Newbie 647 - Over!!!
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
See the wiki article on random voting here. You're free to make your own opinions, but most players will random vote on the first day to spark reactions and initiate discussion.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
It would seem that we're too docile, speaking of which, anyone want an apple-cinnamon muffin?
Well when I think about it I've found a good place for my vote.Unvote; Vote: OGMLYou're an IC, don't lurk. I would expect you to know better which makes me think it might be conscious.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I have never caught an open contradiction in the first three pages before.
SecretAgentOrange wrote:A townie wanting to start discussion would put a 2nd vote on an active player, one who would be likely to respond. I kind of feel like putting a 2nd vote on an inactive player would be a much easier scum move. That is, if this weren't in the random phase. And since it is, I don't really think it means much.
I mean, you seem to be a little overly defensive here, but I think I'd prefer to chalk that up as in line with your initial reluctance to random vote in the beginning and not as a scumtell.
In the first post you say it is scummy to vote an inactive to start discussion. In the second post you say that all you were trying to do by voting a lurker was start discussion and that shouldn't be thought of as anti-town. While you come up with an explanation:SecretAgentOrange wrote:What, is it impossible to disagree with someone without thinking they're scum now? I said that two votes wasn't as serious as you were making it out to be, and clarified my reasons for voting you. And like I said before I did so, the reason that I took my vote off you was because my main reason for voting you in the first place was to both get you posting, and to start discussion. As both have happened, I saw no more reason for keeping my vote there.
To further explain, there was no real valid strong reason to suspect ANYONE in this thread as scum. Discussion helps the town. Moving out of the random phase helps the town. I want to do both of those things. Lord Gurgi had a vote on Vir, who had three votes on him. He then urged the town to be more active, and put a third vote on Katie, "just because". It was incredibly obvious to me that he was trying to get people to start posting by doing something that could be called into question as scummy. No one took the bait. He called you out on a minor offense. I felt that if no one had the balls to make a move that might appear scummy for the sake of sparking discussion, discussion would never happen. I put my vote there. As scummy as that may look, how could it possibly be an anti-town move? Any quicklynch that would result from having my vote there on such little evidence would CERTAINLY call me into question on the next day. I'm astounded that you'd think I'd be that stupid as scum.
But I notice that you've never once either attempted to defend yourself as to your lurking behavior, or respond to any of the points that I have made in my defense. You prefer to just attack me. That I think is a serious enough reason to put my vote back on you.
Vote: OhGodMyLifeUnvote; Vote: SecretAgentOrange
Also, OGML hasn't been lurking at all, I was just hoping to catch someone for being overeager.
To start some discussion also,
Everyone: How do you feel about his posts?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
SAO, purely because when pressured, she did respond with less than reassuring answer. Townie read on Alurin for these questions, it's something at least.Alurin wrote:1) SecretAgentOrange, or Alurin?
I am more suspicious of Malyss, because she has a tendency (it would seem) to say she has suspicions, rather than what they are. Vir4030 seems like an eager/crazy townie.Alurin wrote:2) Malyss, or Vir4030?
Absolutely Avangor here, he has picked up his prod (I assume) and still has not posted. Kairio is guilty, however of no-content posts. Pretty high on my suspicions list, because it's not hard to find someone to be suspicious of.Alurin wrote:3) Kairio, or Avangor?
OGML, post more, plzkthx. I do not like Katie much either, considering that 60% of her posts are "I'm newbie" posts, 20% random votes, and 20% defending SAO. Please say who you suspect.Alurin wrote:4) Katie, or OhGodMyLife?
General Scumlist:
1.SAO, it's thinning, but still quite suspicious, also because of that first defense. (OGML is effectively lurking now however)
2 Avangor, Last post 13th. 8 days ago... I would consider voting here.
3. OGML mostly because he's IRC and I would hope that he knows better than that.
4. Malyss, no suspicions stated, at all.
5&6. Katie and Kairio, have done basically about the same things the entire game, not contribute, pull newbie card.
