Newbie 762 - OhGodMyVillage - Game Over
-
-
Scien
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Le sigh...
Before I get too far right at the start, please tell me why you like to start off your games with a random roll result instead of a normal random vote. This exact same thing happened before in my experience, and I had to give that player a hard time as well.
Right off the bat I can tell you I dislike this style of voting. The fact that you let the result become a self-vote makes me like it even less.
Rolling seems to me to take away a risk involved in getting involved in the game. The risk being having an action be viewed as being scummy. A roll is something that someone could hide behind, because if someone decided it looked weird, the rolling player can just blame statistics instead of trying to defend themselves.
Long story short, I don't really see a roll serving any purpose besides two possibilities. A) A scum using it to stay behind the scenes. B) A townie trying to lay low, and not draw attention to themselves.
From past experience, you seem to be a player that would not fall into B. So what are your motives behind the die roll?
Second, you allowing the roll to fall on yourself makes me cringe even more. The same arguments about the roll could be laid on that course of action. Wanting to lay low, which is typically a scummy thing.
I dislike both a random roll, and self-voting.
Sorry to give you grief right out of the bat, but I don't like your initial action.
To the town, my vote is still random. But I want an answer from Mastin about the motives.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Perhaps. But the main thing I am trying to say here, trying to avoid saying too much about the past, is that due to my views I am obligated to at least apply some pressure to figure out why someone would use the random roll as a tactic. I did it then, and things progressed after I got initial answers, just as we are getting initial answers here.Mastin wrote:You went hard on him, if I recall, mainly due to how he dodged the questions.
Mastin wrote:One thing an IC of another game taught me is that generating discussion is always a good thing [...] it actually generates rather the healthy amount of discussion [...]Scien wrote:I don't really see a roll serving any purpose besides two possibilities. A) A scum using it to stay behind the scenes. B) A townie trying to lay low, and not draw attention to themselves. [...] From past experience, you seem to be a player that would not fall into B. So what are your motives behind the die roll?
First off in my rather limited experence I have not seen you as scum so I don't know if you could fit into the A category, that is what I am trying to decide.Mastin wrote:From past experience, you can also conclude that I do not fall into A. I know what these things can produce, and it has the opposite outcome of what you describe, in my experience.
Secondly, I take it you are arguing that the third choice is C) A player can use the roll as a tool to make himself look initially scummy, in order to increase participation in the game? Hmm maybe. But this has some drawbacks that I would like to ask you about if this is your claim.
First, would you consider it a risk that someone would start analyzing your play before you could get reads from others, bringing the tactic into limelight, and allowing for scum to dodge around it? Would you say that I am harming your attempts at the moment? Or do you think you can maneuver around this and still get the reads you are after from scum?
Second if you are truly trying to examine others, why were you content on a roll landing on yourself. This still screams scum to me. If you wanted to examine others, you could be playing the random roll game you are playing with me now, but have placed a random vote elsewhere so you had a chance of getting a reaction you could read out of more than one player. Letting a random vote land on yourself, and then arguing it away as statistics (which you have just done in your last post by saying you needed to leave yourself in the vote list), just screams to me that you want to look fair and impartial. When in reality every single person in this game has some info about the roles, even if it is just their own.
Where I was going with that last bit? If you are townie, you know that you are townie. Why would you leave yourself as a possibility for your own random vote? Because you wanted the vote to land on yourself. You wanted to call attention to the fact that it was a "random" vote, so you could avoid suspicion. The only group of people that should want to avoid suspicion are scum. Is their another possibility of why you would let yourself be a candidate for random vote? Why did you need to accentuate the fact that the vote was random? It still goes back to A or B, (I don't think C applies to my current train of thought, I could be wrong).
Where do you think I am wrong. I want to continue this...-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Eh? How would it generate discussion without some people viewing it as slightly scummy and strange for a townie to do?Mastin wrote:I had no intention of it making me look scummy, but had intended for it to generate discussion (which it did).
I believe a typical scum would have more motivation for a move like this for one, although there are more possibilities. I believe scum would have more motivation due to the fact that it keeps them participating while minimizing their attacks on others by A) the random roll itself and B) the fact that the vote landed on yourself. A newbie scum could fall behind this thinking it was a good idea. I know you can see this, you seem pretty analytical. A pro-town role using the roll in a 'strange, practically unorthodox' way needs to be examined carefully. There is a reason for the examination.Mastin wrote:Why would I, if I had any other role, have any more motivation, for that matter?
I don't know what else bugs me about this, but it still does. The tactic gets an all around meh in my book. But you are right, it does look like it got some people involved rather quickly. If that was truly your goal, then ok. But IGMEOY (I got my eye on you).
First us as townies don't know your intentions. We have to decide that on our own. Second, I don't think he was questioning that. I think he was questioning that you felt the need to both post and tell everyone that you have good intentions. Seems fishy, sorry.Ubaten wrote:I'm pretty sure of my own good intentions
Okay, in that case could you go into more detail about what you think about aspects of the game so far? You say later that you think the random votes can provide discussion, but think that the actual method of die rolling used by Mastin was suspect. If that is the case what do you think of Mastin's defense so far? Unsatisfied on anything? I am but I think I hit a wall of what I want to ask.Ubaten wrote:I wanted to show, by posting, that I haven't forgotten or quit the game.
Eh, don't be afraid to post. Talking more helps more, trust me. But then again you admitting to constantly worrying about your image makes people go 'Huh?'.Ubaten wrote:All good intentions (i hope) but I will try to keep the fluff to a minimum from now on.
QFT (quoted for truth).SirDanilot wrote:By simply rolling the dice, you are taking away the human aspect of choice from the RVS
Eh, I think there is a slight difference here, and you are kind of using a slippery slope argument. It is true that he got discussion going. If that was his goal he definitely succeeded. It not like he is hiding behind the 'generation of discussion' as a last ditch defense here. Yes it is still scummy, I agree. But his immediately jumping to that as a defense makes me tend to believe it. It just seems to me to be a weak defense, when so many others are possible. And as an aside, just because I might be willing to believe that this was his goal doesn't mean that I will then buy it from everyone trying to use the defense. Just because it seems valid in one situation doesn't mean that it will hold in all situations.SirDanilot wrote:Also, as for the 'getting discussion going' part, yes, you indeed got discussion going, but does this make you more towny? No. You did something scummy, and you got discussion going, but you are still scummy. Otherwise, scum could get away with anything that is scummy and draws attention to it. [...]-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Ok one last question for you Mastin, heh.
