Dynamite Stick Mafia! GAME OVER
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok, let me say now what I was hoping to say yesterday, but never had the chance:
Usually, towns lose these "everyone has a daykill" games because of townies doing dumb things. So, can we please try to not be stupid here?
I'm not even sure why everyone fees the need to run in and right away strike a light.
In any case, we still do have to find the scum here, random kills before people have even posted aren't going to be helpful. We need to hear from everyone, we need everyone's thoughts here before we end the day, and I'd like to see us try to be at least somewhat intellegent about how we use our kills as well.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I can undestand people thinking that by striking a light they look anti-scum, but in general it just dosn't seem like a good idea. The biggest danger in this kind of game often seems to be silly, impulsive decisions by random townies, and the more people strike a light the more chances there are for people to be impulsive. I'd rather see people strike a light for a specific reason, and give the town a chance to comment first before they blow themselves up.
On another note, this kind of setup makes it WAY too easy for scum to lurk while all the townies kill each other off. That's how the scum won in the first MAD game, and it could easily happen again here. So we've got to make sure the days are long enough so everyone has a chance to post some real content, and I'm also personally going to be keeping a very close eye on lurkers; I think lurking is an especlaly strong scumtell this game, because lurking is more likely to be a good scum tactic in this kind of game.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I have a question for Adel based on one of her posts today, but I suppose it should wait until we find out Ooba's alignment.
Anyway, I can see a ooba kill today, but the timing makes little sense. Tommorow, we really do have to be a little more patient.
I kind of like Adel's attempt to deter people from striking a light for no reason, but I would suggest she use a little bit of discression and not necessarally blow up ANYONE who strikes a light. Still, if she does force the town to use a little bit more reason, it should help our odds.
Anyway, no sense doing more scumhunting until we see what ooba's alignment was, so I guess I'll quibble a bit about stratagy stuff.
One problem with this method is that this could apply to more then two people. If 33% of the town is voting for person A, 33% of the town is voting for person B, and 33% of the town is voting for person C, then all three of them would fit the criteria she's given here. The same applies even if 50% are voting for person A, 30% are voting for person B and 20% are voting for person C, or whatever; basically, there could easily be more then 2 people who fit the criteria of "66% of the town is voting for one of two players".Adel wrote:2: Once >66% of living players are voting for one of two players, one of those players strikes a light and kills the other. If both the #1 and the #2 player refuse to do this (should only happen if both are scum) a volunteer will kill one and then another volunteer will kill the other.
The more fundimental problem is that we can force someone to blow someone up or be blown up himself, but we can't force him TO blow up any one person in specific; once he realizes he's going to die no matter what, we kind of lose all leverage there. I'm not sure what the solution for that is, though, other then just to hope that at least most townies are smart enough to realize the advantages to the town from them going along with the will of the town even if it means their death.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
[quote="Adel"there can not be an out. this needs to be an absolute. Scum can use the wiggle room, claiming confusion, or try to use rhetoric to give themselves room to maneuver. [/quote]
Eh...I think the threat is strong enough and the gain is small enough that scum are unlikely to strike a light, even if you temper that threat with a little bit of wisdom.
Basically I just don't want to see you pointlessly blow yourself up against someone who makes a dumb move even if you're pretty sure they're a townie; I'd like you to leave YOURSELF some wiggle room, to allow you to use your own judgement on the matter, especally since the goal here is to try to avoid more hasty and pointless pro-town deaths.
That being said, I totally agree that no one should strike a light tommorow without town consencuss behind the move.
That dosn't make any sense, Adel. You can't pressure scum to act in a pro-town way by threating that they'll look bad after they're dead, and it dosn't make any sense to suggest that I'm trying to "lay the rhetorical foundation" for some scum to "get away" with something, if that "something" would leave them dead anyway.Adel wrote: I expect scum stuck in a position where the town is pressuring them to kill a scumbuddy to present a case that parallels Yos2's point here.
fosyos2 for laying the rhetorical foundation for scum to attempt to resist the best interests of the town.
The point I was making is that if we think person A is scum, we can't necessarally expect them to kill person B on our command. It might be better if the town specifically nomiates who we want to do the kill and who we want to be the target, instead of just saying "top two people kill each other", since once someone strikes a light and waits 24 hours they could basically do whatever they wanted, and we don't want that. That just common sense, right?
Basically, my main point is that your system is flawed because it gives our top suspects way too much flexability. Once we have our best two suspects for tommorow, we probably want to be more specific then that, and actually direct them, like "Person A, strike a light, and then person B, we expect you to kill person A right away before the 24 hours is up." That way, if EITHER person A or person B is town, we can pretty much guarentee that they'll both die; if person A refuses to strike a light, then we can reverse it and have person B strike a light and kill him; and if person B refuses to detonate person A, then we can have person A just blow up person B once the 24 hours is up.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
The point I was just making is that if we tell A and B to kill each other, and A is town and B is scum, probably B will instead kill player X, where X happenes to be the pro-town guy that everyone already thinks is pro-town, so he can do more damage that way. That's why I think my suggestion works better, becuase it seems to avoid that risk.Adel wrote: Consider the following cases for players we will call A, B and C
Players A & B are the two scummiest by town (one vote per player) consensus. C is the enforcer.
1. If A and B are both town: we tell A and B to strike a light and kill each other. One of them does, let us say A does, and the other will target him as soon as possible.
2. If A is town and B is scum: we tell A and B to strike a light and kill each other. B lurks or tries to type his way out of it. A strikes a light and kills himself and B.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Uh, yeah, but I'd rather townie-we-think-is-scum kills scum A instead, since that increases our odds of lynching right the next day. If both A and B are scum, then hey, we're pretty much set anyway.Adel wrote: scum-A kills player X? cool, I'm down with that, dead scum being the objective.