7. Alurin, this list.
8. Vir4030, Seems eager townie, but just barely.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
That seems to contradict to me, which do you mean?Kairio wrote:With Lord Gurgi, again, I get kind of a good dodgy scum read, if he is. However, as far as Lord Gurgi, I don't think he's scummy, and he's not really high on my list.of scumminess.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Vir, it depends entirely on the player. If a player picks up a prod, but still doesn't post, my bet would be that they are scum. However getting replaced out is really a null tell. When people go idle they are just tired of the game usually, and for whatever reason don't feel particularly 'into' it.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Not lurking Vir, thinking. At this point this back and forth has cleared SAO in my eyes.Unvote. I am a little concerned that Malyss is defending herself in so much of her posts, rather than scum hunting.
SAO, why do you vote for Mini-Kold over Malyss? It would seem to me that it's a better idea to vote the person who's given more reason for you to vote, than avote that was obviously in jest.
I guess this makes me fall to my second suspect.Vote: Malyss.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
1. I'm not lurking.Vir4030 wrote:I'm not sure what to do now. It seems useless to scumhunt when there are only four active players.
Alurin is out and needs a replacement. Katie is at 12 days and needs a replacement. MiniKold is at 6 days and needs a prod. OMGL is at 4 days, but his post 4 days ago was a promise to post the next day and that hasn't happened. Lord Gurgi claims that he is thinking, not lurking, but I can't tell the difference.
Unvote
Malyss, you pointed out that the three of us could be chasing our tails while scum sits back, and I agree, wholeheartedly. I still think you've looked scummy, but you're completely right that it could be chalked up to poor play. I also wonder what your fiance has been telling you, and if this can contribute to any of it. Either way, until we start hearing from more players, I don't want you being lynched. I'd rather keep active players in the game and get rid of the idlers.
Vote: Lord Gurgi
I think the "thinking, not lurking" line is completely unbelievable, especially from the IC. If you were town, you'd be leading the charge in scum-hunting. This is why IC's are assigned to each game, is it not?
I'm going to continue to post and hold up my end of the game, but really, we need to post more as a group. IMHO, the IC's are doing a horrible job being active in this game, and the Moderator is also doing a horrible job getting and keeping active players. It's not fun. It feels much more like a chore to have to make these posts, because there are so many people that aren't participating. We barely have enough active players to get a lynch happening.
2. There are bigger fish to fry. You gave a list up there in fact.
3. Why, pray tell, are you going after me over OGML?
4. IC's are meant to explain, not to push you through every lynch. I am glad you are willing to step out and get going, but insulting the IC's and the Mod is not good practice.
5. Just because a player is participating does not mean they are town.
6. I am disconcerted that you are hopping your vote around this much. It seems like every post you've got completely different suspicions.
7. I have played in a game with a replace-happy mod. It was a 9 player game, we had 17 replacements. Replacing is kosher when everybody else is posting. This game however has two or three posts perdayIf someone misses four days that means they have missed a page.
8. You. Are. Not. Mod. Stop acting like you know what's better for this game.
Sorry if this post sounds angry, but it is. Don't insult the mod, and don't insult me. I am posting more than once per page, what's the issue?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I LOVE JAHUDO!I LOVE JAHUDO!I LOVE JAHUDO!I LOVE JAHUDO!I LOVE JAHUDO!
Ok, now that that's out of my system, I love it when people actually give opinions, not just summary. SAO is also looking very townie to me. I would appreciate something from OGML about everything that's happened, or else I will slap him with a small trout.
I LOVE SECRETAGENTORANGE!I LOVE SECRETAGENTORANGE!I LOVE SECRETAGENTORANGE!
I'm feeling a little nutty.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I should have specified, you are suspecting everyone. First Alurin, then SAO, then Malyss became #1 out of the woodwork, then me for lurking when OGML is worse, then Kairio for some reason.Vir4030 wrote:Lord Gurgi, would you mind explaining how I'm hopping my vote around? I've only voted twice, once for Malyss and the other for you. Does that mean that I can't look at anyone else? Your vote for Malyss has a very scummy feel to me. I just don't see someone who has experience playing like you and being town. You seem to be holding back on us, except when pressured.