So why are you calling off your tactic? You don't think you could have gained more insight when the current quiet people show up? Is their a reason why you think you have currently pushed this tactic as far as you were comfortable to go?Mastin wrote:Unfortunately, nobody else has really contributed much.
Basically, why is now the right time? You've seen actions from SirDanilot, Me, Ubaten. Counting yourself that's 4. There are 5 others in the game, you think that your change in focus will alter the responses you get when those guys show up? I think they very well might.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Hmm. I don't know if I can follow your logic, you might be stretching a bit too far. Just to make sure, are you suggesting that the fact that he is causing suspicions to come his way is in itself a scummy looking act? Not trying to defend him or anything, I have a few issues with his actions myself, but it looks as if you are making this claim and I don't agree.Ubaten wrote:A lot of discussion has been spawned, great! People are suspecting people because of this discussion, even better! The problem is that I have the same info you have + a suspicion [of Mastin]
Are you just arguing that it was not just the most optimal play? Maybe this is what you are going for instead of above, but that would just be a difference in play style. Unless you are thinking that he was just making a weird play and also thinking that the fact that it was not an anticipated play is scummy. If so, could you maybe explain to me some more on why you think acting in the way Mastin is acting is scummy?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Woah woah woah wait... let me quote everything for you Ubatem. I know what Mastin is trying to ask, and neither of you at the moment are understanding each other.
Ubatem wrote:vote: LleuUbatem wrote:3. An answer (of sorts) to Scien who associated random roll voting = minor scummyness. I tend to agree andvoted accordingly.
This is what is confusing. You are claiming to agree with me, but then say that backs up your vote on Lleu. I think you were confused. You were voting for Lleu, not Mastin. Long story short, your vote on Lleu has nothing to do with your 3) comment above, but you made it sound like it did. Whats up?Mastin wrote:Then why did you vote for Lleu? That had *nothing* to do with the random roll. My role was on myself, not on Lleu. And what about supposedly random voting? It's either random, or it's not.
Ok long story short, and if it helps you to stop for a moment let me advise you with Mastin's own words.
You are moving around from point to point like you are scared. Don't be. If you are townie you really have nothing to fear. Tell us the truth. Take your time to formulate thoughts before posting, and use quotes as much as possible if you are wanting more information from a specific player. But stay calm and collected. The more inconsistent you are the more you look like scum trying to find the best way out of a hole.Mastin wrote:-You seem to be constantly contradicting with yourself. [...]
-You've done what I interpreted as dodging against some of my questions.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Yep, Scien'sSirdanilot wrote:we need more input from the other players since a core of 3-4 players is doing all the talking right nowunofficialparticipation list:
Mastin - One of the actives.
Ubaten - One of the actives.
Scien - One of the actives.
sirdanilot - One of the actives.
Lleu - Starting to become active.
PhilyEc - Just spoke up. Is catching up with the walls of text.
Santos - Said one thing about a random vote, but is pretty much not here. Mar 29 was last post.
Crysnia - Has said nothing so far. Mar 27 was confirm post.
Barim - Posted his random vote, but nothing else so far. Mar 29 was last post.
I'm currently kind of waiting for PhilyEc's comments on the happenings at the moment. I would also like the last 3 inactives to say something. Crysnia is probably the only prodible right?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Cool. Most of the messed up quotes were at the end of the second page. That must mean that we are fairly close to getting some content from you!Santos wrote:This discussion is killing me with all the coding errors and no names associated with quotes. Ugh.
As for the quotes, I bet you are mostly irritated with Mastin. But his quoting style is that quotes are grouped by the person saying it, with the first quote attributed to its person. If you look a few quotes up you should be able to see who said what.
Looking forward to your insight.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I don't really know what was weird about it, but that's fine. As long as you understand now.Barim wrote: I think it's still a weird way to say it.
I take it 'vote-or-die-mother******' is your term for random vote? If so that means you don't buy his defense of it? I admit it does seem a bit weak, but do you have specific problems with it that you could articulate for us?Santos wrote:I'm leaning towards Mastin. The vote-or-die-mother****** on his self is suspect.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
The preview button works nicely. I use it and it catches most my mistakes.
He has flat out said that that is what he was hoping to happen. He claims that the whole situation was contrived to try and get the scum to push hard for the lynch. If he knew the consequences of his actions, and walked knowingly into the situation, is that really stupidity?Santos wrote:So if Mastin is really truthful about his randomness its quite stupid on his part because: if he is town, then he has just given scum reasons to vote for him that even a townie frowns upon.
Not trying to pick on you too much, but you are pretty much agreeing with what others have said up till now without much new content. Yes, people see that the random.org thing was fishy. Yes, most just do a random vote with a quick quirp. Yes, Mastin did something that was scummyish if he is a noob scum, but he is claiming that that was his plan in order to flush people out. What do you think specifically about this attempted defense of his actions?
Also, I don't believe scum make a huge mistake unless we are continually providing content and hunting them out to put pressure on them. I still don't believe that you are helping in this regard.
So again: What do you think about Mastin's attempted defense?
Also what do you think of Ubaten's defense about what he meant with whole 'voted accordingly'?
I would very much like to hear your opinions.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Eh, that time I truly was ambiguous. I was trying to address you and mention that Barim and Lleu are both kind of quiet kinda quiet. The question was about if you were just focusing on one of them for some reason. But I guess not since you are questioning a few now.
I should quit posting at work >.<-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
So, does that mean that you think that pretty much everything that has happened before is pure fluff and we should disregard it? If not do you see anything interesting so far within his posts; anything either directed at him or in who he is pestering? Do you think that Mastin's long posts and analysis are any kind of tell? If not do you think that it might at least be some kind of tactic that we should be able to read the motives of?
What are your thoughts beyond the fact that you think he talks too much? Just curious.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Hmm, I don't follow. Getting info out and in print in day 1 can contribute in future days. His long posts, and asking questions by using quotes should in theory get people to post their opinions and whatnot in day 1. Yes you might be right that the day 1 vote is probably going to be based on pretty shakey stuff, as the game has not really started. However this doesn't mean that day 1 is meaningless. We can get people to talk, and use their positions as evidence in future days. You don't agree with this?PhilyEc wrote:I think [disliking long posts is a scumtell is] the case well into the game.