What? My plan allows for a lot less wiggle room then yours. Did you read my plan?Your plan allows for enough wiggle room to allow scum to maneuver and sabotage the town's chances to win. What is the advantage again?
The town saying "Person A. Strike a light now. Once he does, then person B, you must kill him." gives them a LOT less wiggle room then your vauge "Ok, guys, go ahead and kill each other now." If one of the two of them is scum, it pretty much prevents that person from taking out a different townie instead; person A can't take out a different townie, because person B kills him before the 24 hours are up, and person B can't take out anyone but person A, because (hopefully) person A's the only one who struck a light.Yosarian2 wrote: Once we have our best two suspects for tommorow, we probably want to be more specific then that, and actually direct them, like "Person A, strike a light, and then person B, we expect you to kill person A right away before the 24 hours is up." That way, if EITHER person A or person B is town, we can pretty much guarentee that they'll both die; if person A refuses to strike a light, then we can reverse it and have person B strike a light and kill him; and if person B refuses to detonate person A, then we can have person A just blow up person B once the 24 hours is up.
I think you may be contesting this because you didn't really read what I said. Otherwise, I can't understand how you don't see that a vauge "you guys kill each other now" plan is less effective then my plan.I think the you may be contesting this due to 1. your alignment being anti-town and 2. hubris.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok, that's fine. Just so long as we make sure it's over before the 24 hours are up.Adel wrote:ok then how about once we have settled on which two must die, they both must quickly strike a light and target each other? If only one strikes a light we can probably conclude that he is town and will go through with targeting the other guy who refused to strike a light.
Before either are instructed to strike a light we should confirm that both players have been on the site and therefore should be aware that their number is up.
Good point. If it comes to a deadline, we unfortunatly might have to make a more hasty decision, but hopefully it won't come to that.We should also keep in mind that this process could take up to three days, so if there is deadline pressure we should make a decision three or four days before the deadline.
Yeah, that's fine. I guess we might as well make it "greather then 66%, or else the top two vote-getters at 3 days before deadline".also, does >66% sound good, or is there another number that you may think is better?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I want town to be non-impulsive becasue impulsive townies in this type of game almost inevitably help the scum. See: Bad idea mafia, bad idea mafia II, Mad mafia, Mad mafia II. Every single game impulsive townies end up badly hurting the town. And look at day 1 of this game as well, for that matter.Skruffs wrote:INitial thoughts:
DGB is an impulsive town player.
Yosarian2 wants town to be nonimpulsive.
Would Yos have killed DGB to prevent her from quickdynamiting him or one of his buddies?
Discuss.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hwh...well, Skruffs, when you come into a thread and say "here's a theory that demonstrates that my lurking proves I'm pro-town", you can't expect people to just accept it. I mean, if nothing else, you could theoretically have lurked just in order to make that defense when you did show up.
Besides which, considering how little time the scum have to send in night-kills in this game, I'm not sure why you're assuming that all three members of the mafia carefully discussed what they should do before sending in the kill.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Huh? How am I giving "credence" to your theory?Skruffs wrote: You are also giving credence to the theory, just not the person who presented it. If I turn up town, does that mean my theory has weight?
We can probably assume that at least one of the scum must have been paying enough attention to send a kill in. But like I just said, I don't think we can assume that they were all extensivly talking about it. Besides which, just because a scum is paying attention to a thread, dosn't mean he's postng in it; especally in a game like this, scum could easily lurk stratigically for the first game-day or two in order to try to not be randomally killed. So, no, I don't give much credence to your theory.
Huh. Not sure why I said 3, I guess I've been playing too many mini games.Also: I didn't see anywhere that there are exactly three members of hte mafia. With 22 players, doesn't 3 seem a bit low?
Big Fos: Yos
Hmm. (goes to check) Looks like Bad Idea Mafia II had 4 scum out of 25 people. So I actually would expect about 3-4 mafia in this game as well.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Seriously? You really think that me using a phrase like "3 scum" is a tell, when like 95% of the games I've played have had 3 member scum groups? Pfft.Adel wrote: Even in minis I consider the accidental naming of how many players are in the mafia to a decent enough scumtell for a lynch in the early phase of the game.
And yes, I'm in two other large games. What you fail to mention is that one of them is cultmafia, which has no mafia groups at all, and the other has been going since approximatly the dawn of time. Sheesh.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Claus: Exactally why is a "heavy attack on lurkers" a scumtell? I think it's very likely at least some of the scum are lurking hardcore, especally considering how many people haven't really said anything of note yet this game. In fact, I just noticed Armlx hasn't even posted once, and a lot of other people have nothing but filler posts or striking a light day 1 for no reason.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yosarian2 wrote:I have a question for Adel based on one of her posts today, but I suppose it should wait until we find out Ooba's alignment.
Ok, before we got all caught up in the stratagy discussion after the LML kill, I had noticed some really odd behavior on Adel's part with that lynch.
First, when LML asked if he should kill oobo right away, she encouraged him to do so.
Then, she accused him of bluffing (which is often a way of pushing someone to do something, is ) while suggesting that she was fine with him and ooba dying.Adel wrote:
no.LoudmouthLee wrote:Someone, anyone, talk me out of dynamiting him this second.
But then, after LML blew up ooba, she said this:Adel wrote:I suspect that LML may be bluffing.
I now endorse ooba blowing up LML or surye
Adel wrote:Assuming I am alive tomorrow, I will kill myself and the first person to strike a light without town consensus.
If I am not alive tomorrow, I think that quagmire should kill the first person to strike a light without town consensus.