Question for you Vir: Why don't you find OGML, Katie, or Mini-Kold suspicious, as they are the only people you haven't been suspicious of when they are all lurking?
Statement for you Vir: I am participating, more so than multiple players, why then is your vote on me for lurking?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Sadness. My point about the lurking is that these people aren't resurfacing, for whatever reason they lose interest. Also, don't cut off my questions before they can be answered, I was trying to prove something from his response, and it's pointless now.Brandi wrote:My notes so far:
PG 1:
Not very informative.
most notable - Vir4030 (null tell)
PG 2:
This reasoning isn't really substantial enough to warrant a second vote. So he's an IC and he's lurking. So what? This is just as baseless as a random vote. I agree when OGML states that:SecretAgentOrange wrote:Unvote Katie; Vote: OGML
IC's shouldn't be lurking, and with so little to go on at this point in the game, I don't think there's a better place I could put my vote right now.
SAO goes on in her next post being way too defensive over the matter and goes on to say that the purpose of her vote was to get OGML to talk.Going "what he said!" and dropping a vote, on the other hand, is scummy.
PG3:
OGML is happy with his vote, SAO continues to be over defensive. Completely out of character from how I percieved her on page one.
Its rarely ever good for townies to lie. =PLord Gurgi wrote:Also, OGML hasn't been lurking at all, I was just hoping to catch someone for being overeager.
How can we know you weren't SCUM trying to pull newbie townies in to make themselves the center of lynchattention?
FOS: Lord Gurgi
Bad play. Let the mod take care of that. Silent is not ALWAYS = Scum.Alurin wrote: unvote, vote Avangor
Lynch the silent ones.
Scum can use gambits.SAO wrote: I really don't think a scum player would do a gambit like he did.
PG4:
Malyss inquires as to why Vir4030 still has his vote on her. I think inquiring such is a bit of an insecure motive. Malyss had absolutely nothing to worry about. I think that there really doesn't need to be a reason for him not unvoting in this situation because it just wasn't neccessary yet. If perhaps Malyss had a bandwagon going on her after the random voting stage then it would be appropriate for Vir to at least speak up again about his stance on Malyss if not just unvote all together to prevent a quicklynch.
Vir wrote:OMGUS is a scummy move.
Not so much in the random voting stage.
Perhaps. It might just be anti-town.Vir wrote: I think an OMGUS vote is scummy when it's the random voting stage and that player already has two votes on him.
Lord Gurgi practically votes Malyss for the same reasonings he had against SOA earlier though SOA is pretty much cleared in his book.Lord Gurgi wrote:Not lurking Vir, thinking. At this point this back and forth has cleared SAO in my eyes. Unvote. I am a little concerned that Malyss is defending herself in so much of her posts, rather than scum hunting.
...
I guess this makes me fall to my second suspect. Vote: Malyss.
PG5
Jahudo hops in and gives his opinions. Doesn't seem to strongly suspect anyone at all. OGML gets a mudslide from Malyss. Thats it for this page.
PG6
False Delima for the most part. Lurking != Inactive. You are posting content. It is easy to pull scum tells from content, its harder to pull scum tells from absolutely nothing.Lord Gurgi wrote:Question for you Vir: Why don't you find OGML, Katie, or Mini-Kold suspicious, as they are the only people you haven't been suspicious of when they are all lurking?
This is it for now, I will do more individual reads later.
Hey Lord Gurgi. ^___^ Sorry to say, I think you are scum.
Vote: Lord GurgiIf he says what you did so help me I am going to murder a small rabbit, and it will be all your fault.
To address the OGML deal, that was to start discussion, because we were stalling out if you look at the time stamps. Everyone was sitting there smiling at each other and it was something to get the town moving, and it worked.
