Medieval Mafia - Game Over
-
-
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
This post=scummy.camn wrote:Wow, guys. You all come out pretty strong.
Obviously, IVOTE KMD4390
WHy? flawed gambits + flawed scum-dar = town liability.
Plus, in an off-topic way, I would like to mention that I am revisiting Pink Floyd's early work. I think I like it better when Gilmour started playing Lead.. though I am sure there are some Syd Barrett purists here that will defy me.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
Meh. If you say so.Kmd4390 wrote:
No, the Gambit was a reference to a past game. And the "flawed scumdar" is the fact that I pushed a case on her from Day 1 and she was town. I'll find the link if you still want it.Caboose wrote: The whole "coming out strong" thing was a reference to a past game?
Link please.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
I've seen both real pro-town millers and scum claim like this. I'm not quite in the "lynch all millers" camp anymore, but normally a miller is still at least a pretty good lynch.
I'm a little unsure in this case, though; if a scum has a one-shot daykill, why would he claim it so early, instead of just sitting back quietly and waiting, and using it for a surprise endgame win, or to pick off a cop the moment he claims, or something? While I don't trust a "miller-vig" claim, obv, I'm not sure I see the logic for a scum with a one shot day kill to claim "miller-day-vig" on day 1; nor do I see the logic of, say, a day-SK to claim that, or any other plausable scum with a daykill that I can think of. That being said, if there's even a small risk of him being scum, TSQ's plan to make him use his kill right now might be for the best.
Zwet, does your role have any other details or flavor?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
(shrug) Well, I suppose, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the town's chances this game in order to advance some meta; I don't really think that's either a good idea or an effective one.Thestatusquo wrote:Yos, you know as well as I do that the logic for the meta policy is not because he's sure to be scum, but rather that we have to make the meta for miller claims unacceptable for scum.
In any case, I'd be more inclined to have a balance; something like "lynch a claimed miller 25% more often then you would lynch a claimed vanillia in the same situation"; that's probably enough to discourage scum from claiming miller that often (especally considering how often you should lynch a claimed vanillia anyway).
Of course, in this unusual case, he's not a claimed vanillia, so it'd more like "25% more often then you'd lynch a claimed one shot dayvig in the same situation". Which is probably still not that high.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
Meh, no reason there can't be daykilling-scum, I've seen mafia members with one-shot daykills before more then once, and a daykilling SK isn't out of the question either.DrippingGoofball wrote:
Nah. Still. Not buying the dayvig-scum.Thestatusquo wrote:Also, are we all trying to outguess the mod? DGB camn, you guys should know better. At least, DGB definitely should. You know damn well OGML is a very experienced mod who knows not to fall into standard meta pitfalls.
Now, as I said, I do tend to doubt a scum with a daykill would claim so out of the blue on day 1.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
Why, pop?populartajo wrote:I dont policy lynch millers. I lynch based on behaviour. If you are scummy you die. This isnt about general meta. This is about this game.
Your kill should definitely be used today and in the second suspect of the day.
With that said I disagree with TSQ plan.
If you think the claimed daykiller is likely to be scum, forcing him to use his daykill on day 1 is good both because it tests his claim, and because if he is scum with a daykill it's obv much better to get him to use it on a target of the town's choice, and ASAP.
On the other hand, if you don't think he's scum, then I'm a little fuzzy on why him using his one-shot kill day 1 is the most pro-town way to use the kill. Could you elaborate on why you think it is?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
(sigh) Ok. Here's my reaction.zwetschenwasser wrote:Tadaa! I am not a miller or a dayvig. Behold my awesomeness. Discuss reactions. You're welcome.
Vote:Zwets
Die scum die.
Reasons for this:
1. A player claims X, then, when he realizes he's going to have to actually prove his claim, suddenly says "Hah, I was just kidding guys". Probably lying scum.
2. Last time I saw someone claim dayvig, then unclaim it when the town tried to direct his kill, the guy was actually a scum dayvig and just didn't want to be forced to kill his scumbuddy.
3. He claimed miller, then unclaimed miller. Now, if a cop investigates him and gets a guilty, he'll probably re-claim miller. Let's just lynch him now.