As LML just demonstrated, intelligence and the ability to communicate effectively do not effectively hedge against the town's tendency to self-destruct. At the very least LML should have stalled so we could get more information from this day before we lose another to a NK.tag fixed -- Stoofer
Which is a bizzare post, because A, after LML did exactally what she pressured him to do, she suddenly seems to think it was a bad idea, and B, that post really makes me feel like Adel already knew at this point that it was a mislynch, that she already knew both LML and ooba were town. Which is suspicious, since Adel was really pushing the ooba lynch all day.
Now, this was what I wanted to ask her right after the lynch; at that point, I thought she was quite suspicious. Her later behavior that day (especally the whole "I promise to kill the first person who strikes a light" deal) looks less like something a scum would do, so I'm not as sure anymore, but I still would like an explination for that series of events.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That dosn't really answer my question at all, Adel. Sure, LML wouldn't make that kill as scum. But the odd thing was that you seemed to know OOBA was town, even though you'd been attacking him all day; you seemed to know LML's kill was a mistake even though you were pushing him to do it. Could you explain that?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
But that was what he said he was going to do, he said he was going to dynimate ooba "this second", and you said you didn't have a problem with that. I donno, the whole things just feelt like you trying to distance yourself from something you basically helped orcistrate, and to do it before a townie would know that it was the wrong decision..Adel wrote: Once LML targeted ooba I felt like he was a total chode, like a self hammering townie. I can see that I put LML in a "can't win" posistion, but he is a grown-up and I falsely expected that he could deal with it, or at least draw a bunch of positions from people. Instead he threw an tantrum and prematuraly killed ooba, and then didn't even take the time to give us any insight from a player with a proven-by-death alignment.
No, why would I do that? Attacking a scum is not a scumtell unless it's done in a way that gives you a specific reason to think it's bussing; anyone who think it is is, well, to reference a MD discussion we had a while back, on the wrong side of the WIFOM curve.If ooba was scum wouldn't you be linking me to ooba as having bussed him?
Anyway, I'm going to let this go for now, because I don't think it's that likely a scum would promise to kill the first person to strike a light (it's be a really high risk gambit, to say the least), but I still did want to note it while it was fresh in my mind.
I'm going to go back and see if I can figure out which lurker looks scummiest; there are quite a few lurkers to choose from, probably at least some of them are scum, and we certanly need to apply some pressure and hear from some of them.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
So many people are lurking, I might as well make a full lurker list.
Lurker List:
armlx: Hasn't posted yet this game.mod, could you please prod him?
Flameaxe: Not really a lurker since he's posted 7 times, but he hasn't really posted much content. Day 1, he struck a light and that was about it; and day 2, he quoted one line of Adel's stratagy and agred with it, then made an odd post abot how "Adel's plan needs more bussing between him and quag". So no real content yet.
PokerFace: Hasn't posted in 5 days. Decent content when he posted, though, made some good questions for CES.
Skitzer: Has only posted twice. Both had a little stratagy content, but nothing else.
Surye: Hasn't posted in 4 days. Needs to say who he's suspicious of.
UltimaAvalon: The only post he made was:
And then and edit by way of post to fix his formatting errors and to actually strike a light. So not only has he contribued less content then anyone other then Armlx, he also struck a light day 1 for absolutly no reason. Seems like a good place to start.UltimaAvalon wrote:STRIKE A LIGHT
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeath
deathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathdeathvote:UltimaAvelonI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Adel was just doing exactally what she promised to do, Skruffs, in order to try to deter anyone from lighting a match; and we do want to deter random people from lighting matches, after all. Unfourtantly, UA apparently wasn't paying attention to her threat. I was afraid this would happen; I did try to convince her yesterday to use her own judgement on the policy and not to ALWAYS blow up anyone who struck a light, but she refused.
Well, there's one lurker down off my lurker list. I guess he's as likely to be scum as anyone, let's cross our fingers.
By the way, I am somewhat suspicious of Skruffs here. He's gone to some pretty irratioal lengths in order to attack Adel, going so far as to suggest she'd blow herself up as scum in the hopes that townies would follow her lead, which makes absolutly no sense at all (why would townies follow her after she's confirmed scum?).I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ah...I thought that was what you meant here:Skruffs wrote:Yos: When did I Suggest that Adel would blow herself up as scum to encourage others to follow her lead?
If that's not what you meant, then could you clarify?Skruffs wrote:
WHy would ADel-scum NOT potentially sacrifice herself at the expense of getting a string of townies to sacrifice themselves in killing other townies?
Adel did. It was always her idea.I don't know who first suggested killing off the first person to light a match
Again, we don't want people randomally striking lights, because we don't want people thoughtless killing people and because it would interfere with the "make the two scummies townies kill each other" plan. Adel was hoping to deter people from doing so by threating to kill anyone who did.
Anyway, I'm glad to hear Quagmire, even if he's the next "enforcer" under Adel's plan, will be using a little more common sense on the subject.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um, I didn't actually attack anyone for lurking until day 3.skitzer wrote:OK, I'm here, but It's hard not to "lurk" when the days last no longer than a few days.
Yos2's heaviness on lurkers on day1 is not good, because most people didn't have a chance to post. Also, his 3 scum slip is another factor, so tomorrow I will vote yosarian2, but seeing as we have a lynch already....blah.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Huh?Adel wrote:yes, a policy lynch does result in three dead townies, probably even in this case....
but the alternative is worse: mad confusion and more irrational behavior.
I did what I promised to do, and if I had done anything elsethe scum (yos2 + and skruffs)would use it to push my lynch and confuse and mislead the town.
I was trying to tell you yesterday that you should use your judgement, that while you trying to deter peopel from lighting was a good idea that you might not necessarally want to AUTOMATICALLY blow someone up if you think they're likely town, and you jumped down my throat for it; in fact, I think that's when you came to the false conclusion that I am scum, was because you thought I was trying to "give the scum wiggle room". No, I was trying to give YOU some wiggle room, so you wouldn't box yourself in a situation where you would feel like you had to do something stupid.