Question for you, do you agree or disagree with Vir's accusation of me about lurking? Given what you have said up there.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Hi BM - I mean Brandi.
BrandiM, please find for me where I tell everyone to vote for OGML.Lord Gurgi wrote:It would seem that we're too docile, speaking of which, anyone want an apple-cinnamon muffin?
Well when I think about it I've found a good place for my vote.Unvote; Vote: OGMLYou're an IC, don't lurk. I would expect you to know better which makes me think it might be conscious.
The mod was threatening a mass prod on day2.
Vir4030 wrote:Town doesn't need to think so much.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
That should read Page 2, not day 2 >.<
Your last name starts with M? Seriously? I was just pointing out that it's Battle Mage's schtick to quadruple post.
Brandi, do you never lay traps for foolish scum to fall into?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
IC Note: I hope you never are. It is generally bad procedure to defend someone else, even at the point of them being confirmed to your knowledge, always be aware that nothing in this game sure.Jahudo wrote:I can see you line of thinking, and although I still have a different interpretation I'm not 100% sure on Gurgi right now so I won't defend him.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Only in open or semi-open games.Brandi wrote:
Unless you're dead. ;o I read what Jahudo wrote incorrectly at first, I thought I said "I'm am 100% sure on Lord Gurgi" I was gonna say, ONLY SCUM are 100% of who is NOT SCUM. =PLord Gurgi wrote:nothing in this game sure.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
SAO, I think I've also explained the lurking thing to death, as have you explained your behaviour, at this point.
Brandi, I can't help but notice that you word a great number of your sentences so that no matter the opinion of the reader, you neither disagree, nor particularly commit yourself to either side of the discussion; this is also accompanied by the heavy use of the words probably, could, would, might, may, and depending. I'm not sure if it's the way you talk, the way you play, or a scum tell however.
If anyone has any questions at all, if they could share them now, it would be much appreciated. Especially any questions for me, as I feel that some people are finding things scummy about me, and a few other players, without asking for thewhy.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I didn't mean to attack you, I'm really off this game for some reason. But I must disagree with you, every townie should be sure of a few things, they should be sure of their own convictions, their own alignment, and the need to lynch.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I would like to have a better excuse but I really don't have one. I would also like to blame the fact that I was for all intents and purposes alone as an IC, however that just doesn't hold water. Don't what I can say, but that it was the truth.MarkBG wrote:Post 131-134:
Brandi's four posts and her earlier vote for Lord Gurgi prompted me to take a closer look at LG's character and what we have learned from him so far. At originally a 7 in my head, having looked back I still can't find any stand out obvious tells that would prompt me to place a vote on him. However, I get a "feeling" that he could well be scum - partly due to his "I'm thinking, not lurking" excuse - but it would be hypocritical to place a vote purely on a feeling, and I do feel as though further analysis is necessary.
The thing is that the more attention is drawn to it, the less the scum will want me lynched and the more they will avoid me in general, but I can't see any terribly obvious cases where people are doing that.MarkBG wrote:Post 142:
Gurgi's "trap-laying" suggestion is an interesting one, and this could be interpreted in two different ways:
a) The suggestion of laying traps for foolish (hint of newbie suggested here?) scum to fall into could be an honest, town tell. His "laying of traps" could be his own method of rooting out scum.
b) It does seem a little suspicious that he hasn't mentioned this until now. The idea of town is that you share everything with each other,because discussion is all the town has. He could well be scum, attempting merely here to defend himself against Brandi by changing the subject and beginning to go on the offensive. However, I do believe that if he had mentioned his trap-laying technique sooner, then the scum would have become more aware of it and taken precautions to avoid falling into those traps, thus nullifying the effect of these traps.Yes, I am saying that most, if not all, of the people suspicious of me at the moment are town
I already explained this in 179MarkBG wrote:Post 157:
Vir raises the point that Gurgi has voted for 5 different people throughtout the game, something that in my (brief) experience seems to be a scumtell. Wishy-washy voting to me indicates a "whatever-just-lynch-anyone" attitude and this is not helpful to the town. If Gurgi does end up being scum, we should perhaps focus our attention on those who he didn't vote for in the end.