4. Lynch all liars. At least, when they're scum.
5. I don't even care if he claims again before he dies, it'll probably be another lie anyway. There's like a 1/10 chance he's town pulling a stupid gambit, but if he is, he would have to be a complete idiot to do so if he had a useful power role anyway.
Let's just hang him right now. And I mean, RIGHT NOW. It'd be nice to see a day 1 end before page 8 for once, games were better when that was the norm.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 read your posts. I just don't care. He needs to die, and he needs to do it yesterday or so.DrippingGoofball wrote:
FAILYosarian2 wrote:
(sigh) Ok. Here's my reaction.zwetschenwasser wrote:Tadaa! I am not a miller or a dayvig. Behold my awesomeness. Discuss reactions. You're welcome.
Vote:Zwets
You are not reading my posts.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
...DrippingGoofball wrote:
Are you ignoring the hints on purpose?Yosarian2 wrote:I read your posts.
You said you can read his tone, and that you think he's town; I'm not surprised by that, especally, nor do I have a problem with you saying that, since that's a normal part of your playstyle and one that's often effective, but it didn't convince me of anything.
If you were hinting at something else, though, then I totally missed it. If you are, like, 100% sure he's town for some kind of role-based reason, then I'll unvote him and I won't ask for any more details today.
Don't screw with me, though; I've let you get away with fake claims in other games because of your meta, but not here. This is NOT the time to fake role info, or you could REALLY screw the town over, ok?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
Meh. Ok, I see what you mean. (Actually, I thought after you told me you had dropped "hints" that you were about to claim Gawain or something, but never mind that.) It's kind of a weak flavor argument, but I'll relent far enough to say that I'm now willing to give him a chance to claim for realz before we kill him. If he does it fast.DrippingGoofball wrote:
He may be a mason.Caboose wrote:
And that supposed to make him less likely to be scum because...DrippingGoofball wrote:
I'm not saying I have rolebased info. But his character has two brothers. He's not Gawain; he's one of Gawain's three sons.Yosarian2 wrote:If you were hinting at something else, though, then I totally missed it. If you are, like, 100% sure he's town for some kind of role-based reason, then I'll unvote him and I won't ask for any more details today.
By the way; could you point to which of his posts let you "tell that it was nothing but provication" from his tone? Beacuse I don't get that vibe from any of his early posts, at all, except perhaps the post where he unclaimed and that could very easily be faked.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 am thinking. I think he's scum.
He made a claim, he couldn't back it up, so he changed it.
You're right, it's easy. That's not a bad thing, not when the evidence is so clear.
Is there a chance he's just really dumb town? I guess; I've seen some people do really dumb things as town lately. It dosn't seem likely to me, though.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 think this post looks scummy. DGB looks like a town who thinks zwet is town and is trying to stop a lynch. If anyone looks like they have inside information, it's you; I really, really distrust you making this post while still voting for Zwet, makes me wonder if you're a scum who's playing us all and setting up future mislynches.Caboose wrote:I don't like how DGB is is setting herself up for the classic "I told you so" D2 if zwet flips town.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 now, by the laws of irony, he will re-appear in the thread and dayvig a cop.DrippingGoofball wrote:
One thing about zwet, is, in my mind, absolutely certain.Kmd4390 wrote:Vote Zwet
This is a good point. If he's scum dayvig, I don't want to give him a chance to shoot a townie.Yosarian2 wrote:Ideally, I would like to see him dead before he gets to post again, just in case he is a scum dayvig. I am 100% serious about this.
DGB is my second suspect right now.
He's no dayvig.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
Nice OMGUS there. You're so scum.zwetschenwasser wrote:I'm actually William Wallace, and I can target someone every night. If the person is nightkilled, then I die instead. I'm your official martyr, folks, and TSQ is scum.
On a side note: DGB, I count 8 people voting Zwet, and there were 8 votes on him in the votecount. Will this double vote thing show up in the votecount, or is there actually one more vote on him then is showing up now? That would make him at lynch -1.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
Unless Zwet is scum, in which case the "scum agenda" would be to stall and delay the lynch until the waters are so muddy that the town's short attention span wanders and someone else gets lynched instead. Which is already starting to happen.DrippingGoofball wrote:
What is believable is that scum will do everything in its power to reduce discussion and ensure the quickest, least informative mislynch possible. Thanks for helping the scum's agenda.scotmany12 wrote:We fucking serious people? Seriously, stop unvoting. I do not get what makes this claim so believable; and after reading about William Wallace, I really don't see how martyr (or bodyguard for that matter) fits for him. And we should not be letting him get away with his OMGUS on shea.