Don't follow, and I think at best this is some kind of logical fallacy. Probably a strawman argument. There is no evidence that he would try and hide behind the fact that he's talking the most yet. And the fact that he is getting people to talk currently is getting info to the town that we can use later.PhilyEc wrote:[...] example of what I think of your actions is;
Dude: Vote Blah, sorry but you're obviously the last scum.
Mastins: ZOMG 'sorry' buddying if I've ever seen it! Lets waste an entire page into why it is or not! Why do you question me? ITs pro town! You're anti town for thinking its not helpful!
Sorry but you are talking about needing less information again. Why are you so afraid of Mastin's posts so far? If he is getting others to talk it has a chance of getting a tell out of them. If you think Mastin is scummy, him talking more has a chance of getting a scum tell out of him. Why is him talking so much a bad thing?
I find his posting helpful so far. I can't speak for the others. But so far I think you are the only one that is complaining about having to read too much info.
Sorry if its just your classes that are getting to you. But so far in this game you have done nothing but want to limit what is said. I dunnot like it!-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Ironic considering that you are trying to get people to talk less.PhilyEc wrote:I think acts which stagnate the entire game deserve an FoS as its directly effecting our ability to find scum.
I think there is a wiki on that somewhere... Too_Townie.PhilyEc wrote:I think the effort to look town is far too strong on his part
So what if they are long... you are trying to argue that that is why people are inactive? There is no way to prove that. There is no way that you could know if that's the case. A couple of the inactive haven't posted past page 1. They would not have even seen some of the long posts unless they truly are around lurking.PhilyEc wrote:Find them majorly needless in size? Yes. Its making me not want to play the game and I'd say others could agree on this opinion considering the amount of activity.
Quite frankly to everything you are saying at the moment, NO. I have been criticized for the same things you are harping on and it is complete crap. I will examine others posts, I will quote people, and if they are not making sense I will post until they make sense. I will not settle for being quiet so that people can not hurt their little eyes reading some text.
Seriously. This is mafia. Its a text game. You expected something else?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Bwahaha. I'll fall for your little trap. "Scien, you are too invested in this. Now I am going to vote you so you have to defend yourself. Then you will have to get even more invested and I can point this out!"
I don't know if Mastin is townie or not. I know that I am. You want me to call him a towny as opposed to a person. Nope, won't do it. He's a person because I do not know his role. Now you are the one butchering quotes.PhilyEc wrote:Use of the word people isnt something I like to see.
This must have been one of the posts you skimmed. It had nothing to do with Mastin and lengthy posts. It had to do with people failing to use quote tags right and use the preview button to verify before posting. Actually the first post of Santos' was also about quote tag misuse. You are butchering quotes again by your own definition (which I would say is more taking things out of context, not butchering)Santos wrote:I know, but its brutal to read the discombobulated posts :/
Hell yes I am dismissing your attack, and your assertion that post length is scummy. That's what this is all boiling down to. Post length means NOTHING in terms of role. Long posts tend to help town, if you disagree then something is fishy there.PhilyEc wrote:Scien, far too dismissive.
More info in print is always positive for the town. Even if it takes long to read. You are trying to tell me that you want people to not scum hunt as much because it will cater to the people who don't want to really play the game. Nope, not going to do it.
Get opinions in the open, do this by questioning them. No text in this thread is superfluous. You are in essence arguing against this.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Hmm really? I think this is where I am having problems. I try and run what motivations people might have for their actions through my head when I am looking at them. My thoughts on this tactic are this:Santos wrote:It may hold no relevance to what Mastin's allegiance is now, but I've used this tactic before and it failed miserably because it was too suspect in trying to say 'I'm trying to provoke scum to voting me' when in reality town players figure this is just a scum trick on the town. FYI, I was scum in that game giving the self-vote a shot to try and 'find scum'. Discuss.
1) Experienced scum... I really can't think of why they would use this tactic. (You are saying that you have done so, so I might be missing something, assuming you pulled this trick with some experience behind you.)
2) Newbie scum might use this tactic to stay out of the limelight. Contributing while not contributing so to speak. (This was my first thought in this game)
3) Experenced townies might use this tactic to hunt out people by forcing discussion on themselves. (I wouldn't have thought this a possibility before this game)
4) Newbie townies might use this tactic to also try and stay out of the limelight. Which is bad of course because it looks scummy, and calls attention to themselves.
Basically in my mind 4 and 2 have been ruled out in my mind, although you guys need to make up your own conclusions. Since I have a hard time seeing why someone would use option 1, I have a hard time seeing if motives could lead there for an experienced scum player. That's why what you say is interesting.
Just out of curiosity, in the game that you played this tactic as scum, did you think that there was going to be a massive wave of townie attack coming towards you for it? Or did you think it was going to be minor, and something that you could argue away quickly? Also, do you think the towns response in this current game would qualify for being a massive attack towards Mastin so far, or more like a minor argument.
I am legitimately asking for more of your opinions. You have me thinking that maybe I truly am missing a possible motive/mismotive in this situation.
This is what I think Ubaten's defense was that I was curious for your opinion on (fixing quote tags sorry):
Basically I think he is trying to say, without putting words in his mouth I hope, that why everyone was confused is when he said "voted accordingly" he meant not the person the vote was directed towards, but more of how the vote was made.Ubaten wrote:Ubaten wrote:The reason I voted for Lleu is as I said that I believe random votes leads to discussion - in this case Lleu might very well respond to my vote asking me why etc, etc... The point was that it was not a random roll
These are my answers given so far. I'll try to be as clear as I can for this attempt. I agreed with Scien that the random self-vote = minor scummyness, therefore I chose to vote accordingly. This is were my logic might seem strange, so brace yourselves. Voting accordingly meant, for me, not to do as Mastin had done and random self-vote but to do what I thought the most productive: a random vote on an inactive player.Ubaten wrote:I voted according to my belief that a random roll vote is a bit scummy and contra-productive and as I prefer not seeming scummy and being productive I voted a random vote instead, with no evidence whatsoever, but at an inactive player.
IMO it seems like it works, and I think I buy it. Just wondering what others thought about it, and mainly probing you for content as well.
Eh a couple of things here. I agree, your vote doesn't necessarily need to follow your main suspect around if you think the vote has value elsewhere, as long as your end of day vote is on the most scummy player in your mind. But then again I don't agree with you that a vote is as extreme as saying that the guy is going to get lynched either.Santos wrote:Maybe because I'm not a trigger happy guy? Although it warrants an FOS for self-voting, it doesn't mean you should die asap. Day 1 should never end this early on a risk you took. So its worth some discussion; or would you really like me to vote you?