And while, yeah, I was a little suspicious of you based on the Ooba thing yesterday, all in all I thought you were town, and if you had decided to not auto-kill UA right away, and had good reasons for not doing it, I wouldn't necessarally have attacked you for that.
Meanwhile, Skruffs has been arguing even more against your "kill anyone who strikes a light" plan, right from the start. I don't really trust him at the moment, he very well might be scum, but I don't see how he even could go after you for that in this situation considering what he'd been saying.
And that's just wrong. As Skruffs pointed out, we could very well be in lynch or lose tommorow. If someone Quagmire thinks is a townie does something dumb, should Quagmire throw away the entire game just to prove a point or to maintain a policy or whatever? Should we kill Quagmire for not doing that?I advocate the death of quagmire if he hesitated to follow the stated policy we agreed to.
I heavily advocate the death of Skruffs and Yos2 asap.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah, you're right Elmo, I was getting you and Skitzer confused there, my bad.
Sarc: No, not especally, I was just trying to pick a fight, although I got the people confused. It was actually Skitzer who said that, who claimed that I was "going after lurkers on day 1", and I rememberd thinking that was a really scummy thing for him to say, since not only was he completly wrong, it made me notice that he himself had only posted 3 times all game, that he hadn't really said anything all game, and that it seemed like he was attacking me because he was a lurker who didn't like the idea of the town going after lurkers. It seemed like a paranoid over-reaction, and I've seen lurker scum react like that before.
So, yeah.vote:Skitzeruntil we hear more from him. And sorry Elmo.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Which is why I didn't attack any specific lurkers yet. At that point, all I made were general statements that scum might lurk and we should look out for that. Which is both true, good stratagy advice in this kind of game, and was hopefully going to be a deterent that might hopefully get people to lurk less if they knew we were going to be going after lurkers.Claus wrote: Because on day 2 (where you attacked lurkers on your post no 1). We can't really know who are the lurkers.
I didn't attack any SPECIFIC lurkers until day 3, after the game had been going for a full week. If a full week goes by and someone hasn't said anything meaningful yet, then yeah, they're a luker, especally in a game that moves this fast.
The very fact you point out is why it's so easy for scum to get away with lurking in this kind of game, if the town's willing to let them do it; scum don't even have to bandwagon really, they just have to sit back and wait for townies to blow each other up and stay out of the way; if we don't want that to be a winning scum stratagy, we have to take steps to prevent it.In less than 11 pages we had 9 players dead and 3 days past us by. Townies are blowing up before we wait for everyone to speak. It is ingenuous of you to accuse anyone of not speaking, when the town is not waiting for them to speak in the first place. It is a cheap shot.
And, "cheap shot"? Really? Sorry, am I not being fair to your lurking scumbuddies?
I never said all the lurkers are scum; there are too many lurkers for that to really be likely. But we need to make them all talk, we need to pressure them to do so, because if we just ignore the lurkers and let them lurk like you seem to want to do, it pretty much guarentees that a lurker scum will in the game.If these were normal length days, with normal majority bandwagons, that can be seen a long time going, I would agree with you. A player that sees a bandwagon form and discussions happen without saying anything - possibly lurker scum.
But in this game. No. Are there some scum lurking? Probably. But there are also townies that haven't had the chance to speak yet, because of the short days.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
The nights last longer then the days? We've only had, what, 2 night so far, and they've been less then 24 hour each. THe game's been going for 11 days. There's been pleanty of time for you to say something.skitzer wrote:I'm kind of sad that I'm being called out as a lurker, I mean to post, but because the nights last longer than the days it's kind of hard to find a interval in which I can post. Some people don't watch the site 24/7.
In any case, I wasn't really going after you for lurking. The really suspicious thing was that you were lurking, you made 2 posts that were almost totally without content, and then the first post you had with ANY content was specifically attacking me for going after lurkers, which makes me think you're quite oversensitive on the subject of your own behavior, and that's a scum tell. Also, do you think that's the only thing all game that you think is worth commenting on?
I wouldn't be opposed to Skitzer and Surye taking each other out.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Edit by way of post: To clarify before someone misinterprets that, I mean "I wouldn't be opposed to Skitzer and Surye taking each other out AFTER we've had some more time to discuss and hear from everyone and come to a general agreement". We don't want anyone blowing themsleves up this early in the day, again.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I really can't believe that anyone is actually taking that seriously as a "scum tell". Why, exactally, is it suspicious if I automatically used the phrase "all three scum" when I've played like a bazillion games where 3 scum are the standard?Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:Yos made the 3-scums-tell
[/quote], followed by the 2-night-am-i-rite-tell.
And probably some more, but I've gotta look back.
Uh, I was pointing out that Skitzer was wrong when he claimed that the game had spent more times in day then in night, because there had only been two nights and they'd only been 24 hours each. I'd like to hear how that's supposed to be a tell.
No, on second though, I don't care.
vote:CES
Pretty sure now that he's scum. No way would he be playing this sloppy and this lazy if he was actually town looking for scum here.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Uh, I want to make sure no one misunderstands me and does anything stupid, is what I want to make sure of. I'm not trying to be "seen" as anything.kuribo wrote:To me, the more troubling aspect of Yos' 276 wasn't the bit about two nights, but that he felt the need to hastily add 277's content afterward. He wants these guys blown up, but wants to make sure the town sees him on the side of extending the day. (Which is our best hope right now, honestly)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:I could argue that the use of the rolleyes smiley is a scumtell too, actually.