It dosn't help that his vote on TSQ is just terrible. Nothing TSQ has done so far this game seems like it'd be more likely to come from scum-TSQ then town TSQ. Voting a claimed miller day 1 is a perfectly reasonable move, especally when the guy is freaking lying about his role anyway. The only excuse he gave was "TSQ should know my meta", which makes no sense, unless Zwet has a habit of claiming miller-vig on day 1, getting backed into a corner where he had to either prove his claim or die, and then admitting he was lying all along.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
Although this is pretty much just wrong; lurking is a great scumtell, and day 1 is a great time to go lurkerhunting, or even lurker lynching if it's absolutly necessary.scotmany12 wrote: And it is still a null-tell. Attacking someone's activity, regardless of his activity in other games, is ridiculous to do on day 1.
That being said, the time to lynch a lurker is not the point when you've just cornered a scum into a position where he was forced to admit his entire roleclaim was a complete lie. And who claimed to be a miller and then "un-claimed" miller when it looked like he was going to take more flak for it then it was worth. And who claimed he was "trying to get reactions", but has not made any comments on any of the "reactions" from his lies at all, except to OMGUS vote someone who voted him for perfectly legitimate reasons, and to do so without any real analysis of his "reaction".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 don't need or want a roleclaim from you, but it would be useful to know if you mean, say, you believe his role flavor for reasons related to your role flavor, or something.Caboose wrote:
That would require a full roleclaim, which I'm not giving.scotmany12 wrote:You already came out and said that you have information to believe that he is town. If you have said information, you not releasing it is hurting the town. Call it rolefishing, but no one is going to believe you until you explain it fully.
No, not releasing the info is not bad for the town, it's bad for the scum's ability to decide if I'm worth nightkilling or not.
Zwet: You know, you still haven't really explained the vote on TSQ, and now you're making another OMGUS vote without any reasoning? If you do have some kind of pro-town reason to suspect Sam, I'd like to hear it.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
You say that like it's a bad thing.Kmd4390 wrote:
You did. But others, mainly Xyl, are only voting him for lurking.DrippingGoofball wrote:
If you look at my post you'll find that I made a case against Jebus earlier on.Kmd4390 wrote:Jebus is being wagoned strictly for lurking?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
TSQ: I will mention that DGB has been improving lately, especally with the "focus on someone and then never change your mind no matter what" thing; she's been more flexable and less tunnel-visioned in recent games I've played wih her.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 still sick, but I'm going to try to get caught back up on this game.
Caboose wrote:
Nice fencesit.stark wrote:The argument between DGB and TSQ is really silly. I have no opinion on that.
+scumpointsFos:CabooseConsidering what the DGB/TSQ argument was about, this feels like you're trying to shoehorn a generic scumtell into a situation where it dosn't at all apply, and that seems scummy to me.
Let's see...then Kore replaced in, with perhaps the awesomest summery ever.
Jebus actually posted (!), although it was one of those darn "I'm here, will read and post later" posts. If he dosn't actualy "read and post" in the next few days, I'm totally in favor of just lynching him and being done with it.
qwints acts scummy, refuses to explain himself.
Eh...in my experence, a lot of people lurk but still pay attention to the game; you'd be surprised how often a lurker shows up right after a few votes appear on him.sam wrote:
Here's how I think the lurker problem gets fixed:
Those who lurk get prodded continually, or replaced. Those that get replaced are replaced by someone who's usually more talkative.
Those who lurk and then get called out on it sometimes see a rise in activity when they do. I have a sense that Jebus will begin posting.
Sometimes there are those who lurk but post just enough to bypass mod proddings and replacement are those that we need to really pay attention to. And it's difficult to gauge who those people are on day one, so it's best to wait until other days to do it.
Try, please.Sam wrote: Especially when we have this hasgfas scumbag over here who's so obviously mafia I can't begin to explain to you.