I still hold that scum slips don't come as often or at all if you wait around as opposed to scum hunting. Waiting is a curious tactic that I don't see as townie at all. How do you think scum slips will come about if everyone is waiting for them?Santos wrote:I am a very patient in waiting for a scum slip. They'll come.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
A list of a few reasons why talking is good:Santos wrote:
Why not?Scien wrote:Waiting is a curious tactic that I don't see as townie at all.- Townies start off with little to no info.
- Townies can only get info from conversation and questioning.
- Townies always do better when there is more conversation and people's claimed positions that can be examined later.
- Waiting for a scum slip does not contribute to conversation.
- Waiting does not pressure scum to force a scum slip.
- Waiting gives the impression that you don't care what your vote is going to be, and that you are waiting for a wagon.
- Scum would rather that there is not much discussion and waiting helps them out in this regard.
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Fine... if you insist.
Vote: PhilyEc
For the reasons I have been harping about. I won't recap them here to save space
However I still hold I would like to hear from the inactives before we do anything drastic... at least to get some info from them in day 1. And I WILL temporarily remove my vote if we haven't heard from them and we are getting close to a lynch.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Um... there is still the same things I disagree with the above two posts. And I might post on it when I have more time. But this one is worth posting now:
I know that you are just simplifying things. But just because I am townie doesn't mean that Mastin is. Don't jump the gun there. You know what I'm going to tell you, that I have a protown role. But if the town is truly irritated at my play and when I flip townie, don't go and assume Mastin is town as well. Just saying.PhilyEc wrote:Either
1) Hes scum defending a town player.
2) Scum team have stupidly revealed themselves through buddying.
3) Both are town and merely semantic fanboys. (Unlikely due to context of disagreement being so dwelled upon).-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Sorry Phily, and I am not trying to be difficult. But can you repeat your last post. I think I might have a general idea of what you are trying to say, but want to make sure with your own words. I currently am having a hard time understanding what you are trying to say.
I guess the things I am not understanding are the term '1-3', what 'that situation' is, did I tell people to not mislynch Mastin (I thought my last post was doing the opposite, telling people to still look at Mastin if I was mislynched). I guess the last two sentences are saying that the current inactives are now getting scummy in your eyes?
Like I said, I'm not trying to be a bastard by bugging you, but just was having a hard time understanding your phrases.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I don't know about wall of text... but I will give a defense for myself, as well as comment on some of your other points.
I generally agree with all these statements. I had to give Mastin a good grilling in order to verify that his 'I used the self-vote as a scum hunting tactic' defense seemed sound. I didn't catch any inconsistencies, and also him using that as a defense seemed unlikely so I believe him.Papa Zito wrote:1. Mastin - The "self-voter". I thought he defended himself well (I was satisfied with his initial response), and he's been actively scumhunting. Good pro-town vibe.
Hmm. Yes. But he also seems to value the vote very highly. I tend to use it to back up discussion, but he seems to be the kind of guy that wants your vote where you are looking at the moment.Papa Zito wrote:5. Sirdanilot - Immediately voted both Mastin and Santos after their very first post, which is bizarre to me.
Yep, its how I get information out of people. Attacking seems kind of harsh here in my opinion by the way. I want people to tell me the motives behind their actions in their own words. If I think they are still suspect I continue asking them questions. If they 'stay the course' in my mind, and what they say is the logic behind their actions meshes with what they have said in the past about their motives, its how I get a feel for the truthiness so to speak. I look at everyone, and when I see something funny I ask about it. I don't really think that's a scummy thing to do, but I'll leave that for you to explain. Its not going to stop how I play in any case.Papa Zito wrote:6. Scien - Oh boy. Attacked Mastin for the self-vote, attacked Ubaten for the odd vote, attacked PhilyEc for venting, attacked Santos for being cautious. Good God man.
Lleu is V/LA. Did you miss that (I assume this is true), or is your comment more subversive. Barim has been prodded and apparently has not shown up yet. I suspect he will be replaced soon.Papa Zito wrote:7. Lleu - Lurker, though tried not to look like one by chiming in a couple times.
8. Barim - Lurker. Weird for an IC isn't it?
In day one you don't have many actions to look at. Sometimes you need to ask about the nit-picky stuff. If I see an action I don't understand, or a stance that I don't agree with, that person gets a question. If I get a response that falls into the same categories, either I don't understand, or a stance that I don't agree with, that person gets another question. This generates discussion. Based on this discussion I can get a feel for the player's motives. Sometimes people shake around a bit over nit-picky things and are not careful about how they answer. This is a sign of scumminess, as townies will just tell the truth and have no need for shakeiness.Papa Zito wrote:Scien, wow, Scien is attacking everything in sight. On the surface it looks like aggressive scumhunting but when it's over nit-picky things and when it doesn't stop, well, I think I have to vote: Scien.
But above all else, my examining of peoples ideas and motives gets info into the forum for examining later if necessary. I fail to see how me questioning many people's actions, over what you would call nit-picky stuff is a scum tell.
Why do you think that my discussion is scummy? Why do you think its a bad thing to look at all townies, as opposed to focusing on one?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
And for the double post!
I never really even questioned Ubaten, I think you have me confused for someone else. Everyone attacked Mastin for that vote. Phily and Santos were questioned by me for the same reasons. A failure to understand their hatred of long posts.Papa Zito wrote:6. Scien - Oh boy. Attacked Mastin for the self-vote, attacked Ubaten for the odd vote, attacked PhilyEc for venting, attacked Santos for being cautious. Good God man.
Many people have asked questions to multiple people in this game. For instance lets take the top of your list, Mastin, and look at who he was questioning:
During an initial defense period he starts examining Ubaten. He presses him fairly hard, and in fact I think he still has questions out to him.
A few posts later starts questioning Santos.
Presses Phil in his next post.
Really presses Phil with a HUGE post, then follows with another couple posts for Santos.
IMO I did similar:
Started off pressuring Mastin hard.
Questioned Ubaten a bit, but mostly due to confusion
Once Santos showed up, questioned him about his intro posts and views. This continues.
Phily Pipes up, and I have questions about his intro posts and views. This continues and actually gets pretty heated... we are both voting each other at the moment I believe.
I still have questions out to Santos. I think.