Post 177:
Malyss also raises the point that Gurgi has been hopping his vote around, despite he himself saying that Vir was doing the exact same thing. This does seem a little hypocritical and scummy, and is all adding up to form a general scummy view of Gurgi.
I'm surprised that you have a read on Xolani, when he and his predecessors have contributed about as much as some of the replaced players. Could you explain why you have so much of a read on him as opposed to some of the non-contributing people?MarkBG wrote:This leaves Lord Gurgi and Xolani. I think Xolani and his predescessors are more scummy than Lord Gurgi - they have been quick to vote and content-less in posting, and this reeks of scum to me. Gurgi I have less of a strong opinion on, as sometimes I feel he is scum but sometimes he can be townie.
Concerning the question about the replacements all acting as one another: This is a hard question because like most in theory it really has two answers, neither of which are entirely correct. Some people lurk as a general strategy. Some people lurk as a general scum strategy. In my experience the important thing about lurkers is what they say when they resurface. IE: Slinging mud, parroting, not contributing, coming out with some evidence. I don't think that there is any use to just assuming that all lurkers are scum, however when a lurker resurfaces you have to scrape what you can from what they say.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I'm confused, I'm liberally applying votes but I'm holding back? I'm not posting enough and the other IC got replaced?Jahudo wrote: -Vir has several points for his vote:
1. Not posting as often or substantially as an IC should.
2. Not actively scum hunting enough
3. Holding back except when pressured
4. Liberally applying votes
And I have already addressed this, I'm annoyed that people keep bringing it up.Jahudo wrote: -Malyss had a few opinions to add to that when she placed a FoS
1. Glossing over Vir’s comments?
2. He Called out Vir for changing votes when Gurgi has changed votes several times.
Hold on a second, I'm being voted for not being active enough, but when I vote people for that it's scummy? Talking about the traps nullifies them, I've gone over this. And once again I have addressed this, I don't use FoS's I use votes.Jahudo wrote: -MarkBG has added his recent FoS on Gurgi:
1. Voting Katie for not posting much at a time when others hadn’t posted much more?
2. Slightly exaggerated reaction when Vir said things about prods, mods, IC’s responsibility, etc.
3. Mentioning the trap-laying tactic at that time and not sooner?
4. Liberally applying votes.
5. He Called out Vir for changing votes when Gurgi has changed votes several times.
@Batt: Sorry, I got used to massive introductory posts.
@Vir: Where are you. It's been four days since your last post.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I was trying to spark discussion yes. Discussion usually needs to be revitalized every now and then.SecretAgentOrange wrote:Post 37: Votes Katie "Just because."[/i] He was previously on Vir, with 3 votes, and then moved to Katie, putting her at 3 votes. I want to ask, Gurgi. I interpreted this as a play of some kind to get either Katie or others miffed at you for the L-2 to spark some discussion. Others have called it random. What was up?
I don't see that as lying about rules, mechanics, or strategy. I was misrepresenting what he was doing, not about any of those three. I suppose you could stretch that into mechanics, but the problem is that the definition of lurking is largely subjective.SecretAgentOrange wrote:IC's are supposed to be on their top game. They're also not allowed to lie about game rules, mechanics, or strategy in order to gain the upper hand in a mafia game.
I think that saying that a player is lurking when they really haven't been inactive long enough for it to be considered lurking is coming pretty close to the line. I definitely wouldn't call it a serious offense, but it is on the line.
I'm genuinely confused, are you saying that it might be a scum-tell because I'm IC'ing for the first time?SecretAgentOrange wrote:But upon reread, I've also noticed that, for an IC, Gurgi is relatively new. He's played a few games on this site, and modded IRL. I could feasibly see, as scum, that he might have been new to the ICing thing, thus making the newbie factor more easy to overlook.
