure about. Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment?"
0. I said: "I was like wow, guardian must be cop and he checked out dasquian N0. But then, this was a day start game. My first reaction was, wtf is guardian talking about."
1. Guardian said: "Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip "
2. He is implying that I am a scum, and Dasquian is my scum partner.
3. If 0 was deliberate and not a slip, then you cannot get 2 from 0 because it's wifom.
1) You slipped and are scum with Dasquian.
2) You're admitting to deliberately WIFOMing, which from everything I've seen in my admittedly limited time here, is usually considered scummy.
Can you see how this doesn't look good for you? In either alternative, your statements come out as scummy.
I added Guardian's inital question to the quote chain here to help illustrate. Guardian's question looks mostly rhetorical/joking to me. There was really no reason for you to reply beyond "I'm simply denying I'm scum" if you were going to reply to it at all - honestly I wouldn't bother with that kind of question. When you then go on from there about how you could fall for the "trap" and WIFOM about Dasquian being your partner, when there's no reason for you to say any of that in the first place... you're actually WIFOMing about being scum with Dasquian as your partner.Near wrote:
I was illustrating to Guardian why either answer to his question would lead to WIFOM.Macavenger wrote:
Talking about how you could WIFOM this stuff is different from actually doing it how?Near wrote:
I'm simply denying that I am a scum, which goes without saying. What did you mean by "if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you"? What are you saying! Did you think, if I were a scum, I would fall for this trap? Anyway, even if I were a scum and Dasquian was my scum partner, I might even say Dasquian was my partner to make it look like he's not. This is wifom and won't provide any information even if I were to turn scum when lynched.Guardian wrote:Hm so uh, you are denying that, if Dasquian is scum you are his scum partner? Remember, if you lie in answering this question we'll have to lynch you.
Actually, I wasn't convinced you were scum until a couple posts ago. In any case, you're doing a fine job making yourself look scummy.Near wrote:My overall feeling from Macavenger's post: his main goal seems to be trying to make me look scummy no matter what I say. He doesn't seem to focus on what I am actually trying to say in my argument, instead he seems to be mainly concerned about how he can make my argument look scummy. It is true that a blind townie who absolutely convinced with himself that I am a scum can make this kind of arguments. But at this point, I am more inclined to think Macvaenger is a scum trying to lynch an easy target who has quite a bandwagon already.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Ok, I see what you're saying here now. For the record, the it in "then you cannot get 2 from 0 because it's WIFOM" points to the 0, not the 2, in the way I naturally read sentences.Near wrote:1) Re-read my post and tell me if you think I made a slip.
2) No. I am not admitting to deliberately WIFOMing. I am arguing what Guardian said was WIFOM.
This does nothing to change the fact that your argument against it being a slip was an atrocious example of WIFOM.
Please quote where I have ever said I thought that specific question from Guardian was entirely serious.Near wrote:Now you are saying that you think Guardian was being sarcastic. This isn't what you said eailer. I didn't find Guardian's post to be rhetorical, that's why I explained either answer to his question would lead to WIFOM
The point is, you pretty much recognize that you can only hurt yourself by answering the question in any detail. You then proceed to go ahead and talk about how you could WIFOM about the question if you're scum. There's really no reason for you to do that if you're town, and saying "I could say xxxxxxx" is very close to just saying xxxxxxx. This looks strongly like trying to get a WIFOM link to Dasquian out there for us to find if you're lynched and turn up scum, without having to take responsibility for putting that WIFOM out there now.
I also feel like you trying to turn my argument around on me here is just a desperate attempt to get your own neck out of the noose.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Welcome to the game, MBF.
Please explain why.Evilgorrilaz wrote:I still think a JtP lynch would be better than a Near lynch.
I'm interested in MBF's entry into the game here. I think the interplay between he and Guardian could be most instructive, and I intend to watch carefully.
I'm content with a Near lynch at this time.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Hey guys, I just noticed something.