I fail to see the big difference between Mastin's scumhunting, and my nit-picking. Actually I don't care much. But I would like to hear you explain the difference. This will give you more insight to your motives. I'm just questioning how one of our actions is good enough to place them at the top of your list when the other's actions is bad enough to place them at the bottem. Everyone has been looking at the whole towns actions. And quite frankly that is the way its supposed to be. Again why do you disagree?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Yep, we've called him inactive before. But its not really lurking if you are not around.Papa Zito wrote:Missed it, but I'll stand by my statement. Four days, five posts: 1 confirm, 1 random vote, 1 roll vs role post, and 2 that had something to do with what's going on.
Maybe. But I needed to be satisfied that his defense was legit. I was not willing to take it at face value. He needed to explain why he used that tactic, it was not typical. It is however a tactic that under a different light could be scummy. I pressed because I had not considered that a tactic like that would be used by a townie. I continued because I was getting a feel for it, and trying to determine if Mastin's claim of using it from a townie perspective could hold water.Papa Zito wrote:That's a lot just to talk about a throwaway vote.
Perhaps, but there are other possibilities of what I was trying to do by examining the people that are around to talk to. I've already said the one that I am doing. You can buy it or not, but it is to look at the people who are posting and to examine if what they are posting makes sense. Examining motives.Papa Zito wrote:It looks like you're:
a. Desperately trying to start a bandwagon;
b. Stifling discussion;
c. Trying to lead/control the town
Yep that would be the tactic that I was examining when I was questioning Mastin. It's not typical for a townie to try and encourage people to pursue them in order to try and weed out scum. At least in a newbie game. It might be more prevalent in other games, I frankly don't know.Papa Zito wrote:1. The majority of Mastin's posts were defensive. The majority of yours are offensive.
And then examine what is said, to determine if it fits right in my mind with the said player's mindset, and claimed goals.Papa Zito wrote:You, OTOH, immediately jump onto opening statements or other conversations.
Well, ok. I don't really know where to start on this so I'll just dump my few thoughts. Sorry if they are incoherent.Papa Zito wrote:This conversation is kinda my argument in microcosm. Your defense to my points is basically offense.
Quite frankly I am not 'defending defensively' because I don't know how to defend against 'You look at too many people and ask too many questions'. Yes you are right, I suppose it can look like I am looking for the easiest target. I can tell you I'm not, but I can not prove it. I have already said if someone's play doesn't make sense to me, I ask about it and will continue asking until I think I know where the person is coming from. I don't know how to say it more clearly than that.
I have defended people as well, but only when I believe people are mistaking others words. I have got called out for defending Mastin. I have reworded questions for Ubaten when neither party seemed to understand the confusion. I did not push for a lynch when it was easy. This is because I am currently examining, and not 'attacking'.
I still don't know why you think it would be better if I examined people through defense as opposed to offense. I believe both generate discussion.
I don't know why you think that desperately trying to start a bandwagon. If this was the case I would have had a few good opportunities.
I don't know why you think that I am stifling conversation by getting people to explain their actions. On the contrary here I think I am promoting it, even if the party has to defend.
I don't have the vaguest of how I could be controlling anyone here. I have never once tried to force anyone's opinion.
I am looking at the explanations and reactions to my questions for my benefit mainly. The fact that they are in print for the town to read is also a perk, but you have to make the judgments on your own. I won't tell you how to think.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I have voted two times in this game. The random vote, and then the person I was investigating, and the last only because you pressured me to place one as opposed to holding for a while before I applied more pressure. I assume you mean I flip flop with who I question?Sirdanilot wrote:To be honest, I don't think that scien's play style is scummy. Yes, he flip flops with his vote a lot.
I agree with this for the most part. It would be nice to see the actual quotes he is talking about. He mentioned a few that I had in regards to Ubaten. But both of those were simple questions that didn't get too far, because I didn't feel the need to ask further questions for explanation. However apparently they qualify as an 'attack' on Ubaten. I doubt the rest of the town would agree that it was truly an attack if they had the text in front of them. I also would like to see the Sirdanilot quotes that you are curious about Papa Zito. I might see something I didn't see before.Sirdanilot wrote:...then not talk about the content of those posts and/or the reasons I had.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Uh, so your saying that my pure goal is to start a bandwagon... and if anyone else starts voicing concerns about them, I would ignore that opportunity in order to start my own fresh wagon? I don't understand.Papa Zito wrote:
Disagree. Nobody's following you yet, that I can tell.Scien wrote: I don't know why you think that desperately trying to start a bandwagon. If this was the case I would have had a few good opportunities.
If I was wanting to start a wagon, why would I move on from person to person? Why would I not sit on the first person that some others from the town start voicing concern at?
Mastin would have been a good choice, almost the entire town was after him. I was the first one on him, but I was the first to move off him, when I was satisfied he might be telling the truth about the tactic. I quit questioning him even when others were still pursuing him.
The rest of the players I have looked at have some suspicion on them true, but I only asked questions, never voted or asked townies to do the same. The person I have placed my first real vote on didn't have a huge townie push on him, it was mainly just me. But I didn't wait for others to voice disapproval of him before making a vote, nor have I moved my vote off when the town didn't bandwagon him. There is a big difference between questioning someone and pushing a bandwagon. You don't agree?
I still don't understand where this argument is coming from.
Why does me questioning people look like I am starting bandwagons when I have moved my vote in this game ONCE? If I wanted bandwagons why have I never threw a second vote on someone even when I had the chance? If I wanted bandwagons why have I not stayed involved in the discussions that seem to have the most townie involvement against the accused?
Disagree. Its not an either or. You can answer questions and ask them in the same post. There is nothing stopping you.Papa Zito wrote:If I'm spending all my time defending myself, I don't have time to examine anyone else.
Only if you have things to hide. You should not be afraid of unfounded attacks. If what you are saying makes sense from the shoes of a townie, there isn't anything in the world the scum are can do to make you look scummy. Don't hide from questions. Don't fear inquisitive people.Papa Zito wrote:If I'm jumped on every time I post something, it makes me not want to post.
Uh, ok. But you can still answer the questions, and if they make sense from the stance of a townie people back off you. Never be scared of town pressure unless you have things to hide. No one can hurt you if you tell the truth.Papa Zito wrote:If someone is asking me something and you jump into that conversation too, I would feel like people are ganging up on me.
