Medieval Mafia - Game Over

[camn]

What did I do?

[DrippingGoofball]

@yos: Why does the fencesitting scumtell not apply?

I'm looking forward to the answer.

[OhGodMyLife]

Vote Count:

9 to lynch

hasdgfas: 4 (scotmany12, populartajo, sam.samhorn, qwints)
Jebus: 3 (Xylthixlm, Yosarian2, camn)
qwints: 2 (Thestatusquo, DrippingGoofball)
DrippingGoofball: 1 (farside22)
camn: 1 (Jebus)
qwints: 1 (Kmd4390)
Kmd4390: 1 (hasdgfas)
stark: 1 (Caboose)

Not Voting: 3 (stark, crywolf20084, Korejora)

[Caboose]

Soft claimed PR. This = bad D1 lynch, great lynch later on... If.

I don't get why the soft PR claim makes me a "great lynch later on." And what's with the "if"?

[camn]

If nothing changes.
If you don't get nightkilled.
If you don't fullclaim some day. (NOT NOW!!)
If you don't keep keeping it real.
If there is no obvscum.


But how, exactly, is softclaiming NOT scummy?

[Thestatusquo]

FYI, my current vote is not random.

Care to explain?

Not currently, no.

Scummy.

Next:

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.

I don't like letting miller claims into the meta. This is purely and simply a meta policy issue.

Clearly you understand Lynching someone for meta- or Policy- reasons.
YET>>>>
Even though you admit this...

It's equally likely to me that he is just flaking on this one game.

YOu somehow don't understand the benefit of policy lynching a lurker..

Jebus does not need to be lynched

.
Scummy.

NEXT, Back to Farside...

In my opinion the town is well served by knowing that my vote is not within the bounds of the RVI, but is not well served by knowing its purpose yet.

All will be revealed in due time, my tiny little friend.

How many times have I heard this promise?
And then, when you finally bless us with your insight.. it's this???

I found her comment where she said "Wait, we haven't had a night" to be scummy because to me it sounded like the kind of comment that a scum player would make if there was a night and they didn't realize it.

THATS what you were being all mysterious about?
Scummy.


NOW.. That said, even though those things were scummy.... you have done a lot that was NOT scummy... which is why you aren't OFF THE HOOK, but you DO deserve to live through the day.

For clarity.. this post should not be construed as a 'case' against TSQ. He asked when he was scummy... this is my response.

1) Generally the first non-random vote that you make is not very strong. I like to slow play it in order to garner more reactions from the player in question, and also the other players in the game. In the early game, I feel you gain a lot more from keeping your cards close to the vest and observing, rather than full out attacking. Do you disagree with this benefit? I would also be interested in hearing what you think the scum motivation would be for attempting to remove the game from the random voting stage.

2) Yes, I understand meta-policy lynching. Here's the delineation, though. Lurking is fixable by mod intervention, whereas miller claims d1 are not. In my opinion it is a much stronger play to get lurkers replaced then it is to lynch them. That option is not available with millers. I am much more concerned with lynching active lurkers. Players who are active but are not contributing anything to the game, because a) I find these players much more likely to be scummy, and b) Because that problem is not fixable by the mod. This definitely seems like more of an ideological difference than a alignment difference. Do you think it scummy that I disagree with you on this?

[Caboose]

But how, exactly, is softclaiming NOT scummy?

Softclaiming is

NOT

a scumtell.

[Thestatusquo]

It highly depends on the soft claim itself.

[Caboose]

Did my softclaim look scummy to anyone?
If so, explain how it's a scumtell.

[Yosarian2]

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?

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.

[Thestatusquo]

tbh, I don't even know what soft claim she/you are talking about. Please enlighten me.

[Xylthixlm]

No need to pressure Caboose over his softclaim now. We'll rake him over the coals for a fullclaim in a day or three.

[Caboose]

tbh, I don't even know what soft claim she/you are talking about. Please enlighten me.

When I said that I had rolebased info that cleared zwet.

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.

I assumed stark was talking about the game related stuff.
Personally, I'm trying to ignore the whole personality clash between TSQ and DGB.

[camn]

Totally agree.

[camn]

OOPs.. I mean totally agree . . with Xylthixlm.

[Xylthixlm]

MASSIVE SIMULPOST

[Thestatusquo]

OOPs.. I mean totally agree . . with Xylthixlm.