Right now, my gut is suspicious of Sam and Caboose, and both Jebus and qwints apparently need to be pressured to act in a more pro-town way. My vote could happily go on any of the 4 at the moment. I'll try to do targeted re-reads of them in a little while.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
Because I was assuming that what Stark was talking about was the un-game-related, "I hate her playstyle so much I almost want to be replaced out" personality dispute between DGB and TSQ. He said it was "silly" and basically decided to not get invovled in it, which is usually a smart move when an argument based mostly on outside-the-game-emotions happens inside of a mafia game.Caboose wrote:WTF? Why are a bunch of people making these crappy attacks on me that I can't possibly defend myself from because they lack a case? Kore? camn?
@yos: Why does the fencesitting scumtell not apply?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
"softclaiming" can be a scumtell, but I don't think what you did was softclaiming, Caboose; you claimed you had role-based info that a certain person was probably pro-town, and you claimed that in order to prevent his lynch. That's a perfectly valid reason to do a partial claim.Caboose wrote:Did my softclaim look scummy to anyone?
If so, explain how it's a scumtell.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
(shrug) Very often, around day 3 or 4, people go back, see who was on each bandwagon at lynch, and compare who was on which townie wagons to who was on which scum wagons. For that reason, scum often don't like actually having their vote on a townie wagon at the moment it goes to a lynch, or at least not to have that happen too often.populartajo wrote: 2. Qwintscum would have left the wagon but with what purpose? Nobody would have given him shit for pushing such a perfect wagon.
I know what you're saying, but I don't think the behavior would be unlikely for qwints-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
I mean, don't get me wrong; now that we know zwet was pro-town, this post has to be considered to be a good pro-town post from quints.
The problem is, reading over qwints' posts now, it is almost the only good pro-town post he's made all game. (the only other one that looks even slightly pro-town to me is when he jumped on the jeebs wagon)qwints wrote:unvote
Caboose vouching for zwet combined w/ zwet claiming bodyguard means I don't want to lynch zwet 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
I don't think we want or need the daykiller to claim today, because I'm 95% sure the daykiller is pro-town. No way a scum with a one-shot daykill would waste it on a guy who was about to be lynched and, even if he had somehow survived, had claimed a pretty weak power role anyway.farside22 wrote: I get hascow's paranoid reaction to the vig?? kill. As even though zwet was town and he made this game go to hell in a handbasket. And I didn't think he was scum and agreed with DGB (I'm going to hell now). All that said it made me wonder based on a few games (including my own) where that was a scum or town doing the kill.
He asked where else he role fished from TSQ.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
Did you go back and read the post where he voted farside?DrippingGoofball wrote:[
Also, if he's not bus'ing farside, why was he all over her from the moment the game started? She wasn't even there! And he was babbling on like he had some solid evidence.
If he was not bus'ing farside, perhaps he was anticipating that she'll be her usual scummy self and easy to lynch?
Looks like a perfectly good "first non-random" vote to me; there were at least two different (although minor) scummy-ish things in that farside post he quoted. Nothing that's a big deal, but better then keeping a random vote.Thestatusquo wrote:farside22 wrote:
People asked why DGB was still alive. My thought well because there was no night 0 that is why.populartajo wrote:
What are you talking about?farside22 wrote:I could have sworn that all we had was a confirmation phase. Why is everyone act like we had a night 0?
I just voted for her because she loves to BW me to death.Unvote, Vote FarsideI 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
Right. Like I just pointed out, he had a perfectly good, non-random reason for putting his vote there; and also, by making clear his vote was non-random, he'd likely get more useful reactions from it, since everyone just ignores random votes most of the time. Nothing there seems inconsitant with what I would expect from town-TSQ. Not that I'm convinced he's town; his scum playstyle is very, very close to his town playstyle, he's not easy to read. Just that nothing he's done is inconsistant with my meta on him.DrippingGoofball wrote:There is also this post, coming immediately after TSQ's initial farside vote:Thestatusquo wrote:FYI,.my current vote is not randomEmphasis mine.