Huh, you're right. I was just thinking how many people got killed, and for some reason I forgot about Nightson.That's not the point. There have been 3 nights. Since townies have nothing to do at night, it seems like a good idea for scum to act like they have nothing to do with what's going on at night either, by means of miscounting the number of night. Really, it says DAY 4 right there.
So, I miscounted. Big deal. But I can't believe that you really would think that I would delibratly miscount as some sort of scum gambit. What would I have to gain from that, exactally? Would all of a sudden everyone said "Oh, Yos said there's 2 instead of 3, he must be town!" Again, .
Really, you're a better player then this. You've played enough games with me to know better then to act like I would delibaratly act stupid as scum in order to try to trick the town. Is that really all you got?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I'm not talking down to him. I'm quite serious. I know he's a good player, and I don't think there's any way that a player of his caliber could really be convinced that someone is scum just because I thought there were 2 nights instead of 3, or becuase I used a rolly-eye-face (which is not only an absurd scumtell, it's also something I use a lot in pretty much every game I've ever played ever). Ergo, if that's all he's got, I think he's scum trying to manufacture a false case, which is why I'm voting for him.elvis_knits wrote:
Talking down to other players always rubs me the wrong way.Yosarian2 wrote:Really, you're a better player then this. You've played enough games with me to know better then to act like I would delibaratly act stupid as scum in order to try to trick the town. Is that really all you got?
I say CES and Yos blow each other up.
So, does that mean you agree with me that CES is probably scum trying to manufacture a case, or not? Because if you do, then why do you want me dead, exactally?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
And then do what? Ignore those who don't "react" to it, or pressure lurkers after that?Claus wrote:
Yup. Exactly what I said we should do. Nothing like having a normal day with a normal bandwagon and see who does not react to it.Yosarian2 wrote:because if we just ignore the lurkers and let them lurk like you seem to want to do
Are you in favor of pressuring lurkers, or should we let them lurk? You seem like you're trying to have it both ways here.
And when, exactally, did I suggest we shouldn't have normal bandwagons?
Ok, either you agree with me that we should pressure lurkers, or you think we should ignore them and let them get away with lurking. There really is no third option here. If you think we shouldn't pressure lurkers, then you need to go back and read this game, right now.Funny how you react to criticisms of your ideas
by attacking people right back.
viewtopic.php?t=5279&start=0
That's what happens when the town ignores lurkers, especally in this kind of daykilling game. The scum just all lurk, and they win while the town all kill each other off. That's why I put "nuke all lurkers" in my signature, because after modding that game, I can see the horrible ways that town tend to lose these kind of games when they ignore lurkers.
And I'm not attacking you because you're "disagreeing with me". I gave a pro-town suggestion, and YOU attacked ME for it, remember? I am trying to get the town to act in a way that will help the town win, and you are giving anti-town stratagy advice and attacking me for giving pro-town stratagy advice. So yeah, I'm suspicious of you because of that. ALthough so many people in this game look like scum, it's hard to know where to begin...
Oh, so now I'm scum because I'm active. Or am I scum because I'm attacking you? Or am I scum because I'm offering pro-town stratagy advice on how to deal with lurkers?So did they choose you as the "active scum" this time?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
If you think the so-called tell is nonesense, then do you disagree with me that CES is a better player then to be using such nonesense tells?elvis_knits wrote: I never made any judgement on CES's reasons for voting Yos. I do think the two-night-tell is nonsense. I was only commenting on Yos's reaction, which I didn't like. And I do think saying "you're smarter than that" implies the person is acting stupid. It's a slightly disguised insult. And a manipulative way to get somebody off your back.
I might have come off as condecending there; I need to stop doing that in mafia games, it's not helpful, and I apoligise to CES if I offended him. But that's besides the point; the point is that CES is a good player, and he should be trying harder to make a good case instead of spouting nonesense like that; that kind of nonesense case against someone I personally know to be pro-town, coming from a good player like CES, makes me more suspicious of him.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You know, there's something deeply amusing about the idea of you reading through several of my games, counting the the frequency of how often I use a certain emotacon in order to attempt to get an emotocon-meta read of my emotocon usage as scum vs town.Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:Dropping the rolleyes point. I read several games with Yos, and what he said was true.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Eh...Elvis Knits does look pretty scummy, Quagmire, but you look pretty town to me, so I don't want you to die today. I'd rather see CES kill her (or her kill CES, whatever), or Claus, or perhaps Skitzer. We kind of sort of get 2 lynches a day here, not one, and we really should try and use both of them to our advantage.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um, no, no you really didn't, or at least not in a way that fit the facts at all. Your entire claim was that you thought it was scummy that I "attacked lurkers in my very first post on day 2", but that's just not true. In my very first post, I said we NEEDED to pressure lurkers, and we do, that's just good, solid pro-town stratagy advice, but I did NOT attack lukers until there'd been pleanty of time to see who the lurkers were.Claus wrote:Yup I do. And I still think that the timing and manner of that suggestion seemed off to me. I explained why already.
What's wrong, exactally, with me suggesting pro-town stratagy early in the game in general terms?
What you need to do, is you need to answer my question.So you're attacking me because I'm voting you because I thought that your "pro-town suggestion" seemed scummy (also because of the 3 scum slip and gut feeling, but nevermind). Where do we go from here?
In other words, you need to explain why you're voting for me, because it seems like an incredibly scummy OMGUS vote from where I'm sitting. Also, you need to explain, exactally, why you thought I was wrong when I made this comment:Yosarian2 wrote:
Oh, so now I'm scum because I'm active. Or am I scum because I'm attacking you? Or am I scum because I'm offering pro-town stratagy advice on how to deal with lurkers?So did they choose you as the "active scum" this time?