Well thats kind of the goal right? I want to fork its flow to answer the questions I am asking, and to examine the motives behind the players actions. But if you are claiming that getting involved stops others from also driving the conversation, then no I disagree again. Just because multiple people are asking questions of someone doesn't mean that parties need to stop asking questions if they have them. If anyone has questions about something that happens in the game, then ask them. Even if someone else is in a heated discussion. Waiting to ask or omiting questions can only end up harming the town. Forking a conversations flow does not stop the original direction of the conversation.Papa Zito wrote: And if you are involved in every topic, you can direct its flow.
Yep, that just about covers all the possibilities. Heh.Papa Zito wrote:Either you're an extremely aggressive townie or you're what I suspect you are.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Uh, I have planned, and do still plan to go back and gather the questions that I still have out to people but I need to comment now.
Santos WTH? Why did you claim with two votes on you as opposed to trying to address peoples concerns? Why did you self vote with two votes on you? You are going to panic under that little pressure?
Why did you ask about role setup if you already have some knowledge of it? No sane person would give you an answer that would tell you what there role was if that was what you were after. Every protown role will consider it suspicious that you asked a question that seemed to be looking for role information. You don't think that would be suspicious?
Why did you feel the need to do all of the above? Please answer each question in turn. And don't panic.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
No. It flat out doesn't make sense to ask this. I assume it was just a newbie mistake for the moment. I typed out a long explanation, but Mastin's short one in 172 is the same but more concise.Santos wrote:My question was simple and that was to speculate about the scenarios since we have done so much else today. I thought it would be interesting to see what people thought of the setup.
Maybe not, but as per above, since that question can only harm the town and not help it, it looks bad.Santos wrote:I was not role fishing
I don't understand this question. I think your question about game setup, was a bad question. I think there was no way that it would have been a good question at this stage of the game.Santos wrote:
Uh, why do you think this would be a good idea as opposed to a bad idea? I was not seeking role claims by asking what I did.Scien wrote:Why did you ask about role setup if you already have some knowledge of it?
Hmm. [1]Yes I can see this kinda, although I think it was the wrong move Santos. [2][3]Agree. [4][5]I think it is the wrong move to lynch him today solely for this claim. If its true there is a good chance that the scum are going to off him, or try to off him tonight depending on setup. If the claim is not true, the real cop shouldn't be speaking up necessarily, however. I get a all around feeling that we should look elsewhere for now, but maybe revisit the issue after we have more info in day 2 or 3.Mastin wrote:In summary,
-Santos's actions as cop make sense,[1]
-Santos's actions as scum make nearly as much sense,[2]
-Santos's overall feel and attitude towards the game was rather anti-town,[3]
-I am divided between believing and disbelieving the claim,[4]
-Yet regardless of what I think, it would be a bad idea to lynch the cop claim day one.[5]
We can do quite well without a cop, its just better to have it. And you 'effed' the town and yourself if you are telling the truth.Santos wrote:If you're seriously thinking about lynching me, then you might as well ask your moderator to replace me so you guys don't eff yourselves.
But thats the only answer you SHOULD get. Everyone's best answer after that question would have been 'Oh IDK, probably any one of the 4 possibilities' and in essence claimed vanilla townie for now. And other answer would have pretty much been a claim.Santos wrote:If you are townie, then you shouldn't have a problem role claiming it.
Just don't claim. No one here needs to claim anything.Santos wrote:Obviously, if we have a doctor in the setup, claim townie.
Ok. I said it before but I know people skim my posts. At this stage in the game I don't want to lynch Santos, even though I don't trust his claim.
Reasoning? Basically long story short, there are a bunch of possibilites to get info out of this strange turn of events but they all happen at night. Lynching Santos now just gives the scum a free night if Santos is telling the truth. And if he is not telling the truth, it should be pretty obvious either tomorrow or the next day. That's my opinion.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
First off Santos, I don't know if I believe you, but I definitely want to see you live for today. It causes interesting things to happen tonight and tomorrow and might even result in a no action night.
Now to answer some questions about your play:
You're pretty much wrong here. If people wanted to lynch you, you replacing would not help your cause, in fact it would probably harm it. After the replace the new person would have a hard time explaining what you might have been thinking in some of your plays. By you sticking around instead, you can mount a better defense of your past actions. Plus if the whole town was really out to get you, its just nasty to force someone to replace into that.Santos wrote:THe biggest issue I feel I was doing by replacing out was so you guys don't lynch a cop. Tell me I'm wrong?
Please do stick around. And no, we don't necessarily know if you are telling the truth yet, so we can't be sure that you are townie yet. We'll know in a couple of game days or so.Santos wrote:Now all I can be is a townie. So if you'll have me back, I'm game to play. I just didn't want you guys to make the mistake.
Wow I have not been giving you enough credit. I kept typing out possibilities and you kept addressing them later in posts. The above quote is true. But we won't have any info out of it until tomorrow. Which is why so many are against your lynch now.Santos wrote:They know its 1 or 3 while we can only assume its 1 or 3. Right?
We can use it, but it would have been better to have you investigate at least a few nights first. This is kinda trying to make the best of a bad situation now.Santos wrote:Basically, I feel me claiming now, and with me dying at night, can actually help you guys win the game. What do you think?
Correct kinda.Santos wrote:oh and if the scum try anything out of the ordinary (like not role blocking or killing me) it would seriously be them making a huge risk of me not investigating one of them tonight
When I get more time today I'll go back and gather my thoughts on the game so that I can get my questions out again to the people I still suspect.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
First off, Santos, please stay. You are in a position to play better than any replacement could in the coming game. Replacing will not solve anything. Stick it out, you've pretty much saved yourself for a night or two anyway.
Ok, on my reread I didn't see anything that jumped out at me. I thought I had a question about a post of Phily's but on reread the post seemed to make sense. However, just so you know Phily, if you are still listening, the fourth scenario that I was talking about is Scien townie, Mastin scum. I was just warning you that if I am lynched, don't blindly assume that when I flip townie, Mastin is clear. Give him any scrutiny that you need to.
Right now my vote is on Phily, and my scummy list is:
Phily,
Ubaten
in that order.
I don't necessarilly trust Santos' claim, but I would like to see what happens the next few nights around him. I've kept him off my scummy list because of this.
I want to hear more from:
Phily,
Ubaten or his replacement.
Lleu he has not been replaced after 48 hours, so he must be around?OGML: Has Lleu responded to you yet?
MM. She's been around, I would just like to hear more.
So to those four guys, what is your current thoughts on the game? Any ideas where you want go from here? We are approaching deadline, what are your thoughts on that?
