Mini 738: The Town of Merrin - Game Over

[dejkha]

/confirm

[dejkha]

We have 9/12 voting so far. Not voting: GIEFF, springlullaby, dejkha

Of those three, one has posted (twice) and didn't vote. Conveniently enough, that person also has two votes on him and so could be the Day One Bandwagon-ee. And, OMGUS because he called me obvscum before I had even posted anything more than a "/confirm" in the thread.

unvote: Panzerjager

vote: GIEFF

Sounds like you're overreacting way to much to what seemed like an obvious joke (calling you and two others obvscum is his confirm post).

Hmmm... so springlullaby suddenly appears on the scene after I note she hasn't posted, and then casts a meaningless vote (or at least it looks meaningless due to lack of explanation) after I criticize GIEFF for not voting while posting, despite there actually being a debate of sorts going on. Odd, somewhat suspicious, and definitely not helpful.

FoS: springlullaby

This also looks like you're overreacting. What it looked like to me, was Springlullaby casted a random vote and that's all. This is my first time posting since I confirmed and if I joke voted, would you be on my case because it was after you said I haven't voted? This is the first chance I had to post in the game since day one started. Ever think the same for her?

FoS: Dourgrim

because this early you seem awfully eager to write people off as possible scum for things with obvious explanations.

[dejkha]

I wouldn't call it "overreacting," more like "reacting to something." As I just posted above, obviously the "obvscum" thing was a joke, which is why that part of my reasoning was labeled with an OMGUS.

My mistake. I thought you meant Geoff's reasoning was OMGUS.

Yes, I did think the same for her, but I also think there was enough of a discussion in the thread that the time for "joke votes" was past... but none of that was really enough to convince me, which is why I only gave her a FoS instead of moving my vote. Does that make sense?

I see. To me, even if it is past random voting, I think "just because" is an obvious joke vote. I would understand if you thought she should've been serious about the game at this point, since that could be a minor scumtell (more so depending on how serious she is or isn't for the rest of the game).

I haven't written anyone off yet, not even GIEFF (who

still

has my vote). Besides, aren't we supposed to be eager to find scum? Or is it now considered better play to be passive in the thread and watch instead of actively hunting scum?

I wouldn't say that, but being so serious about certain things like the ones i responded to, could make you look too eager. As if you just want the attention on someone else.

[dejkha]

I disagree. Aggressive play early on is pro-town.

I do think being aggressive is important, but I guess it's a matter of opinion. To me, little things like that are way to little to be taken the wrong way. But that's just me.

[dejkha]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but how would we go about specifically finding the SK? Seems like the only way would be if they admitted to it.

As for whether it would be better with a SK dead or alive, while he could end up killing scum, I think going against the combined NK's of a SK and Scum are far worse since the town loses once they lose all members. Obviously vanilla townies being without night choices, lower the chances of survival.

But I think it would be best not to worry about a SK until we know if there's one in game.

[dejkha]

Well, it looks like there's quite a bit going on already. It seems to me that some of this talk about whether or not we have an SK to worry about is premature and probably counter productive to our efforts against the one threat of which we are certain, the mafia. I think we ought to wait and see what happens tonight and reopen the discussion after we have more concrete evidence to look at.

Yeah, that's what I was saying. There's no point in going on a possible wild goose chase. It seems like only reason we're considering it is because someone brought it up and if it is just a distraction, it's working. I think it goes without saying, its better to wait until we know for sure.

Why only a FoS?

Mostly because of the same feelings you have about him:

I haven't seen any underlying scum motivations for his actions, at least not yet.

I was aware that it could've been him being aggressive right from the get go, it just seemed unlikely that the posts he was addressing meant anything. When he and I explained later, it turns I out I misinterpreted a post or two of his and that's why I was more suspicious than I should've been.

[dejkha]

Sorry for my absence. Here I go:

The quote post above is a variation OMGUS: suspect someone by seemingly defending someone else for an action one has/is going to commit, the effect of which is to justify one's action.

This is further scummy because, if it is my prerogative to play as I wish, I certainly don't see anything remotely recommendable in my random vote. It is also scummy because accusing someone of being 'too eager' in the random stage is piss poor play and just plain scummy.

I have read the last pages or so. My comment on them is that I don't particularly like the dynamic of this town, there is plenty of talk and speculation but not enough true aggressiveness IMO. Note here that the SK talk may be interesting in the future but not now. Right now I would like to suggest more focused fire, starting now with a djekha wagon for example.

What can I say, I think it's a little extreme to accuse someone right off the bat because of a joke in their confirm post and a joke vote as their first post. I think I've explained to Dour why I was suspicious of his reaction to both of those and no OMGUS was involved. As I said, it's my way of thinking and I think how he reacted to those was a bit much. I personally don't think it's scummy at all to think someones too eager when they go after someones confirm post. Not much other way I can say it.

