Mini 578 - Mistery at Montescuro - Game Over!
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Heh, Yos, you don't agree with me as much as you think -- 6 of the players are new acquaintances of mine, from mafia discussion, or my moding their newbie games (or IC newbie games), or ICing in their newbie games.
So they are new familiar faces. What do you think of that!?
And why no random vote?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Why? Would that be bad? Why would that be bad?Joudas wrote:
Surely you aren't suggesting it would be a good idea to lynchGuardian wrote:It requires 4 more votes to lynch Fox. Use your votes wisely Wink.anyoneon page 2?
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 .
Dasquian, why is VampanezeHunter more voteworthy than JamesthePhox?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Possibly. Give it time.Dasquian wrote:Lots of questions at this stage is good. Any scum suspects from the answers you're getting?
Why not?PyroDwarf wrote:Guardian, why the mystery?
VampaneezeHunter, if you had to say who you find most suspicious right now, who?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
fos: Near
Joudas, why do you assume that fewer posts and quicker days equate with less information?
Some more foxy votes would be nice. His post 38 seems to be a good blend of hypocrisy mixed with WIFOM considering he was one of the last people to 'not come up with 2 votes out of 10 cast', yet he agrees that the occurrence is fairly suspicious.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
In an ideal world that's true. In the real world, most players don't spend enough time re-reading to justify days where, on average, each player posts more than 20 times or so imo. I think when days get much longer than that, they start to be detrimental to the town.
I'd like to see your evidence for many, many games proving longer days are more beneficial to town.
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)?
How am I acting naive? What do you think about my case on Foxy?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
- 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.
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.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
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?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.Guardian wrote:Mac, what doyouthink of my case on Foxy?
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?Macavenger wrote: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.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
A good response. How do you decide what is useful content and what isn't? Which player in this game would you say has the most useful content in proportion to their total number of posts? Which player would you say has the least?Joudas wrote:
I'd respond by telling you that there's a pretty sizable difference between 8.5-9.5 pages and 2 pages. I'd also respond by suggesting that that study should have counted the number of meaningful posts in those games, rather then the page count. You could have a 20 page game with only 2 pages of actual "useful" content. On the other hand you could have a 5 page game with 5 pages of useful content, and in this case, sure - you'd definitely get more out of the short game.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)?
I disagree, but my view is a minority view, possibly for good reason.Joudas wrote:Honestly, though, the suggestion that players are too lazy to re-read threads is beside the point - that's a fault of the players.
Reasonable.Joidas wrote:I'd agree that having a day 1 that's too long is bad, as it gives the scum more opportunity to sow seeds of doubt and cause the town to second guess themselves - but having a day 1 that's too short is almost worse, as regardless of the outcome of the day 1 lynch, town has very little to go on for subsequent days.
Well, obviously you've considered voting him, I asked you to consider voting him. However, you reached the conclusion that he was not worth voting for. Do you see what I am classifying as (possibly intentional) WIFOM? Is WIFOM not meritorious of your vote at this stage in the game? Do you find your no vote (and FOS of me) a more useful state of affairs?Joudas wrote:As for Phox, I haven't seen anything to make me consider voting him. I find your case against him to be far too weak to warrant even considering a lynch.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?Macavenger wrote:
A 2 line suggestion of hypocrisy isn't worth bandwagoning.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?
Hypocrisy and WIFOM aren't worth bandwagoning?
My standards for bandwagoning are fairly low.Macavenger wrote:Why do you think your case on Phox does merit a bandwagon?
Vague insinuations? The only insinuation I see that I've made is that Phox should get more votes.Macavenger wrote:
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.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?
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.
I've seen people respond scummily to theory discussion in games numerous times.Macavenger wrote: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.
I'm not sure why what I'm doing looksMacavenger wrote: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.thatcrazy; I'm trying to garner responses and reactions from players, and I'm trying to get people to justify their actions and opinions.