I'm getting pro-town vibes from:
MiteyMouse (kinda),
Sirdanilot (a bit, more recently)
Papa Zito (a bunch, but not my play style)
Mastin (a bunch for the moment)
While these people don't see necessarily eye to eye with me, they do seem to be actively looking around at others posts, and seem to be interested in getting info out to the town. Sounds pretty pro-town to me.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I ditto Papa Zito then. The more viewpoints given to the town the better. Besides if we have no doctor, you might bite it tonight. So getting your thoughts in text will be beneficial to the town later on.Santos wrote:Well, before I spill the beans on who I think is more pro town, I would like to get an okay from at least a few people...if you don't mind.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Then how about a read through and a quick posting of your thoughts so that we can "sit back and get used to" your playing style?Henrz wrote:But anyway I'll just sit back for a bit and get used to your playing styles, but I'll still post.
We can't ask you about what Ubaten was thinking, but we can ask you about what you think about the play so far. We need your input so we can make an informed decision today.
And deadline is in a few days. We can't let you wait around too long.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
My top suspect Phily:- Main cases against people coming in was about post length. Repeatedly urged for posts with less content. While what he probably meant was that he wanted posts that were more concise, I don't like the fact that he was ignoring actions and rather just focusing on the amount of contributions themselves.
- Since then seemed to back off in post 109. But has only made one post since. This is either lurking, or perhaps he is busy.
- His last post still seems to suggest that he is looking at amount of contributions, and not actions. This is due to his said suspicion of Sirdan, just because his pursuit of Papa was spread over many posts.
So uh, did someone have a more substantial case against Henrz (Ubaten) that I am missing?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
V... L... A... WTF is everyone still harping about Lleu saying he was lurking. The guy posted a bit and then left on vacation. That's not lurking, he just flat out wasn't here. I know Reckoner is just defending himself, but good god people. Lurking would be a tactic if he just tried to stay out of the limelight enough to avoid notice. Lleu was replaced. That's not lurking.Reckoner wrote:Regarding Lleu's lurking: I think he/she was just incredibly overwhelmed by the tl;dr posts starting as early as page two.
Meh, among many other posts that contributed content. You pick out these two phrases and complain about me not providing content? Even the posts you pulled them from had content in them.Reckoner wrote:Scien's few posts of "Sorry, I'm a noob" and "I need to quit posting at work", neither of which seemed to hold any content to them.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
He was posting elsewhere multiple days. But the real reason for my vote were the reasons he was giving for his cases. He was looking at amount of content provided and not examining peoples actions. Do not like.Mastin wrote:Phil's gone. I'm fairly certain that he didn't need to be lynched. I think he just disappeared from all games he was in...
Yes. I would have loved to hear more from Phily. I am not one hundred percent confident he is scum. We are just at deadline, and I think he looks the scummiest.SirDan wrote:because it is deadline we can't afford this-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
One place to start would be Mastin's chief suspicion. There would at least be some motive for them to remove such a vocal advisory. However today, like yesterday, I don't really understand the case against them.
Oh and yes, I was fishing for Santos to say something other than no result. He passed. Unfortunately what that really means is his premature claim has cost us our Cop, but no sense crying over spilled milk.
They had a role blocker. They knew the doc would protect Santos most likely. They just blocked him and hit someone else in hopes of hitting the doc. Lucky freggin scum.
And before I go to bed:
I don't understand this. What do you mean contacted? That would be expressly against the rules. I doubt it happened. You seem to be stretching far there. It's not uncommon for scum to hit the most pro-town sounding guy, and Mastin had several people saying that they got pro-town vibes from him.Reckoner wrote:Maybe... maybe the doc contacted the "cop" Santos and that's how they knew?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I'm not. I still have doubts. But here is the game as I saw it yesterday.Papa Zito wrote:Why are we so quick to believe Santos?
On the scum team, there is either a role blocker or there is not.
Roleblocker:
Scum know that possible role assignments fall into 7 townies, or 5 townies/cop/doc. Claiming cop in this situation is scarey, either no one is around to counter claim, or no matter what you claim, there is a counter.
Two vanilla scum:
Scum know that there is either a cop or a doc. But there definitely is one. Any claim might have a counter, or might not.
Seems kind of a risky play to claim with so little pressure and so early. However they might have tried it. It would allow a scum to pass through night 1 and possibly night 2 unscathed.
As for what I think combining what we know about last night with the above:
Santos telling truth - Scum blocked him, knew there was a doc due to them having a roleblocker, and hit the most townie looking, knowing the doc would likely be protecting the cop. They got lucky and hit the doc. In this case they will either
A) Let Santos live keeping him blocked hoping that this causes townies to suspect him, or
B) They will hit him tonight knowing there is no one to save him now, and the fact that many are starting to believe him a confirmed townie is too risky.
Santos lying - They may or may not have a roleblocker. We still don't know. He claimed cop, and we know we had a doc. This would tell us either
A) They have a roleblocker and there is a real cop out there
B) They don't have a roleblocker and there no cop, leaving this Santos free. (They would not have known this when he claimed however)
What we do about the above I'm not sure yet. But it is worth noting that just blindly believing him because he made it through the night is the wrong thing to do. My gut has been saying that our course of action should be, to leave him alone one more night, and see if he bites it. I'm not sure that is the correct choice just thinking aloud.
I can say though that I think that if Santos is lying and there is a real cop, he should be on his toes. Be very careful about advice that people give you, only you know what your play should be.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
I don't know... I was mainly asking to hear others opinions. There is a trade off here that I don't know which is the most beneficial side to be on. First... if there is a real cop, and he doesn't claim, it allows for more legit investigations while the scum look to lynch or block him. However, if the cop claims now, he has at most one investigation, and we would know Santos is scum.Henrz wrote:Is that wrong to do?Assuming we trust a counter claim at this point, which is not a given.
Basically, I think the cop needs to forge his own path, as his investigations and his unique situation will drive his play. Us as blind townies or blind scum don't know the full situation and I don't think we should be urging a cop to do anything that he thinks is against townie interest.
*Please note that the above is pretty much all speculative. I'm not positive that Santos isn't cop, and still have the gut feeling to give him one more night.
But I would very much like to hear from players why they think a cop should claim now. It will give the town insight into claimed goals.