I dunno. Remembering that Gurgi is relatively new for an IC makes me able to see that it's possible that he could be scum without being malicious. I'm more comfortable with that. I still think that overall, it's a town tell. It looks to me like he was consistantantly spurring activity through the beginning part of the game, and that was just one more thing he tried.
Call me crazy but I don't see how it's more pro-lynch to say you're considering voting someone instead of voting them.SecretAgentOrange wrote:But also said would consider voting for Avangor due to no posts. This strikes me as kind of weird. It's like feeling out a bandwagon possibility in a way. I mean, this might just be my play style, but if I vote an inactive player, it's to put pressure on them to become active. Just lurking, for me, isn't enough to want to lynch someone. It has to be persistant lurking, and persistant lurking can't come up by page 4. When you say "well, I could see voting for so-and-so", it generally means that you have actual suspicions of them as scum or a willingness to see them lynched. Maybe this is just me, but it seems scummier this way than had he just gone "Post more! Vote:Avangor".
The irony is that Vir has now gone that long without posting, irrelevant of course, but I just like the irony.SecretAgentOrange wrote:Post 99: "Not lurking Vir, thinking." He's cool on me, concerned about Malyss's defensiveness. Questions my vote on Mini-Kold.It was 5 days since Gurgi's last post. That's a lot of time to be thinking, but I could see how sitting back and watching that interchange could provide more useful information than getting involved would. And since nothing we were saying was really implicating him or pushing for a wagon he was on or anything that really affected him, I don't think he had a real incentive to lurk there specifically as scum. I'm getting a null-read on this post.
I was ticked. I don't get ticked too often, but I was ticked.SecretAgentOrange wrote:Post 110: States that he's not lurking, that for lurking OGML is a better choice, IC's aren't lynch drivers, participation != town, Vir's vote hopping is bad, in a game this slow missing 4 days isn't serious, stop backseat modding.This post sounds very defensive, but he also has a reason to be defensive. He was insulted. Vir said he was doing a horrible job, especially when OGML was doing a worse job. That kinda sucks. But I'm not so keen on the whole "Why not OGML?" thing. More on that later. Here's where Gurgi first accused Vir of vote-hopping, and it was right after Vir voted for him. It really seemed like he was looking for a reason to call Vir scum to get the attention off of himself. That's kinda scummy.
Yes.SecretAgentOrange wrote:The one thing of note in this post is that he was using some kind of loaded question to guage Vir's response. It's now aparent to me that Gurgi's playstyle is more about laying traps than passive observance.
You have never seen that? I have, unfortunately. The point of that whole thing was that the townies would ask me why and the scum would say yes let's go and lynch him. Unfortunately I didn't account for people taking IC word as law. (It's not, we can be scum just the same as you.)SecretAgentOrange wrote:Post 140: Never told people to vote for OGML, mod was threatening a mass prod on day 2.Gurgi I'm really confused about this statement. First, of course you didn't tell everyone to vote for OGML. I've never seen a post where someone says "I Vote:PlayerA and EVERYONE ELSE SHOULD TOO!" Before you were saying it was a plan to catch overeager players voting for OGML. Doesn't that mean that you DID want other people voting for OGML? And I'm not drawing the connection with what you're trying to get across with mentioning the mass prod.
Sheesh, that is nitpicky alright. But yes that is badly phrased I don't know what else I can say, except ending the second sentence with except then ramming the other onto the end.SecretAgentOrange wrote:Post 173: DIdn't mean to attack Brandi. Off on this game. But every townie should be sure of their convictions, alignment, and the need to lynch.Whoah whoah whoah. Didn't you say in post 145 "It is generally bad procedure to defend someone else, even at the point of them being confirmed to your knowledge, always be aware that nothing in this game sure." I mean, sure, that's a contradiction that's nitpicking, but you seem to be saying that contradictions are scummy, so I can't just leave that out.