Examining players reactions to intense scrutiny is one of the best ways of scum hunting. Examining players reactions to a call for a bandwagon is a close second.Macavenger wrote: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?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Why?PyroDwarf wrote:Guardian wrote:I legitimately am coming to the opinion that using meta is a bad policy.
I lol'edguardian 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)?
I'm talking about a very different kind of meta; there is a thread in Mafia Discussion about it if you'd like to read called 'On Ignoring Meta' or something.
I'll ask you too -- WIFOM and hypocrisy are not meritorious of your vote?PyroDwarf wrote:Guardian, I don't see any case against Phox. I'm sorry if I am answering a question not directed at me, but this is just my personal opinion. You seem to be pushing really hard on phox, but your case is nonexistent.
Why?PyroDwarf wrote:I can at least see the logic behind sensfan's vote changing shenanigans, but you are to suspicious to pass up.Unvote, Vote:GuardianDo not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Why not?Evilgorrilaz wrote:
One small instance should not merit a bandwagon.Guardian wrote: Would it have been more worthy of bandwagoning if I wrote a full paragraph?
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.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Evil, you haven't answered my questions, try again.
Pyro, Phox was the 9th to vote, and voted one of the 4 people who didn't have any votes on that time.
He later agreed something odd was going on that the first 10 people to vote voted 10 different people, while he was one of the most guilty of doing this.
So he said that what "those people" did was suspicious, and he was one of "those people", while never taking responsibility for that or explaining his actions.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Moreover, this is what he meant when he called something a fair assumption:PyroDwarf wrote:Waiting for phox's response to Guardian's allegations before I move my vote. I want him to elaborate on this:
This was in response to the "fair and balanced" vote count, after he voted next to last.JamesthePhox wrote:I think that's a fair assumption. Not that bandwagoning is a major accusation these days. It seems to me that as long as the votes are spread out evenly, then the reasons for voting don't have to be held by strong opinion. It allows for wishy washy votes.
I found it fairly suspicious that he said it was a fair assumption that he placed his vote carefully so as not to attract attention.JamesThePhox wrote:
I think that's a fair assumption.Macavenger wrote: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.
This is more than bandwagon worthy from my POV.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Guardian wrote:
Why not?Evilgorrilaz wrote:One small instance should not merit a bandwagon.Evilgorillzaz wrote:I don't believe it should. No other reason.Guardian wrote:Why doesn't Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'?Evil, you haven't answered this.Does Near's FOS count as 'one small instance'? Why or why not?Guardian wrote:Why is Near worthy of a bandwagon for one small instance, but Phox isn't?Evilgorillza wrote:I believe that Near's logic was more faulty than JtP's.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
I find that your method leads to scum being on edge and townies being careless, whereas mine leads to only scum being logically inconsistent.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 edge which 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.
It is never to early.Joudas wrote:Now this, this is WIFOM. He says so himself, actually. However, I still don't think this is meritorious of my vote. It's too early to be band wagoning on anyone.
I appear to be pushing for Near's lynch?Joudas wrote:"Useful Content" might have been poor wording - "contentful content" might be more accurate. What I meant was, you can easily have a 20-page day 1 if everyone's posting little 1- and 2-liners. Or you can have a 3 page day 1 with the same amount of content if everyone posts thought-out, multi-paragraph posts as the norm. Granted, there's some posts that are flat out useless - my image macro response to the joke vote on me, for example - that's an entirely useless post that does nothing to further the game. I believe it was you who was moderating a game I replaced into recently where the first 6 pages consisted of about 15 useful posts and a lot of stupid bullshit. This is an extreme example, but that's more or less what I'm talking about. My point is, post count is not a good indicator of whether or not it's a good time to lynch. Evidence is. We don't have enough evidence to warrant considering a lynch right now. Would you disagree? Do you honestly want to lynch Phox right now? How about Near? You certainly appear to be pushing for it.