I assume that's the comment you're attacking me over, am I correct? What, exactally, was wrong with that comment? And what was wrong with the so-called "timing and manner" of that comment?Yosarian2 wrote: On another note, this kind of setup makes it WAY too easy for scum to lurk while all the townies kill each other off. That's how the scum won in the first MAD game, and it could easily happen again here. So we've got to make sure the days are long enough so everyone has a chance to post some real content, and I'm also personally going to be keeping a very close eye on lurkers; I think lurking is an especlaly strong scumtell this game, because lurking is more likely to be a good scum tactic in this kind of game.
You need to do all of this and explain yourself better, becuase I'm just not believing your claimed motives right now. The reasons you've given for attacking me make little sense and seem to have little to do with anything that's actually happened in the thread, and it feels like you're trying to piggyback on the attacks made against me by others to try to cause a mislynch.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Surye wrote:
Yes master.pickemgenius wrote:
one word answers please. i'll make my own informed decision based upon your answers.pickemgenius wrote:@Surye- if you were able to blow someone up right now who would it be?
@Elvis- same question
Skitzer.
Interesting. They're both saying they're willing to blow the other one up, huh? I've got a feeling that one of them is probably bluffing.Skitzer wrote: OMG Embarrassing...Totally wrong FORUM!
Mod please delete that post...I knew multitasking was a bad idea.
But since I posted, I guess I should say something...
Surye is still my biggest suspicion, and Yosarian is far behind but in second.
(i sense embarrassing custom titles emulating from the above post)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah; I'm still waiting for Claus to answer my questions and respond to my latest post. I explained why I think he's scummy, ask him to explain himself back on Wednesday, even though he's posted 7 times on other places on the site since then. With the deadline coming up, I'm really starting to wonder if he hopes he can just lay low until someone else blows somebody else up.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Interesting.
Oddly enough, even though it might lead to my death, Claus's striking a light is actually the closest thing to a pro-town action I've seen him do all game. Now I guess I just have to try figure out if he's a town trying to get a reaction out of me, or a scum who's trying to bluff his way our of trouble here, so I can decide if I should kill him or not now that I have the option.
So, now to respond to the meat of his posts:
It never occured to me that you needed a mod prod, seeing as how you just posted on Wednesday; based on the timing of your lurking and the approaching deadline, I had been assuming you were intentioanlly lurking. Why, are you now claiming you forgot about this game or something?Claus wrote: You could have asked the mod to prod me also... but nah, you prefer to have the town mislynch, right? I'll finish reading this thread and then reply to your "wednesday questions".
Again, the first time I tried to start pressuring lurkers, the game had already been going for more then a week. Don't you think that, after a full week of gameplay, in any game, it's a good idea to note who hasn't posted content yet? And my comments about lurkers certanly were helpful in scumhunting, I think, considering the scummy-looking reaction I go from both you and from Skitzer about the scumhunting.Claus wrote:I disagree with you. I think we couldn't say for sure who the lurkers were by the time you start pressuring them.
That's just not true. In a theme game, with different rules and different mechanics, it is ESPECALLY important to discuss pro-town stratagy. Take a look at how bad the pro-town play was before we started discussing the stratagy of when to strike a light, when to blow ourselves up, ect. That has nothing to do with policy lynches; in fact, good theoretical discussion should avoid bad policy lynches. Not that I consider going after lurkers to be a "policy lynch" in a game where lurking is perhaps the best possible theoretical scum stratagy...And for your "is it bad to discuss pro-town strategy in the beginning of the game?" question, I'd say that discussing strategy that has no immediate benefits for town, and can lead to bad policy lynches is not pro-town at all.
I'll be glad to continue to debate how useful discussing stratagy is in theoretical terms, but since we don't have much time to have this conversation here, I'll just say that I always find theoretical discussion of that type very helpful for the town, and challange you to find one single game I have ever played in either theme forum with significantly altered mechanics where I, as a pro-town player, did NOT spend significant amounts of time in the early game discussing stratagy. I highly doubt you'll find one, because I ALWAYS discuss stratagy as a pro-town player in games with altered mechanics, especally early in the game when there's not that much else to talk about.
I never said lynch all lurkers. I said pressure all lurkers and don't let them get away with lurking, which is a radically different thing. And I think that going after lurkers is ESPECALLY important in this context, for reasons I've explained any number of times.Lynch all lurkers is a generally good strategy, but it is not perfect. I think it fails in the context you presented it.
As I mentioned in a different post, a lot of people look very scummy right now. My main suspects are CES, Elvis, you, and Skitzer, and I also understand the suspcicions on Sarc and Suarve. If I had to make a kill right now, you'd actually only be my third choice, after CES and Elvis.Funny that you say I'm incredibly scummy, but you're not voting for me.
You realize you didn't answer my question there, right? What exactally was wrong with that comment, what was wrong with the timing of it, and what was wrong with the manner of it?
I'm attacking you for this comment yes.I assume that's the comment you're attacking me over, am I correct? What, exactally, was wrong with that comment? And what was wrong with the so-called "timing and manner" of that comment?
We've been over this too many times...I'm also attacking you for your "three scum" slip.
I'm starting to wonder if certain people just keep bringing this up because they know there are actually 4 scum, and they want an excuse to keep saying "3 scum" because they don't want the town to notice that we're very likely in lynch or lose tommorow. Which is not necessarally directed at you, more at CES and Elvis since they've been beating this drum a lot more then you have, but it's making me wonder.
Have you noticed how many different people I've been attacking? I find a lot of people scummy, and while I've wanted answeres from you, I wasn't voting for you because you're just not at the top of my list right now. Although that could change, depending on your posts from now until deadline. We'll see.I'm also attacking you because you are constantly accusing me of being scummy, but have not voted me or done anything similar.