Evilgorillaz is pulling a Near! Check his post history, he's got like 20 posts (I didn't count this time) in other games since his little one liner about how he'd rather lynch phox than Near, and the trend continues back past that.
I'm still heavily in favor of a Near lynch today, both because he's been actively scummy in his recent responses and because his lynch will give us far more information than hitting EG, but this is seriously not cool.
FoS: Evilgorillaz
Is this game just less cool than other ones you guys are in or something? Seriously, I don't get why we're having such a problem with people ignoring this game.
I'd also like to know more about an issue that I think has kinda gotten buried in all the excitement about Near and Dasquian lately. Guardian, what are your thoughts on PyroDwarf currently? How did he go from being a good lynch to not even on your radar a few days ago?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
You've mentioned suspicion of evil, never anything about lynching him.Guardian wrote:Yeah, he would certainly not be a bad lynch. Evil wouldn't be bad too, I think I've mentioned this (right?). Near's had a lot of focus though, so that's good for reading tomorrow, and I'm very serious about long days being horrible for town.
I disagree with Pyro being a good lynch for today, though I'm willing to push for more information there on future days.
Very much agree about Near being informational as well as scummy.
Also, while I disagree with long days being bad for town to a point, there are definitely diminishing returns, which we're very much into at this point, hence my desire for Near to be lynched soon.
If long days are bad for town, why did you bring up the Dasquian thing and push for his lynch? Discussing that has used up a couple pages, and surely you didn't honestly think everyone would instantly agree with you and quicklynch him. Why not just mention the point as something to look into tomorrow, as I did with EG here?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
He's telling you, in his special Guardian way, that jumping on the biggest bandwagon for no real reason is considered scummy. Also probably one of those mistakes you mentioned.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:and what is that makes you so sure that I would be buddies with near?
See, trying to eliminate the weakest player is something scum would be doing. We're trying to eliminate the scummiest players, not the weakest ones.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:could I not simply be operating in survival instincts logic?
Trying to eliminate the weakest player?
Generally you don't want to be voting people without good reasons for why you think they might be mafia, unless it's the beginning of the game and you have nothing to go on. The best way to get people to be less suspicious of you and unvote you is generally to try to help us figure out who the scum are. Say who you find suspicious and why, ask lots of questions, ask more questions based on the answers you get. Look for inconsistencies and things that benefit mafia more than town.
Personally, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for now - I honestly didn't find the person you're replacing overly scummy, and what you've said since hopping in here sounds like new player more than scum to me - but I'd get ready to answer some questions about that, and start trying to figure out who you think is mafia, and why. People are going to want to know.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I disagree, busing would be a great tactic there. It would get Near lynched faster, which is good. The trick is to do it in a way that doesn't tip us off that she's scums too.Guardian wrote:Macavenger, I was trying to give DBE some advice, don't confuse her. I really think busing there was a poor tactic.
You're the first person who's ever wanted to do that in the, um, gonna say something like 8, 9 years now? that I've been using this name in various places. I will probably never understand that.Guardian wrote:I still want to call you Mav btw .-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Curious response considering you recently expressed desire to lynch the player she replaced. Or is that no good anymore now that he's been replaced by someone actually posting? Interested in actually answering any of the questions I've been asking you, or just posting more useless one liners?Evilgorrilaz wrote:Huh?
Seems like someone just wanted to joke post, I don't see anything wrong with it.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Ok. Why?DarlaBlueEyes wrote:well I find the duck very scummy
I happen to have more free time than a majority of posters on this site currently, so I check it a fair amount.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:but atm after reading a bit more I am going toVote: Macavenger, I find it fishy you are so on top of things, and yet have no votes thus far, seems like a thing a very skilled scummy would do.
I would guess, that as 3 of the people voting for near have no votes themselves, that this could be a very suspicious scummy clue.
I can only assume Librarian or Joudas could be your scum buddies
As for the rest of your thoughts about myself and possible buddies on the Near wagon, I'd suggest reading the Too Townie article on the wiki. If any of us have done anything you find overtly suspicious, please, by all means point it out.