I asked you some questions in my last post. Please answer them.

[camn]

caboose answered in 612.

But if you mean THREE posts ago... then:

1) I don't disagree with these high Ideals.
But I don't think you accomplished them.
Your "secret" reasons turned out to be incredibly obvious. Withholding them from us really just withheld info about YOU.. not about farside.
If you were trying to get 'reactions' I would say you failed.. thus your stated strategy was flawed.... if that was your true intention.
Maybe you as scum wanted to tap into some kind of inherent Farside-scummieness and build a wagon. Maybe you are both scum and you are distancing. Maybe a lot of things... most of them scummy.

2) It isn't the difference that is scummy. It is your apparent lack of understanding of why WE think lurkers should die. I am sure you DO understand it. So why wern't you debating it from a policy perspective? Instead you called Xyl "likely scum" for voting a lurker. Scummy.

[Kmd4390]

Well... Camn says she's biased on me and I think I feel the same with her. I see her massively buddying up to Yos with the "legend" comment, but one of my points against her in Tranquility was buddying up to Rishi early in the game. Remember that she was town... I don't even know what tells to look for with her because I was so wrong on her in the other game. =/

Qwints is only reinforcing my thoughts on him by jumping on the latest popular wagon with Cow. And guess what? He did it in the same way he did with Zwet and Jebus when those wagons were popular.

Sam looks good with the lurker opinions, but when it comes to actual specific players, he's no better than Qwints. If Qwints weren't so scummy, I'd probably vote Sam. The lurker opinions look more like trying to look active without giving actual thoughts. And when he does drop an opinion, he can't be bothered to back it.

Camn, I have to ask. You call TSQ scummy. He asks why. You answer. Why do you need the disclaimer, "For clarity.. this post should not be construed as a 'case' against TSQ" at the end. Giving reasons why a player is scummy IS a case. Why are you seperating yourself from calling it that?

Mod

, the vote count shows my vote on Qwints and the other 2 votes as seperate wagons.

I don't see why Caboose needs to be uestioned about the "softclaim"?

Hey camn. Wanna use Zwet to see if my Gambit (actually an analysis strategy more than a Gambit when I use it like this) works better on a confirmed town wagon? hasdgfas, Thestatusquo, Yosarian2, scotmany12, sam.samhorn, Kmd4390. Those were the Zwet voters. (Actually, at quick glance, Qwints, Caboose, and Cow all were voting Zwet at one point too.) I bet we can find an experienced scum or 2 or maybe even 3 on this wagon. Qwints, Yos, TSQ would be my top choices. Cow and Scot are meh as well. So yeah, I'm doing this again based on the simple fact that Zwet was town. Stef being scum ruined the hell out of it last time. I'm gonna piss off Camn here and say this: My analysis strategy reinforces my scum read on Qwints. It also reinforces any suspicion I may get on any of these players later.

[qwints]

claiming role based information in a theme game is as soft as a claim can get and not scummy.

[Thestatusquo]

caboose answered in 612.

But if you mean THREE posts ago... then:

1) I don't disagree with these high Ideals.
But I don't think you accomplished them.
Your "secret" reasons turned out to be incredibly obvious. Withholding them from us really just withheld info about YOU.. not about farside.
If you were trying to get 'reactions' I would say you failed.. thus your stated strategy was flawed.... if that was your true intention.
Maybe you as scum wanted to tap into some kind of inherent Farside-scummieness and build a wagon. Maybe you are both scum and you are distancing. Maybe a lot of things... most of them scummy.

2) It isn't the difference that is scummy. It is your apparent lack of understanding of why WE think lurkers should die. I am sure you DO understand it. So why wern't you debating it from a policy perspective? Instead you called Xyl "likely scum" for voting a lurker. Scummy.

1) Your disagreement there is not with the idea plan itself, but rather with the end result. Let me ask you this, If I attempt to stop someone from murdering someone and fail, does that mean I wasn't attempting to stop their murder. Even if you think it didnt work this time, that doesn't invalidate the method. That being said, you have no idea what kind of information and reads I have garnered from it. The point was to create a scenario and watch how people reacted to it. I do that fairly often with the first weak genuinely scummy thing I see.