Well I have two basic options, lie or give a bad answer, I could say that something came up or a family member died, but they didn't I just was thinking. And I can't really apologize for character flaws beyond trying to change them.SecretAgentOrange wrote:This is both heartening and disheartening as a defense. For one thing, Gurgi isn't getting defensive. That's nice. He's also basically saying through this whole thing that the sum total of his defense is "Welp, my bad." No real excuse for his lurking but "thinking". And when he covered his wishywashyness in 179, it was basically "eh, I've always been bad at that. Sorry." And then there's the thing that anyone avoiding him is doing so because they're scared of his traps. This post comes off as scummy to me.
Like I said, I was getting annoyed because people were just bringing up the same stuff over and over and over again, just like this post is. I feel like I've defended these same points multiple times and from multiple people. I don't see why beating the horse is going to make it run straighter. I just don't use FoS's because people tend to lose track of them, and they are frankly meaningless, especially with the overuse of them.SecretAgentOrange wrote:Now this is defensive. I don't like how you seem to think that your posting only has to be compared to OGML. You said it yourself. Lurking for an IC is more serious than it is for a normal player. Are you suddenly supposed to be held to a lower standard because OGML afked out? And you're annoyed that people keep bringing up the vote-hopping issue? You gave next to no defense for that. Are we just supposed to say "Well, I guess that settles it. He's clear, guys." And you don't use FoS's, but you are willing to say "Avangor, Last post 13th. 8 days ago... I would consider voting here. " What would you say is the difference between FoSing and saying "I would consider voting here"?
Ahhh fix your grammar it hurts.SecretAgentOrange wrote:As of now, Gurgi to me looks the scummiest out of anyone I'm seeing. He was very townie for the first half of the game, but got more scummy looking as the game went on.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I am disturbed that my name is more common in the Vir read than Vir. Anyway, his activity has really dropped. I am really quite tempted to vote for him, seeing as he came out of the woodwork after ten days to give a lackluster PBP and ask if I was dead yet.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Hii MeMe. I think that there are only a few of us left. I believe that Malyss and myself are the only original players remaining.
Battousai: Is there some way that I can address the suspicion?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
No. Cop counterclaiming is very good. Even if he or she was blocked, by counterclaiming he or she effectively gives us a guilty on Vir. Even if they are blocked from then on getting a scum like that is always good for the town.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Vir, my problem with your 'review' is that it is just a summary of the posts, not any sort of analysis of those posts.
Also, the scum can choose not to kill. I wouldn't want to play outguess the mod as far as multiple night choices. Well I am confirmed at this point, except if I am scum with Vir. This does not, however, exempt him from being scum in any way. I do not like his play on a whole, because it seems like often his posts are the reasoning constructed after a foregone conclusion.
At this point in the game my two picks for scum are Malyss and KaHuJo. I'd be fine with lynching either one of them today, but I prefer Malyss. In keeping with that:Vote: Malyss.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
It's not that that's bad Vir, it's that you're giving us a summary of what happened, which scum regularly do to look like they are really thinking about things and participating, without stating any opinions that could bite them in the butt later.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Malyss, you can use the [hr][/hr] tags to create a nice dividing line rather than that thing you were using.
I still think Malyss is scum though. Especially since she is explaining her reasons for being on that wagon after the fact. Then she moves on to just say what has been said many times already. I don't like the post on a whole, it's rehashing, excuses, and summary.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
I think they are pretty solid tells, nothing is ever reliable 100% of the time, but those two in particular I find particularly reliable. You might also want to look at JEEP's standard tells. While they are becoming invalidated by their renown, they are useful, but should not be the defining highlight of a lynch.(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
Posts like these. This is just slinging mud with no reasoning.Malyss wrote:LG: If you were to get your wagon rolling and the town lynched me, who will your next target be after you learn that I am not scum? Will it just be a matter of continuing to pick off players in the convenient little pool of suspects?(11:26:07 PM) thesheamuffin: I'm counting gurgi because I would probably make out with him if I were drunk enough-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004
-
-
Lord Gurgi Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Mostly Harmless
- Posts: 3369
- Joined: March 26, 2004