As for this "bad play is scummy" conversation going on, I'm going to have to disagree. While that could be the case a lot of the time, it isn't always. In my particular case, it was a matter of personal preference/opinion of play style. Bad play can be scummy, but it doesn't mean you're scum. Same for "good" play and looking protown.

Finding scum is more of looking for verbal slip ups (such as possible knowledge of something you shouldn't know as town, but are able to know due to your role as scum), because a lot of the time, bad play can be personal preference. As I've explained, while I understood Dour's aggressiveness, I obviously didn't approve of it in the situation he was using it in. Look how many protown people get my lynched every game. A lot of the time people leave it up to things that don't really determine whether someone is scum or not (some of which Goat mentioned), rather than slip ups. While it can be hard to tell the two apart, the difference is there.

I have to, at times, had a gut feeling about people before, but it doesn't really matter if you don't have the evidence to back it up.

@Goatrevolt:

He is calling GIEFF anti-town

, for simply wanting to lynch mafia. Therefore, mykonian is mafia.

It is clear to me from this post that Panzer thinks that mykonian's vote meant mykonian actually wanted to lynch me, as shown by my bold emphasis. Do you disagree, Goatrevolt? Does ANYBODY disagree?

If not, please join me aboard this Panzer wagon. Lying is bad, and lying about having lied is even worse. If you do disagree, please explain to me what I am misreading about Panzer's above quote.

It says pretty clearly that he thinks so, so I'm gonna have to agree due to visual proof.

[dejkha]

And yet the conversation must start somewhere to end the random stage, and the throwing around of accusations is generally where it start. Town and scum alike want to start the conversation going, as such early accusation throwing is pretty much a null-tell

in my view

. Especially considering that

I do not think

Dourgrim's criticism of my play was extreme at this point of the game.

You say that there was no OMGUS involved in your criticism of Dourgrim, but what was your post in aid of then? It wasn't followed with a vote, nor was it accompanied by otherwise relevant POV on this game.

The way I see it

, the only effect of your post was to pre-emptively defend yourself from any criticism that may have come your way for not posting early in the game.

With the amount of times you implied you think a certain way, it kind of proves my point of personal preference. We don't all think like you do and obviously I thought otherwise in most, if not all, cases.

My criticism of Dourgrim was just that: criticism. I thought it was mildly suspicious, so I FoS'd him.

[dejkha]

Sorry if you guys don't "approve" of the "oldie card" in this game. I was trying to pay you all compliments... I guess that sort of sportsmanship isn't really wanted or required in-game, eh?

Doesn't matter to me. I see it as good sportsmanship, but you should know playing the "oldie card" can be misinterpreted for asking people to go easy of you, which I'm sure you know, no one plans on doing. I don't think you've been away long enough to think we would, so I let it pass.

can you think of a reason why scum would lie day one for his random vote? No. And the same for the towny. The lie you have found is not directly intentional, nor does it have great impact on the game, as panzer already stated that his vote on me is weak. So, you are making a problem where there is none, and then you call it a scumtell.

(Forgive me if I repeat something GIEFF already said. I'm trying not to, but he got here first and said most of it) I don't think his vote was random, so he probably lost track of his supposed reason for voting and threw in another without realizing it would get him caught in a lie. I can't think of any reason to lie about a vote if you believe that person can be scum. Lying about a vote is kind of a big deal because of that. You have nothing to gain by lying about why you think someone's scum.

I

must of

not thought all that threw and

probably

didn't truly realize it was a joke because I was too caught up on the fact he voted someone for trying to vote mafia.

I'm highly skeptical of the bolded words above. You're describing your own mentality, here, and regardless of whether or not you were wrong in what you did, you should be able to at least confidently describe your own thought processes.

I just need to say, that was a good catch. That went right by me when I first read it.

On this note: You shouldn't concern yourself with appearing protown. You need to scumhunt and assume that, live or die, your alignment will become known and your opinions and theories will actually have some merit because of your alignment (proven in death/by cop) or because they make sense. (I prefer the latter, actually.)

I believe you should be concerned with yourself appearing protown. Or at least, be concerned about not appearing scummy. If you end up in a situation where you have people questioning you as a prime suspect, defending yourself is fine, as long as you continue your scum hunting. IMO, it's best to avoid a mislynch, even though it can end up being helpful.

You slipped. If you meant dejkha, you would have said "picking on dejkha." You just revealed that you know dejkha is town.

Do other agree that this is a big slip, or am I just tunneling here?

Even I think that this is a slip. It's hard to make the mistake of calling someone a townie before it's proven. (In my experience, anyway)

As of right now, Panzer will more than likely get my vote due to his lying and contradictions (I don't even know if that's what I would call it, but I'm referring to when he said "I knew that he meant for it to be a joke. I did NOT see it in this way.") While I do think lying about your reasons for voting is a rather large offense, I'd prefer to wait until a little longer before casting my vote. If he can't give a flawless reason as to why he isn't scum (which, at this point, seems impossible), I'll just go ahead and vote.

Mod: Can we get a vote count, please

?