That was my point from the beginning with this question, even though it was pointed at you alone Henrz. Do you think a cop should claim now, and why do you think it would be in townie interest? This is not necessarily an attack, I really want to hear your opinions on the matter.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
The possibilities are that he is scum and therefore lived because of that, or that he is town and the scum are content on roleblocking him hoping that our suspicions grow.Papa Zito wrote: It's now Day 3 and Santos still lives. What does this tell you?
Like I said before I don't know the right course of action here. I suspect he would be night killed tonight, but in the case that he is not our suspicions have to grow on him.
I don't know how to play it.
So, on a side note, where is everyone else on the issue? I know some people might not have come back to the game yet, but do you guys have any insight or comments about the night or yesterday?-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
If he is blocked every night he is no more beneficial than a vanilla townie. If he is telling the truth, they have a blocker. They might leave him to us, since we almost have to become suspicious of him if he makes it through tonight.Henrz wrote:because if he is a cop he will be much more beneficial to the town than the best player-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Meh, where to start.
First off, sorry but I am kind of surprised at MM's lack of content. Yes, she has been popping up now and again, but never really to scum hunt. She mostly just posts an observation that typically has been discussed or mentioned before.
Henrz and Reckoner, are also kind of quiet. Although I guess I fall into that boat as well. Sorry it was a busy weekend for me.
Now to the posts:Henrz wrote:Don't give them ideas...
Psb. Basic strategy. They would see an action that is most beneficial to them before we did. The only reason I mentioned what you are complaining about is because this is a newb game, and people have not looked at all possibilities before. Just making sure people don't have ill conceived notions on what could happen in this game. The most informed town is the best town.Henrz wrote:But he was basically telling them what he would of done, and if they didn't think of it, they may well do it.
Reckoner wrote:Was feelin' iffy about [Henrz] yesterday, and for some reason his "Don't give them ideas..." post stuck out to me like a sore thumb.
Am I the only one that is still going 'wha?' at the moment over this? No I guess Papa Z also asked this: Please bring up the points against Ub/Henrz that you are still questioning. I personally didn't think the case on him was very strong, but perhaps you see something I don't?Reckoner wrote:Well, it wasn't really Henrz so much as it was Ubaten... Henrz has played it very conservatively since replacing in, which I think is to cover for how scummy Ub was acting.
Well, ya I agree in a way.SirDan wrote:Bottom line is that if he's town, he'll do no good for us (RBed or NKed) and he might also very well be scum. So I suggest not treating him any differently than everyone else when it comes to suspicions.
Santos wrote:[SirDan has] been against me this whole mafia and has not tried to find another person guilty in the game. [...] Can anyone find anyone else he's been suspicious of during this game?Papa Z wrote:He's had three votes (that mattered) this game. Mastin, you, and me.
So much 'huh?' here. First you claim that SirD has been against you all game, then quickly concede that you are wrong. What?Santos wrote:So either he is very apprehensive about his votes after he makes them, or he is waiting for a bandwagon to build on those votes. So far, he has voted against the town doctor, cop and now you. I don't trust this at all. I'm not saying you're town completely, but his track record for suspicion is more in favor for a scum's lucky pick of power roles as opposed to appearing a pro town scum hunter. Am I wrong?
Second you seem to be claiming that he has simply been vote hopping and leaving is vote elsewhere not for long. Really? You don't think he was investigating the people that he was on? Do you not think his conversations with those people seemed to have a defined end (minus Papa Z, which I think is on going). If he is using his vote as a tool in investigation, would he not act exactly as he is doing?
Third, him voting for people that in your eyes are power roles, when he had no information on the power roles is scummy in itself? Huh? How? Even pretending he is scum, luck is not a scum tell.
And the PapaZ vs SirD:
I guess my only points so far are the open point about what SirD meant by 'generate discussion', and a comment on your exchanges. I fail to see why he could not have hidden pro-town motives when he placed his vote and started discussion with you. You seem to be saying that that is an impossibility. He obviously chose you for his vote for a reason. The reasons are the things that he started pestering you about. Whither he was doing that for pro town benefit, or because he thought you were easy pickings is another matter. In any case, just because he said it was to generate discussion, doesn't mean that it wasonlyto generate discussion.
Second you guys both should take a second to try and understand the post that you are quoting before you reply. Both of you have been missing points from one another, and using that to fuel your negative views of the other party. Then those views manifests themselves on your reply posts, then the other party goes through the same process. It's kind of a cycle at the moment.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
Heh sorry, perhaps I should have placed it in asterisks. *Psb* is kinda a raspberry sound. I was using it to sound incredulous.
Hmm, taking into account what you say after this, I think I need to go back and do a quick reread. However I arrived at this conclusion in my current thinking due to the back and forth between SirD and you:PapaZ wrote:I'd appreciate if you could show me how you came to this conclusion, because it wasn't my intention.SirD wrote:We have had such a large amount of discussion, and then you simply dismiss my vote as something 'to make me talk more'?PapaZ wrote:I'm not dismissing anything. It's what you said. [...]SirD wrote:Do you truly think that's the only reason I voted you? Do you really think that everything I addressed in our discussions was dropped for 'Maybe this will stir up our discussion a bit, PZ'?
I don't buy that he would have just voted you arbitrarily. I'll go back and reread to make sure, but him being arbitrary does not make sense to me. It makes more sense that he was not satisfied with your answers, and voted to put pressure on you to explain yourself better.PapaZ wrote:Yes, I truly do because... that's what you said. You're suspicious of me because of A and B but you voted for me to stir up discussion.
Hmm I'm not saying your entire argument is like that, there is a bunch of content there, but some 'talking past' is occuring. Don't get me wrong, the talking past is probably due to you two not honestly understanding each other's position. In that case it is best you clear it up. However it would still be wise to try doubly hard to understand each other.PapaZ wrote:An example of this would be helpful, I think. If sirdanilot and I are just talking past each other then we aren't helping anyone.PapaZ wrote:He's had three votes (that mattered) this game. Mastin, you, and me. He voted Mastin for self-voting, you for complaining about messed up quoting (both of these were first posts) and then me to make me talk more (?).
In your quote you did mention the votes that you thought mattered, and by exclusion, the ones that you didn't think as important. He seemed to home in on the first sentence of your post, and fight about that without taking into regards the rest of your post which at least explained why you thought certain votes mattered more. The change over towards the definition of 'what mattered' came in later posts.SirD wrote:What? Who are you to judge which of my votes mattered and which didn't? Pro town thing to do would've been to list them all and then pick out which of them mattered. Manipulation.-
-
Scien Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 976
- Joined: July 7, 2008
- Location: Missouri
-