Posting frequent big blobs of text is not required to post meaningful content. Yosarian hasn't been posting particularly frequently or in large blobs, but I consider him to be generally a helpful contributor this game. You've been posting one liners about suspecting certain people without much in the way of reasoning and voting a touch erratically.EvilGorrilaz wrote:I try not to lynch someone who just replaced into a game, nor do I feel like posting huge blobs of text. Yes, I have expressed interest in lynching her predecessor, but to judge a player based upon who they replaced is a bit unfair.
Oh and for your questions:
1. Not anymore, JtP was replaced.
2. I post when I get to it.
Your logic for not suspecting DBE is poor. The fact that JtP was replaced does not mean his role changed - DBE has exactly the same role he did. She can't really explain the thought process behind his actions, but if you suspected him when he left, you should be suspecting his replacement. Scummy play does not turn into bad play just because the person is replaced. If DBE proves to be a helpful contributor, then modifying your opinion would make sense, but until you have significant content from the new person to judge, your opinion on them should be the same as your opinion on the person they replaced.
If you're town and don't have much idea who the scum are, you should be asking lots of questions looking for reactions that give you an idea.Near wrote:2) Non-committal scum-hunting can be a scum-tell. It could also be a sign of townie who doesn't have good idea who the scums are. Like I said before, I can try to fabricate an accusation on someone to try to make that person look scummy. Doing so can possibly make me look less scummy, but it conflicts with my top objective of finding the actual scums.
I believe Dasquian is referring to your defense of calling it a joke here. It could have been a joke... or it could have been distancing that you wanted us to think was a joke.Near wrote:3) My joke FOS was a case of WIFOM? HOW?
If you're going to make jokes past the random stage, you should be indicating it somehow when we make them. Remember that text doesn't convey humor nearly as well as speech.
You could be a townie getting run up by scums. But what if you're also scum getting bussed? See the WIFOM? Why don't you analyze everyone's reasons for getting on your wagon and tell us which ones are the scums?Near wrote:Secondly, my defense that scums are not as likely to be put at L-2, which requires 5 total votes, is not WIFOM. It's not the strongest defense, but townies are more likely to be put at L-2 for lurking than a scum.
Your first reaction to the accusation of the slip was this:Near wrote:And my reaction to potential cop investigation? Again, I was not using WIFOM to defend myself. I was pointing out that either answer to Guardian's question would result in WIFOM.
As several people have pointed out, this is not only WIFOM, but a particularly bad example of it as well.Near wrote:So you seem to think I made a slip here. Don't you think my saying this was too deliberate to be a slip?
I hope this wasn't just for my benefit regarding you know what. The thought did cross my mind, and while 377 itself has nothing bad in it, I'm still pretty suspicious of the rest of his posting prior to that.Guardian wrote:hm. evil may be town. post 377 has one of my favorite newbie town tells.
I'd be interested to hear what some of the other experienced players in this game think of "Let's not suspect the replacement because thir predecessor was scummy" as a newbie town tell.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
We're in another game together. If you want to search my posts, you can probably figure out what I'm talking about, but I can't really say it because the game is ongoing.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:Mac and Guardian seem to have a little inside joke... intriguing,
why would he mention something for your benefit, Mac, unless, he was infact your scum buddy sending you a message that we would not pick up on?-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I don't think there's much I can say without skating dangerously close to referencing our other game.Guardian wrote:Mac's post bothers megreatly. Why? He asks if I am applying my newbie town tell (that town newbies often use the faulty logic that attacking replacements is "unfair") for consistency's sake to appear like I use it as town always, in this game and the other; he may or may not know I'm town in the other game, but for me to be doing it for consistency's sake, it implies strongly that Mac knows I am town in this game.
For it to look good and consistent as comparing this game to the other, that would mean that there'd have to be little possibility of me being scum here. Granted, I'm not scum here, but how does *Mac* know this, as to compare my play to another game?
Mac, what do you have to say for yourself?
From the viewpoint I'm coming at this from though, your alignment this game has no real bearing on the use of that tell here. I question the validity of the tell itself. Maybe I just need to make a thread in MD asking for opinions on it.