Town-DGB tends to throw around a lot of accusations, and gets all kinds of reactiosn from people that way; if you pay attention to when she makes the accusations (not so much what she says, always, but what's going on in the game at the time) you usually see she has good reasons for them. While she's making the accusations, she always sounds totally 100% sure she's right, but if there's reason to think she was wrong, she changes course. By the end of the day, in recent games I've seen her as town, she seems to end up pointing the right way more often then not, largely because she's much more ameanable to logical arguments and such and is much less tunnel-visioned then she used to be; all in all, in the past year or so, she's actually forged a rather effective pro-town playing style.Thestatusquo wrote:
So I just went back and checked, so far this game DGB has accused me of being scum with:
Zwet: Town
Jebus
farside
Sam
Looking back, there's never ever any reasoning given for why she thinks I'm scum. The logic, initially, seems to be that I am attacking zwet, who she at the time thought was town, then she decides that zwet was scum, and then the attack became that I was busing him, then she decided that I also "had it in" for farside, which was also of course busing, and by extension I must be scum with jebus and sam.
Does that make a bit of sense to anyone at all?
Nothing in her playstyle yet seems inconsistant with what I'd expect from her as town. Frankly, except for her attacks on you, I haven't disagreed with much she's said today; and I'm not surprised by her attacks on you, since your playstyle and hers are so different.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 really don't think she was trying to "prod" you. She was accusing you of using your dislike for her playstyle as a shield to defend against her attacks on you. I understand why that could make you angry, being accused of faking emotions tends to really piss people off (I remember what happened with MOS in that one horrible, horrible invitational game, oh my lord) but honestly, it's not an illogical case for her to be making.Thestatusquo wrote:Yes, there is. I can not play like this. My anger is clouding my play, and I am going to be a detriment to the town if I keep letting her prod me like that. It will continue happening, and I will not enjoy this game, and will eventually start avoiding it, and start lurking, and thats not good for anyone.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
camn wrote:Wow. Take a couple hours off, and I see what happens.
Hey Qwints.. did you soft-claim vanilla a couple pages back?
Eh...I observed the possible soft claim and attacked him for it, but even so I'm a little uncomfortable with you actually asking him if he's soft-claiming vanillia. I donno if that says more about you or about me, but I figured I'd mention it.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, if he's scum, it dosn't matter. If he isn't, though, then him claiming "vanillia or not vanillia" would be bad, for obvious reasons.camn wrote:Oh, the vanilla part? I read it as him claiming vanilla.
And I just want him to confirm or deny.
Why would it be bad if he answers? It would delete any wiggle room on his part.
If you think he should claim because he's about to get lynched, that's a different thing (although I still think that no one should EVER claim vanillia, under ANY circumstances).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
What caboose did was not softclaiming. It was a partial claim, to share role-based information. That's a very, very different ball of wax.sam.samhorn wrote:
Were you here when Caboose did it?camn wrote:How is it legit?
That is.. how does it help the town?
It's a legit town strategy sometimes.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
...why do you keep repeating this over and over again after your basic premise has been repeatedly shown to be false?DrippingGoofball wrote:
Oh relax. Either he bus'ed you, or saw you as an easy victim to push into making mistakes that look scummy. Only you know which. I can only speculate.farside22 wrote:Great now that TSQ is gone I'm beating DGB will continue with her bussing theory where I can laugh in her face when shown as town.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
A vanillia town should never claim anything at all, I think. Lying is not an option; and you claiming vanillia should not make the town any less likely to lynch you anyway compared to a person who just won't claim, and if you claim vanillia and then don't get lynched your vanillia claim helps the scum.Kmd4390 wrote:
What should a real vanilla claim in your opinion? (Actual theory question because I've never heard this and you are a respectable player)Yosarian2 wrote: (although I still think that no one should EVER claim vanillia, under ANY circumstances).
I tend to think that the only time it might (note:might) be a good idea for a person to claim under pressure is if he thinks his claim may prevent his lynch, or if he has useful informaton to share; otherwise, there's no point, and it can only hurt the town.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
To be clear; there can be situations for a partial claim, or even some kinds of soft claim, softclaiming vanillia is ALWAYS very anti-town. There is never a situation where it helps the town, at all, while the kind of post you made is a clear signal to the scum "Hey, guys, don't bother killing with me, power roles are elsewhere", which makes it much easier for them to find and kill the power roles. And then, of course, you compounded the anti-town action by then actually claiming vanillia, even after I'd just explained why a vanillia claim is never a good idea...