2) I DO see your frustration with lurkers, and I DO see why you would want to lynch them. I do not agree. If you'll go back and look, my attack on XYL was not actually for attacking a lurker. There were two components to the attack. First I attacked the faulty logic of a voting system that would name him as just as likely to be scum as the person he was voting at the time. I often look at what people deem scum tells, and then use those as a standard to measure those people, because players very often use their own play as scum as a standard for what they see as scummy in other people. So, I thought it was completely ridiculous to base a vote off of logic that was equally likely to make him scum. Second, I attacked him for jumping in the game and adding very little to it. It's very easy for someone to jump in the game and say "Well, X has the least posts: Vote: X" It doesn't advance the game state, and it's a cop out that allows the replacer to avoid playing and taking definitive stands on the issues that have been raised so far.

If you'll notice, I have not attacked YOUR attacking of the lurker because it does not have the two characteristics that I described about xyl. You are not using flawed logic, and you are not using the lurker push to avoid the rest of the game.

[scotmany12]

Did my softclaim look scummy to anyone?
If so, explain how it's a scumtell.

Your softclaim did not look scummy to me at all. As a matter of fact, I didn't even look into it. I saw no reason why it would mean your were a pr; If anything, it looked like you were claiming flavor as your rolebase info.

I understand the wagon on qwints, as him hopping from one wagon to another (all of these wagons have been the largest during the time of his vote) and him providing nothing to the game is scummy. I still think Cow would be a better lynch, and I think we would get more information out of it.

People sam is obvtown. Quints its neutral at least.

FOS: TSQ and DGB

Mind expanding on this post? sam is neutral at best, while qwints appears scummy.

Hey Cay, how bout that rectifying that was suppose to happen during your break?

[Thestatusquo]

Well... Camn says she's biased on me and I think I feel the same with her. I see her massively buddying up to Yos with the "legend" comment, but one of my points against her in Tranquility was buddying up to Rishi early in the game. Remember that she was town... I don't even know what tells to look for with her because I was so wrong on her in the other game. =/

Qwints is only reinforcing my thoughts on him by jumping on the latest popular wagon with Cow. And guess what? He did it in the same way he did with Zwet and Jebus when those wagons were popular.

Sam looks good with the lurker opinions, but when it comes to actual specific players, he's no better than Qwints. If Qwints weren't so scummy, I'd probably vote Sam. The lurker opinions look more like trying to look active without giving actual thoughts. And when he does drop an opinion, he can't be bothered to back it.

Camn, I have to ask. You call TSQ scummy. He asks why. You answer. Why do you need the disclaimer, "For clarity.. this post should not be construed as a 'case' against TSQ" at the end. Giving reasons why a player is scummy IS a case. Why are you seperating yourself from calling it that?

Mod

, the vote count shows my vote on Qwints and the other 2 votes as seperate wagons.

I don't see why Caboose needs to be uestioned about the "softclaim"?

Hey camn. Wanna use Zwet to see if my Gambit (actually an analysis strategy more than a Gambit when I use it like this) works better on a confirmed town wagon? hasdgfas, Thestatusquo, Yosarian2, scotmany12, sam.samhorn, Kmd4390. Those were the Zwet voters. (Actually, at quick glance, Qwints, Caboose, and Cow all were voting Zwet at one point too.) I bet we can find an experienced scum or 2 or maybe even 3 on this wagon. Qwints, Yos, TSQ would be my top choices. Cow and Scot are meh as well. So yeah, I'm doing this again based on the simple fact that Zwet was town. Stef being scum ruined the hell out of it last time. I'm gonna piss off Camn here and say this: My analysis strategy reinforces my scum read on Qwints. It also reinforces any suspicion I may get on any of these players later.

I actually don't like this post quite a bit. It does a whole lot of nothing in a whole lotta words. You talked about a lot of things, but everything you say is wishy washy and mitigated by something else. "Sam looks good BUT" "TSQ Yos and qwintz would be my best bets BUT"

[Kmd4390]

TSQ, if you read closer, I say Sam's "looking good" looks like an act because he is only looking good as far as the lurker discussion.

And there is no "but" about you, Yos, and Qwints. Way to try and make my suspicions look less like suspicions.

FoS TSQ

(I rarely use that, but I'm not unvoting Qwints)

[Thestatusquo]

So yeah, I'm doing this again based on the simple fact that Zwet was town. Stef being scum ruined the hell out of it last time.

You mention right in the attack that the only other time you tried this you were completely wrong.