I'm also somewhat suspicious over you attacking me over something you know I am restricted about conveying my thoughts on.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
You should probably be voting for Near then. By supporting Dasquian's motion, you're supporting Near's bandwagon but not voting for him, which is generally considered a scum tactic.DarlaBlueEyes wrote:I second Dasquain's motion,
I also agree with Dasquian here, which should be obvious based on the way I've been calling for Near to be lynched for a while now.
Agree with Joudas that Darla's mistakes look more like "new player" than "scum" to me. It's certainly something to keep in mind, but Near is a far better lynch today.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Looking over the deadline rules, Near is the only bandwagon I'm willing to support currently. It's four to lynch at deadline, and it seems like Dasquian, Joudas, Librarian and I are all pretty committed to seeing Near strung up, so I don't think we're going to have any no lynch issues, which is the only thing that would make me even consider any of these other wagons right now. Obviously I won't support my own, I don't think Dasquian is likely to be scum, and DBE's play reads newbie far more than scum. Not saying she's confirmed innocent by any means, but she's a bad Day 1 lynch unless there's no other decent target, which there is. I'd rather vote for Coron, MBF, EG, or Guardian than DBE currently, in roughly that order. None of them have wagons currently though, so they're more suspects for tomorrow for me at this point.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Guardian, I've never found you very on the town side of neutral this game. That one specific post for some reason I can't explain looked very townish to me. That's an abberation compared to most of your posts this game, and shouldn't be mistaken for my overall stance on you. It's true that I swing back and forth on you a ton - I find you exceptionally difficult to read this game. Right now you're very slightly on the scum side of neutral, for the record, but it changes with almost every post you make.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I already had this argument with evilgorrilaz earlier. I fully agree that you should be suspecting replacements based on the replacee. I'm not holding that against DBE myself because I was never sold on Phox's scumminess while he was still playing. So I'm not ignoring anything Phox did, he just didn't set off any major alarm bells for me.Coron wrote:
it's looked newbie, but scum newbie more likely, and you also appear to ignore anything done my DBE's replacee, which I think is a foolish move, as much as it sucks to get attack because your replacee was scummy, it's how the game works.Macavenger wrote:and DBE's play reads newbie far more than scum.
Because who's voting for Near has basically nothing to do with my suspicions, and those 2 seem fairly likely to be town to me.Coron wrote: Why not throw Yos and pyrodwarf in there too! Then you could have all 7 people not voting for near as your top 7 suspects!-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Noting for deadline reasons that I would possibly be willing to support a Coron wagon over Near's, depending on developments. This is largely independent of this SK thing, he was already a top suspect before that, although I agree that if he doesn't produce a better explanation here soon this looks really bad.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
And Coron posts while I'm typing. Meh on that reaction. Even if you don't have specific tells Coron, you've obviously seen some general tendencies or something - point a couple things out."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Very surprised by the massive explosion of talking yesterday. Even more surprised by how little I have to add to it at this point.
I can't conceive of any reason for Coron to claim at that point, and as such am very suspicious of the claim. MBF's explanation makes the most sense of any that I've come up with (not that it makes much sense, very little about that claim does), so I'm sticking with my vote for now. If Coron does accumulate a large enough wagon to potentially deadline lynch, I'd be more likely to switch to it than before, I think."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Deadline is a little under 15 hours from this post, if I'm calculating the time zone differences right? If so, I should be around at most an hour before deadline to react to anything that happens, and possibly right up to it.
I don't really like the way Near says he needs to come up with a convincing accusation at the moment. Nonetheless I am getting a bit less sold on my ideas that Near is obvscum and Darla is newbie not-scum. Darla's posts recently have seemed less newbie to me, but still scummy.
I really don't think there were many if any scum on Near's wagon for most of the day, but the idea that scum could be sitting back and watching aggressive townies lynch another townie who made a mistake has occurred to me.