Still, anti-town as your actions have been, the biggest thing you would need to do in order to get me to unvote you would be to actually start playing mafia. You know, start scumhunting, start discussing stuff, start posting more then just empty bandwagon following stuff. If we don't lynch you today, qwints, who do you think we should lynch?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
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your premise was "TSQ non-random voted Farside when she wasn't even around, he clearly had no real reason to non-random vote her, so he must have been either bussing or trying to get an easy lynch."DrippingGoofball wrote:
Show me where my basic premise has been proven to be false. I don't believe that you can. Until you do, my argument stands.Yosarian2 wrote:
...why do you keep repeating this over and over again after your basic premise has been repeatedly shown to be false?DrippingGoofball wrote:
Oh relax. Either he bus'ed you, or saw you as an easy victim to push into making mistakes that look scummy. Only you know which. I can only speculate.farside22 wrote:Great now that TSQ is gone I'm beating DGB will continue with her bussing theory where I can laugh in her face when shown as town.
So, I took a look at the post in question, and:
So, not only was your statement that "farside wan't around" just false, the whole jist of your argument seemed to be that there was something wrong with TSQ's initial farside vote, and I really don't get that at all; looks to me like he had a perfectly rational reason to vote her, especally considering it was only page 2; how much of a case do you expect him to be able to make on page 2?Yosarian2 wrote:
Did you go back and read the post where he voted farside?
Looks like a perfectly good "first non-random" vote to me; there were at least two different (although minor) scummy-ish things in that farside post he quoted. Nothing that's a big deal, but better then keeping a random vote.Thestatusquo wrote:farside22 wrote:
People asked why DGB was still alive. My thought well because there was no night 0 that is why.populartajo wrote:
What are you talking about?farside22 wrote:I could have sworn that all we had was a confirmation phase. Why is everyone act like we had a night 0?
I just voted for her because she loves to BW me to death.Unvote, Vote FarsideI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug)DrippingGoofball wrote:I've seen enough scum bus right out of the garage to recognize likely signs.
(re-reads again) No, he really dosn't. People keep asking him about his farside vote, and he responds to them, but I don't see any sign he's "harping" on it.Later on, after farside goes VLA, he keeps harping on farside.
Sure, after Zwet died, he decided to go back and find other suspects. Makes sense to me.At some much later point, he mentions how he forgot how farside has provoked his ire, and that he wants to check it out again or some such.
I just don't at all see this case you're trying to make here, DGB. You have a problem with his actions on the Zwet-wagon, fine; I could totally see him doing all that stuff as town, but I can understand why you might think it looks scummy; but there's really nothing at all wrong with his vote for farside.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
Well, it is an incredibly, incredibly anti-town position. And he specifically said he was "policy lynching" you, which means lynching you, not for your alignment per se, but becasue you were pushing an incredibly anti-town action.
Do you disagree? Do you not think that refusing to vote is anti-town?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
Never? I doubt that.Korejora wrote:Yosarian2 wrote:Do you disagree? Do you not think that refusing to vote is anti-town?No. One player refusing to vote never causes a no-lynch
Even if it dosn't cause a no-lynch, it means that, if you are town and not voting, scum have more influince, since they control a higher % of the vote and more townies now need to jump on a wagon they might not like to ensure a lynch. It means that a higher percentage of wagons that are started will be started by scum, since you're clearly not starting any wagons if you're not voting. It means that it's that much more likely for any number of things to go wrong close to deadline. And, most of all, it means that you're not leaving a voting record, so we get less info about you.
One person absolutly refusing to vote at all on day 1 is incredibly anti-town, Kore.
Well, yes, if you do something blatently anti-town and rather scummy, you'll get "strong reactions". That dosn't mean it's a good idea, or that it's useful., and the very unusual personal choice causes highly important (and sometimes badly needed) stimulation and dynamics for the first day, as well as obviously strong reactions (as witnessed 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
If Qwints wants there to be any chance of me unvoting him, then, like I said, he needs to post some real content. If he's not willing to do that, then it's very unlikely I'll unvote the claimed-vanillia lurker scumbag. I mean, frankly, "scummy looking claimed vanillia lurker" is pretty much my favorate type of day 1 lynch.populartajo wrote: Qwints is not optymal. If he is scum it would be so fucking obvious the following 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
-
-
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