Eh? I'm not "worried" about your vote, I'm trying to figure out if you're scum. Also, it's interesting the way you find an excuse to call yourself a townie there...I'm also attacking you because I have this gut feeling that you are scum. You are worrying yourself too much about one little vote from one little townie who is not that active in the game, and is not that great in argumentation or logic.
So, what. Are you accusing me of being overdefensive here or something?
Wrong. I used logic to invalidate your argument a long time ago. I've also been suspicious of you, partly because you've been trying so hard to push such bad logic, and because I just honestly have trouble believing that people still think that "Yos attacking lurkers proves Yos is scum" (I mean, I always do that, it's in my bloody signature, what else do I have to do here?). But my suspicious of you have never been my defense against you. In fact, it seems the other way around, it feels more like you've been ramping up your attack against me in an OMGUS way in order to try to invalidate my arguments against you.You're trying to paint me as scum to invalidate my argument,
Huh? So first you're attacking me because I'm attacking you, and now you're attacking me because I'm not attacking you hard enough? Why, exactally, are you getting so upset about being my #2 or #3 suspect, when no one else is even voting for you?but you are not willing to actually vote me, or ask other people whether they think I should be lynched or not. Your attack against me does not feel right.
Well, sure. Lurking is always a scumtell, and it's an even better scumtell in this type of game. I don't think I ever said it was a "strong" scumtell, I wouldn't go quite that far.Anyway, back to your questioning: regarding the comment above, I think that when you made that comment, on page 2, we didn't have enough information to determine who the lurkers were, and still you were already arguing that lurking was a "Strong Scumtell".
Any number of reasons town should do that.Why would town do that? I can't see strong reasons.
But I can see a better reason for scum to do that - to lead the town in a string of lurker myslinches, with the occasional bussing or two.
1. Because it's the truth.
2. Because in a game like this, if you've got something important to say, you'd better say it damn fast, since days can end so fast and people can die so quickly. Bad Idea Mafia II, by the time I had a chance to post it was twilight, and then I was nightkilled night 1, so I never really had a chance to say anything game relevent at all.
3. Because by saying that, and making a big deal of it right from the start, I was hoping to DETER people from lurking, to get other people to start thinking about and keeping an eye on lurkers, and just because it seemed like it was going to help the town.
If I was scum trying to get a bunch of bad "policy lynches", I wouldn't have made that post then; I would have waited for someone TO lurk, and THEN tried to lynch them for it. Instead, I was trying, right from the start, to PREVENT people from lurking by making it clear that they wouldn't get away with it, BECAUSE that would help the town.
Are you still not understanding how bad lurking is in this kind of game? Did you ever go back and take a look at MAD mafia like I suggested you do?
(shrug) Well, I still suspect your motives, yeah. I still think there's a reasonable chance that you realized you are in trouble based on my logic and are trying to scare/bully/bluff your way out of it. However, in this situation, like I said, I think you striking a light is actually a somewhat pro-town move, and your offer to kill whoever the town votes for is another one, since either one would be very risky for scum to do. Still, if you don't want me to blow you up before deadline, I would suggest that you try to read what I've said a little more carefully respond to my questions a little better, instead of just constantly attacking me because I'm attacking you.Well. You say I'm bluffing when I attack you. I have striken a light, and I'm ready to let you explode me (or to explode you). Are you still willing to say that you don't believe my claimed motives?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok. Then why should I prod you? Prods are for people who've forgotten about the game, or who don't know the game's started, or whatever. If someone jus dosn't feel like posting or seems to be lurking tactically, you pressure them to make them change their behavior, you don't bring the mod into it.Forgot? Not really. Uninspired instead, like I said before. "Meh, I bet these new posts are more of the same, I'll check this game later".
How does theoretical discussin "Detract" from scum hunting? Anything that you can find to talk about early in the game tends to move the conversation fowards. Anything that deters other people from lurking makes it easier to find scum, and like I said, I think lurking in this game is itself a scumtell.Theoretical discussion past that detracts from scum hunting.
No; I'm offering you a way out, because I tend to think that you striking a light in the situation is probably a small pro-town tell, as a scum in your position probably would have not done that, and because you were never on the top of my suspect list anyway.Claus wrote:
Why wouldn't I want to? I have striken a light to allow you to attack me. Are you offering yourself a way out now? If your trade is "answer my questions or I will blow you up", I think I'll just shut up and see what you do.(shrug) Well, I still suspect your motives, yeah. (...) Still, if you don't want me to blow you up before deadline,
I am keeping the option of blowing you up open, based on how you continue to respond, but as of right now it dosn't seem like a (Claus+Yos) death today is that likely to help the town. I wish I knew why you did think so, I'm tired of getting lynched as town all the damn time lately.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Agreed. I really don't think Surye is going to go through on his threat here, he's probably bluffing.pickemgenius wrote:I call BS on Surye.
On the off chance he's telling the truth, I'd be quite happy to Surye blow up any of my other top suspects, either Elvis, Skitzer, CES or perhaps Sarc. Or I'd be happy to see any one of those people blow up Surye, now that he's struck a light and can be killed. If Surye survives the day here, I will be most unhappy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, I'm not going to do anything just because I've got 3 votes on me, when two are CES and Elvis, probably the two scummiest people in the game. The point of this voting system wasn't to let scum easily manipulate the town, was it?
That being said, Surye was already talking about blowing me up. If he is going to blow someone up, I'd rather he blow someone else up other then me, since that improves the odds from my point of view. But if it starts to look like he's a scum who just struck a light in order to bluff the town, then sure, I'd blow him up.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Uh, why should I have lit, exactally? I thought the plan was that only the #1 and the #2 suspects light, and perhaps 1 enforcer as well?pickemgenius wrote:Yosarian2 wrote:
If Quagmire thinks I'm "refusing to kill anyone", he's clearly not reading the thread.Yosarian2 wrote: But if it starts to look like he's a scum who just struck a light in order to bluff the town, then sure, I'd blow him up.
that explains why you're lit.