Near, I don't think you need to come up with a case on someone exactly - it would be more beneficial to just post your thoughts on everyone currently, in as much detail as you can manage on short notice. It would give us something to go on now, and in the event that you are town and lynched, it gives us a record from someone who's motives are confirmed to study.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Near is still at six since Dasquian unvoted, right?
I'm interested to hear the remainder of Darla's claim, but I agree with Guardian it should not happen until after the end of this day, unless she gets much closer to a lynch than she is now. I also don't think that was really a very good time to claim that you have a power, Darla."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
I'd like to give Near another chance to talk. There's no reason to hammer him when he's going to die in 10 hours anyway if no one does anything."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Unofficial vote count I put together mainly for my own purposes:
Near (4): SL, Mac, Joudas, DBE
DBE (3): Yos, Coron, Duck
Duck (2): Near, Guardian
Guardian (1): PyroDwarf
Coron (1): MBF
Not voting: EG
I like the idea of competing bandwagons being setup to Near's since the town as a whole seems to be souring somewhat on his lynch. As long as we don't get into a situation where a deadline No Lynch could occur, I actually find this healthy behavior as it increases our options somewhat.
I'm going to try to get in as much of a reread as I can before deadline, focusing on Near and a couple other suspects. I should be awake until very close to if not at the deadline, and may not have a finalized vote until then.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Near, explain why you think Dasquian is scummy? I was rereading your posts, and I see a hop from "I don't think Dasquian is scum" pretty quickly into "I see a Dasquian/Mac scumpair" into "Hey guys let's kill the duck not me" and not a lot of reasoning in there. There could be a bit there, I'm speedreading so may be missing stuff, but if you could put your reasoning up again it would help."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Is anyone else besides Guardian interested in lynching Coron currently? I'm still reading around, but if there's a sizable enough wagon on him, I'd strongly consider it. We'd need minimum one more than myself, Guardian, and MBF, though."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Guardian, vote Coron if you really want him lynched. It can't hurt anything at this point. Near's wagon is still 4 with or without you, we won't no lynch. Near could also potentially move to Coron giving me a deadline choice between the two of them. Sucks badly for me if I pick wrong, but options are better than not.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
That was my initial thought too, although there may be a small chance he wouldn't make that decision, in specific circumstances.Guardian wrote:I'm sure Near would prefer Coron to near.
so...
I realize you prefer Duck to Coron, but I'm rather opposed to lynching Duck currently. I really doubt you're going to find the votes for that.
I'm still not really sure if I prefer a Coron lynch to a Near lynch, but at least if there are 3 other votes in place for each, I have 3 hours to make a meaningful decision on the matter.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Near, when you get back, you need to be giving me as much information as possible here. Your life may depend on it regardless of your alignment, and if you are town, you want to get as much out as possible for when you're death confirmed, if it comes to that.
It's pretty much between you and Coron at the moment. You're going to have to vote for Coron if you want to give me a real choice here. I'm rereading through a ton of stuff now, but ultimately I'm pretty sure my decision is going to depend on what I hear from you."By far the towniest player in the game. Very good scum hunting, doesn't let anyone off the hook. All in all I find Mac's posts insightful and thought-provoking. " - Vel-Rahn Koon-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
Generally if people are tied at deadline, whoever has been there longer is lynched.
The situation I alluded to above where Near is unwillingot vote Coron has arisen. So now, I have a new choice. DBE is at three votes. I can keep my vote on Near and lynch him, or switch and cause DBE to be lynched.
I deliberately didn't mention this earlier as a sort of test for Near. Since Near refuses to vote for Coron, this means one of three things, ordered roughly in order of estimated likelyhood:
1) Near is really town, and believes Coron's claim.
2) Near is scum with Coron, and presumably Coron has some kind of power or somethign Near wants to protect.
3) Near is scum gambitting like crazy.
Option three seems so ridiculously unlikely that I can pretty much rule it out, considering I gave no indication I was willing to consider a DBE lynch.-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon
-
-
Macavenger Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 768
- Joined: March 10, 2008
- Location: Oregon