If we don't bandwagon now and think seriously about lynching, we'll wind up on page 20 and wonder how the hell we got there, and I'll point back to this post in intense frustration.
No.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.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
So Near's logic being more faulty than JtP's makes Near's FOS be more than 'one small instance', while JtP's WIFOM still fits into the category 'one small instance'?Evilgorrilaz wrote:
Yes I have.Guardian wrote: Evil, you haven't answered this.
Thats my answer.Evilgorrilaz wrote: I believe that Near's logic was more faulty than JtP's.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
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?
VH also merits bandwagoning. I'm more interested in Phox because I see him as about equally guilty, but there is much more resistance.Macavenger wrote:
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?
Me finding your logic peculiar is a vague insinuation of your scumminess? This is a reason to find me suspicious?Macavenger wrote:
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.
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.
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: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.- 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.
If people don't make time to respond to me and think about the game themselves, how does that become my problem? How is it my problem when a good portion of my questions are asking people to scum hunt and think critically about the game? How is at all indicative of me having scum motives?Macavenger wrote:You appear to be trying to force people to react to you more than think about the game for themselves.
I'm trying to get him to respond to me, and see if he notices and defends what I'm claiming he said. He pretty much agreed that Near was worthy of bandwagoning. That's noteworthy to me, and I'm happy I asked that question.Macavenger wrote:
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.
What sort of reactions would benefit me that aren't honest reactions? Why would townies react in a non-honest way to my questions?Macavenger wrote:
Based on my points about twisting and such, I feel you're fishing for certain types of reactions that benefit you, not honest reactions.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.
You haven't convinced me that this is a justified view, in the slightest.Macavenger wrote:This doesn't look like scumhunting, it looks like witchhunting, in the Salem Witch Trials style.
I assume you're serious now, as there is no smiley face?Macavenger wrote:Happy with my vote on Guardian right now.
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.)
Have you considered the possibility that I'm trying to get reactions out of suspicious people that Idon'tsee anyone else focusing on?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Phox, I found Near suspicious because he first posted after being prodded: almost immediately after Yos2 called him out for lurking, he OMGUS'd Yos. His entrance was completely unhelpful, and he hasn't been very helpful since.
I wanted Joudas to back up what he asserted. People having logical consistency is indicative of their being town. I wanted to see if he does.
Phox, what do you have to say about my case against you?
I just re-read; I find many people suspicious. Near, Phox, Pyro, VH, Mac, all have an elevated chance of being scum, in my opinion, roughly in that order. Accordingly:
unvote, vote: Near
Mac and Pyro are the only ones that hasn't been explained:
Mac: I don't see any reasonable justification from him for me being suspicious of me. He sees obscure play, points "ooh, bad!", and is attempting to back it up with reasons... but I'm really not buying any of it.
Pyro: I'm suspicious of him because his play has largely been "me too" -- e.g. he's doing a lot of agreeing and not much original thought.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Well, I think I could fill up a paragraph with a case on him, and basically did earlier.Macavenger wrote:
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?
Yes -- and me using the word 'peculiar' doesn't seem to be at all indicative of me being scum...Macavenger wrote:
As I said, that was simply the example of it that stuck out the most to me.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.
I don't understand why.Macavenger wrote: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.
Most of my posts this far have been questions. How am I forcing an interpretation of anything?Macavenger wrote:
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?
Oh, k.Macavenger wrote:
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.
It has gotten some useful reactions, but I want to act on the evidence collected now, I don't see a reason to continue a style that many players are finding me suspicious for.Macavenger wrote:I notice you seem to have stopped posting in this dominant/questioning style recently - why?
I know what game you're talking about, but... I'd have to re-read to know exactly what you're talking about. I think you're equivocating about what the word 'dominating' means though.Macavenger wrote: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.)
Again, why would townies react in a scummy way to my questions? How would my style be effective at getting townies to slip up?Macavenger wrote:
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?
This isn't the point. But okay, you might be right?Macavenger wrote: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?
Which of the people I'm asking questions of and pushing cases on wouln't be my scumbuddies? Would Near count as one of these people?Macavenger wrote: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.
You have brought up examples, pointed to them, and said 'i get bad feeling here' You still haven't articulated in any persuasive sense why you are getting those bad feelings. You might want to chalk them up to what they are -- bad feelings.Macavenger wrote: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.
I'm trying to shine the light of truth upon every player. Why is this bad?Macavenger wrote:He seems to be trying to cast suspicion everywhere, not just on legitimately suspicious people.
Well, he basically admits that I have legitimate reason to find him suspicious.Macavenger wrote:Guardian, your last post seems to imply that you're happy with Phox's response to you. Is this correct?
I don't see why. He might overcome my suspicion of him. Others might be more suspicious. But dropping it as irrelevant -- no. And I really don't see why his post would make me do that, since he himself admits that he did have WIFOM, or that it could be reasonably interpreted that way at least.Macavenger wrote:Are you dropping your case on him for now? Why or why not?
0 - no real contentMacavenger wrote: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.
1 - nrc
2 - 2 mild questions
3 - mild suspicion of sensfan
4 - apologizes to me, and votes me for something others are finding me suspicious of.
5 - asks me questions about case. builds momentum agreeing with people about near. agrees with mac about vh.
6 - quotes the part of phox's post i've been referencing all along.
7 - agrees with mac, but more suspicious of me and near.
8 - agrees he's been "me too", pushes case a little on sensfan.
he seems to be going with what's popular, with the only original thing he's contributing being mild prod-ing/suspicion of sensfan. (shrug). Doesn't seem terribly pro-active to me.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
That's perfectly reasonable. I'm not saying I should be thought of as ultra-townie right now or anything, but Mac is trying to say that my style is indicative of me being scum... which I find unjustified.Joudas wrote:Now, I don't necessarily think this is indicative of scum - as I stated before, I'm not particularly inclined to think you are scum at the moment - but I certainly haven't ruled out the possibility.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Near's recent post strikes me as quite town-like. I'll go so far as to say I think he probably was a townie who didn't want to miss out on the random stage, and that he shouldn't be the play for today, at least not because of his first post.
Before you ask: yes, I realize that this is a significant change from my prior position.
Expect a re-read from me within a few days.
UnvoteDo not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
PyroDwarf wrote:Guardian, why am I third on your scum list. My response was not acceptable? What was wrong with it? You didn't even comment on it, I thought you would have, but you didn't.
This second quote sums up your response for me; you're saying you don't think you have been just going with the flow... but the end result is that you have been.PyroDwarf wrote:So, I don't think I am being too aggree-full, I just happen to have the same scum list
Your response is nice and all, but the general trend of you going with the flow is there.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
I re-read.
I see what Coron is seeing to a good extent. I am not sure if I see it as a genuine scum-hunting attempt; I think so, though.unvote: Coron
Evilgorillaz hasn't done much scum hunting, I find that suspicious. Pyro I see what Coron is seeing, and find his general body of work suspicious. Joudas less so, I see Joudas's play as pretty reasonable. I'm not that interested in pursuing Near again, for the moment.
vote: Pyrdodwarf. I'm following Coron and seeing where he takes me.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
That sounds good, I like instant gratification more, but we could wait a little bit.
Yos's 200 feels vaguely like he might be purposefully trying to divert attention from the main target.
Oh, I'd been meaning to point out: look what page it is! If you don't start seriously considering lynches like page 3, all games go this long, and we're right on the road towards 15 or even 20 pages, something I *do not want*. So I hope we get a good lynch soon.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Until school's out (Early May), expect my dedication to mafiascum to suffer, perhaps greatly. Then I'll have little access at all for a week. Then I'll be back in full swing. I'm posting this notice in all games I'm playing; sorry if my activity suffers.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
I'm unsure if Pyro is a better lynch than Near.
I'm troubled by Near's posting habits; I do find them suspicious.
However, while posting habits can often be a good contributing reason to lynch someone, it seems that that would be themainreason that we're lynching Near. There is the early game stuff too, but had Near been posting regularly since then, they wouldn't be playing nearly the factor they may be now.
Also, Near seems like an easy lynch, and easy lynches don't work out well, in general. This case may be an exception... maybe not.
I definitely want Near to respond and explain himself. If Near fails to explain himself, I'd likely be resigned to lynching him.
Near -- why are you posting in other games, but not here?Near -- when you do that -- have different posting habits in different games -- unless you have a good explanation for it, it is very suspicious, especially in the games you are posting less in (here).Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Guys I re-read...
And I found the scums!
unvote: PyroDwarf
Let's have a look at...
play.Dasquian's
His main contributions have been:
Vote VH, maintain suspicion of Near. When VH is replaced by a good player, unvote VH and vote Near. Pressure Near, give impetus on Near to be lynched, etc.
Dasquian has (for the most part) not done anything but pressure these two players all day. He's attacked the (arguably) two weakest players in the game, and with deadline coming up (right?) he is keeping with his game plan, on the Large & Easy Near wagon, and isn't doing much of any creative scum hunting.
The most we've gotten is post 227, in which he attacks favorable targets, expresses mild suspicion of me after buddying earlier, and overall is a scummy scummy scumbag.
Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.
Dasquian wants the easy, reasonable lynch, and doesn't want to comment on too many players and leave connections. He has only attacked the mainstream obvious targets, and is quite happy to sit on his main two targets all day, only casting peripheral suspicion on others.
Now, if you want to lynch scum today, follow my lead and vote him. Thanks.
vote: DasquianDo not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Evil: most people have expressed interest, but that is about the sum total of Dasquian's contribution.
His attention to them and no others, and his willingness to carry that to a lynch, is what makes him suspicious.
Try voting him. It just feels so right.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
You're also straw manning me Joudas.
I never wanted more phox lynch, I just wanted to leave the implication that I did. I think that that's fairly obvious from my later postings.
I've almost never refused to answer direct questions in this game. Sometimes I am cryptic in my responses... but if whomever wanted me to answer a question doesn't follow up after a muddled response, whose fault is that?
You appear to be attacking me for playing the game. The link between me and VH is convoluted. Your attack on Coron is based on a convoluted connection to me.
I find your post unreasonable.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
That's actually the first time I tried it; I'll let you know how much it helped once we lynch you :D.Dasquian wrote:Oh, and, cheap tricks ahoy. It's much easier to make your case look sexy if you play around with the php tags, isn't it?Guardian
(more duckscum votes plz)Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
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?
My case on phox was weak. I have no idea how you can possibly say that my holistic analysis of Dasquian's play throughout the game is anywhere near being on the same level as my case on Phox.
My case on Phox was about one minor inconsistency, which he admitted to later, and then I remained suspicious of him for, but shoot, that wasn't something to lynch him over, at least not on its own.
My case on Dasquian is an analysis of all his posts, his play, and suspects throughout the game, concluding that he hasn't been interested in creative scum hunting and instead has focused on two of the weakest, newest players in the game, VH and Near.
That's such a load of whooey. Dasquian's play this game is not consistent with pro-town motivations. He hasn't tried to scum hunt hard targets, or look into players who don't seem that suspicious to see what their motives might be. He's only focused on the easy, gimme, low-lying fruit suspicions -- suspicions that many (first me, then Coron, then others) have agreed are "easy" lynches.Library wrote: It seems that in general your posts are making less and less sense, and your arguments don't have very much substance.
What?? Transparent = easy to see the reasoning behind = easy to evaluate = easy to see are correct = you should be voting Dasquian. If my arguments were transparent to you, we wouldn't be having this disagreement. What did you mean when you said transparent?Joudas wrote:But Librarian nailed it pretty much on the nose. Guardian, your arguments are mostly transparent
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?Macdaddy wrote:I still don't like Guardian's methods this game. He's moving back up my scum list somewhat.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
285 is a very reasonable post. I shall retreat to the bat-cave and consider if changing my stance is appropriate.
In the meanwhile, can you summarize, or link me to an appropriate summary, of all the reasons you find Near suspicious? Coron?Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
263 seems to have a good summary on why Near is suspicious. Can you link to or restate your current stance on Coron and why you have that stance? If you no longer find him suspicious, can you explain why you found VH suspicious and at what point your suspicions changed?Dasquian wrote:Guardian wrote:In the meanwhile, can you summarize, or link me to an appropriate summary, of all the reasons you find Near suspicious? Coron?,Is this two questions directed at meone question directed at me and Coron, or one question directed at Coron? 263 has my most recent summary though.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
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.Macavenger wrote:
Because we're playing Mafia.Guardian wrote:Why can't you just trust my motives and judgment? :(
You'd also be surprised at the shockingly few times that doing so would have switched a town-win to a town loss; I think I've lost exactly two games as scum in which I was lynched without direct role-related information saying I should be (I've been NK'd, copped, lover'd, you name it, and lost as scum... but when I'm lynched as scum statistically speaking, I'm about as likely to win as when I'm not). I've also have been off in my suspicions when I was pro-town a shockingly low percentage of the time.
Moving on...
You're not playing the right game. I'm playing the everyone-has-to-justify-everything-to-me-and the-rest-of-the-town game, and I think that's a great game to play in mafia, leads to successful lynches, and town wins.Macavenger wrote:
I'm tired of playing your everyone-has-to-justify-everything-to-me game.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.
Vote hoping is a great way to keep players on their toes, draw out reactions, and force scum to comment on a wide range of targets, hopefully including their scum buddies -- something that, as Coron rightly pointed out, can be very difficult for scum to do without leaving a trail connecting them with their partner.Macavenger wrote:Justify why your vote-hopping
I'm not sure how this could be construed as unhelpful. Unorthodox, sure. But I'm confused as to how to justify it, because it is difficult to wrap my mind around assuming the activity to be suspicious.Macavenger wrote:immediately following the replacement of a player you agreed was scummy
I followed Coron to see what would happen; I think I made that abundantly clear. I wanted to see both how he reacted to my zealous support of him, and thought that adding some more oomph to his suspicion of Pyro might be helpful.
If people feel that they have to justify themselves to me, that's a step in the right direction towards them feeling they have to justify their views, opinions, and actions to everyone. People -- importantly the scum -- explaining their motives, and then the town analyzing those motives and finding any anti-town motives or inconsistencies is the crux of mafia.Macavenger wrote:holier-than-thou attitude
If getting on a pulpit aids this endeavor (and I'm experimenting in this game to see if it does -- trending yes, but I'll reevaluate at the end), then I'm all for being holier-than-you.
I'm certainly holier than those evil scums ;)!Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip :D.Near wrote:Hmm, at first when I read Guardian's post where he says:
I was like wow, guardian must be cop and he checked out dasquian N0.Guardian wrote: 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? "
Sweet, being suspicious of Dasquian is reasonable! Cuz he's your scumbuddy right?Near wrote:But then, this was a day start game. My first reaction was, wtf is guardian talking about. I actually started quoting Guardian's original post regarding his suspicion of Dasquian with an intent to argue why his post was scummy. But upon a re-read, it doesn't look that scummy. It actually sounds pretty reasonable.
Well put.Near wrote:Guardian, your main argument for suspecting Dasquian seems to be that he's been targeting weak preys all day. His initial suspicion of VH, you said, came to an end because he was replaced by a "good player". And now he's focusing on me.
Yeah but, Macdaddy has the significant difference that he's also been focusing on more difficult to read targets, like me for example. And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town, so, ya know, there goes that.Near wrote:But then, aren't most people who are voting for me in the same category as Dasquian? What differentiates Dasquian from, say Macavenger? I think Macavenger is the main person who's been behind my wagon because I am not contributing much to this game.
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.Near wrote:
I think you are reading too much into this. But if this was true, then he probably hoped that you say you prefer Pyro lynch over me, for reason obvious to me (that is, if Dasquian is indeed scum).Guardian wrote:Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.
I find it similar to 263 and a not unreasonable basis for finding you suspicious.Near wrote:Also, what do you think about post 246 where Dasquian explains reasons for voting me.
Current readouts give a projection of 68.3% likelihood that Near is being bus'd by Dasquian, and Near just tried to get me to be suspicious of Macavager instead of Dasquian and himself, hoping I'd be likely to OMGUS Macavager.
Pro-tip: If you're an investigative role, target Yosarian2 night 1. He's such a tricky bastard. If this causes the scum to kill him, I would not be that displeased. He's a great scum hunter but, his ability to look pro-town when he's a scumbag are of a caliber I've seen in only a few players.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Librarian responded to this already. WIFOM much?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?Guardian wrote:
Had I cop'd dasquian, I'd have gotten a guilty result? Thanks for that tip :D.Near wrote:
I was like wow, guardian must be cop and he checked out dasquian N0.
Near wrote:Your reasoning for suspecting Dasquian was reasonable.Guardian wrote:Sweet, being suspicious of Dasquian is reasonable! Cuz he's your scumbuddy right?
Because you think I'm an easy target? I think the response you wanted was "because I am calling myself a difficult to read target." But I don't see anything suspicious about that in and of itself. The only thing that possibly could make me suspicious is if I am in fact a piss-easy to read target, and am trying to lie about how easy to suspect I am. I'd love for you to comment further about this.Near wrote:
I thought the bolded part of your post makes you scummy. Can you guess why I thought so?Guardian wrote:
Yeah but, Macdaddy has the significant difference that he's also been focusing on moreNear wrote:But then, aren't most people who are voting for me in the same category as Dasquian? What differentiates Dasquian from, say Macavenger? I think Macavenger is the main person who's been behind my wagon because I am not contributing much to this game.difficult to read targets, like me for example. And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town, so, ya know, there goes that.
I think it is fairly obvious what I mean. I am of the mindset that Macavenger is probably town.Near wrote:Also, what do you mean "And then there's the fact that Mac's probably town"?
I think your response to the question might have been informative. Not sure it was.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?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.Near wrote:
I think you are reading too much into this. But if this was true, then he probably hoped that you say you prefer Pyro lynch over me, for reason obvious to me (that is, if Dasquian is indeed scum).Guardian wrote:Post 234, where he asks if I prefer Near or Pyro, REEKS like he knows ONE of them is scum, and wants to catch me in a trap later when one of them turns up as scum.
Near wrote: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.
Okay, you are milking the Dasquian connection a *BIT* too much for my liking.Near wrote:While I can understand the reasoning behind your post where you explain your suspicion for Dasquin, I do not agree with the extent you seem to think Dasquin is scummy.
You need to be focused on your own defense right now, and trying to convince us who is more likely to be scum than you. You're almost at the point of no return from my perspective; I'd love it if your next post was a case on someone else, saying why they are a compelling lynch target as opposed to you.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
I think so, Mr. Duck.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.
I want to think it over and be 99% resolved to it; getting claims and then not lynching in mafia is usually really poor.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
Hm. I read it that Dasquian is desperately trying to cut Near off before he makes things even harder for Dasquian, but Joudas's reasoning is viable as well.
Either way, I still feel strongly that Dasquian is scum. Near is approaching that level for me, though, and I think his lynch would be incredibly informative.Do not lynch me.
[wiki]Great Nibbler Takeover of 2008[/wiki]-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.
-
-
Guardian Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: March 28, 2007
- Location: Warning: Always looks scummy. Is town.