If you'd wanted me to light, you should have said so back when I still could have. Deadline's in less then 24 hours now, it's no longer an option.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Oh, the guy who never mentioned Surye before today is suddenly accusing me of being scum with him for no reason, even though I've been pushing for Surye to die for quite a while now. And then you vote for me instead of for Surye.Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:I'm back, and last day was a disaster.
Surye and Yos are probably scum together. Notice how people jumped from Surye to Sarc after lights were struck, without much new reasons to do so.
Vote Yos
vote:Suryevote:CES
I know we were doing single votes, but I don't care. I'm pretty sure both CES and Surye are scum, and that CES is despretaly trying to distance and to link me to his scumbuddy here with this baiscally logic-less post.
In any case, Surye needs to die today.
Uh, why, exactally? Sarc was town, and so am I, so I doubt scum really cared which one of us died; besides, I was only the third candidate. I never had more then 3 votes on me all day yesterday, and 2 of them were from CES and Elvis; and I can't really see any possible way for CES and Elvis to both be town here, can you? 3 votes is just barely a bandwagon at all, and mine was pretty clearly scum driven.NabakovNabakov wrote:Instead, we should be looking at competition between the Yos and Sarc wagons for the second candidate.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Uh, and what, exactally, are you basing this idea that I'm somehow especally reluctent to be blown up? I'm always going cautious in daykilling games, overhasty town in these games leads to disasters, but I'm perfectly willing to blow myself up if necessary.Quagmire wrote:
Your reluctance to get blown up has been duly noted, and is grounds for absolute dismissal, in my opinion.Yosarian2 wrote:Yes, Suyve is obv scum, and needs to die today.
Does someoen want to actually make a case against me, or are you all just going to keep mindless repeating "Yos needs to die"?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Also, I really am bugged by the way that right now, when we're probably in lynch or lose, all these lurkers are coming out of nowhere and blindly bandwaogning for absolutly no reason. Quag's the only person who's given a reason for suspecting anyone at all today.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
When, exactally, did I try to "weasel my way out of" getting blown up? You never even suggested I should strike a light. No one did.Quagmire wrote: Cautiousness in this game could easily be considered reluctance, yosarian. I'm basing this idea off of you trying to weasel your way out of getting blown up. I don't buy it, and I feel the need to blow you up myself.
(sigh) Such bad play. But I still think Quag is likely town, so if he blows me up today, then if there are 4 scum, the town loses on the spot.STRIKE A LIGHT
note: i do not support a surye explosion without yosarian dying too
STRIKE A LIGHT
At least if I blow someone up, the town has a chance to go another day, if I guess right. I'd still prefer to see Suyve blow someone up instead, of course, but me blowing someone up is obv better for the town to quag blowing me up.
So, now I'm the one in the drivers seat, I'm the one who's going to decide who gets lynched today. We're playing kingmaker, and I just appointed myself king. So you SOB's had better start answering my questions, if you want to live to see tommorow.
Flameaxe: Why have you been lurking all game? Why are you supporting me and Suyve to kill each other now? Do you have any rational reasons to suspect me here, or are you just blindly bandwagoning and hoping to get a townie to do something stupid? Why have you refused to contribute anything all game, posting just barely often enough to avoid being replaced?
Surye: Is your vote for kuribo OMGUS? Why is it you haven't really been doing much scumhunting all game? Are you really going to blow someone up finally here, or are you bluffing?
CES: You've looked scummy all game, and the scum vibe I'm getting from this post is especally bad:
That's pretty much complete crap logic. If you think Surye is scum because of "how many people jumped from Surye to Sarc after lights were struck", why aren't you voting for, you know, one of the people who jumped from Surye to Sarc?Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:I'm back, and last day was a disaster.
Surye and Yos are probably scum together. Notice how people jumped from Surye to Sarc after lights were struck, without much new reasons to do so.
Vote Yos
In fact, pretty much everyone who's just said "Vote:x" today without a case needs to come out and make a case right now.
Elmo: Where did you go? Why haven't you posted yet today?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um, I did not, in fact, "jump from surye to sarc". Try again.Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:Yos:Those people were you, NabakovNabakov, PokerFace and Elmo. The four of you are definitely high up my suspicion list, but that suspicion partially hinges on the assumption that Surye is scum. Note the word partially here because it's important and I don't want to be misrepresented.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Pokerface: What question did I have directed at me, exactally?
Anyway, I made damn clear why I had to strike a light, I'm not sure why you ignored it, Pokerface. I don't think Quagmire was bluffing, I really think he was about to foolishly blow me up, and that would have probably made the town autolose on the spot. Me blowing up someone, while not a good thing especally this early in the day, is obv. better then that, since that way the town at least has a CHANCE of not losing today.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Perhaps. More relevent, though, is the fact that as town in danger of being exploded by someone else I thought was probably town, it was the best approach I could come up with, the thing that seemed most likely to save the town from what appeared to be oncoming disaster, even if it apparently wasn't. Or do you disagre with my play?NabakovNabakov wrote:
If a mafiosi were in danger of being 'sploded, this would certainly be one approach.
Anyway, I'm still waiting to hear something useful from Flameaxe. Also, less saber ratteling and more logic from Skitzer would be helpful; the sabre rattling dosn't actually tell us anything about your alignment until you actually demonstrate if you're bluffing or not, by which point it's way too late for that to be useful. For that matter, a little more logic from a lot of people would be nice; you guys do know we're not playing AITP and it's ok to actually make logical arguments in this game, right?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey