Open 150 - Crossfire - Game mod abandoned

[VP Baltar]

What you are describing above kise seem to be scummy actions, so you do consider lazarus scummy?

Actually I'll just answer this for you with your own words:

I'm not going to call an inactive player scumbag until they say something scummy, thus give me a reason to suspect them.

Lazarus isn't really scummy, he just isn't helping the thread.

[Kise]

This is Entrapment-101...

First, VP is curious why I haven't unvoted KMD after more scummy players arised, then later on him & KMD both vote for Ferny. Then you, KMD, pestered me to vote a few nights ago and even wanted to know why I thought Laz was more scummy then Fern. You pay me as we agreed and I then vote for Fern, but once the tables somehow turned against me, you & VP wanna tag team on me?!?

Furry, I hope your computer crashes. How dare you bring ad hominem into this thread!

[VP Baltar]

You still haven't explained how "lazarus isn't really scummy" to now you are pretty sure he's lurker scum.

[Kise]

@VP/Post150 -

Laz did not

say

anything scummy, but his shyness makes me wonder why he's avoiding any direct conversation with the other players.

[Kise]

Unvote

(((KMD)))

I don't think he's most scummy, no.. Not any more. There's no telling what his alignment is. And I've got plenty of fingers & toes to use.

Then who

is

scummy?

Ash and Lazarus. But nobody wants to be active any more past the RV-Stage because they know it's time to dig in that booty.

Why no vote on either?

No vote because 6 other people probably want to lynch Fernando first. I'll wait for Ferny to posts more before I decide whether he's scummy or not. So far, I don't think Fern will earn my vote, although he seemed to be making a trivial case against Huntress.

The waiting game sucks.

So why not just vote your top suspect?

Do I haft'a make my vote tonight? o_o

It's your vote. Do what you want. I'm just saying it's protown to have a vote out.

ENTRAPMENT

[VP Baltar]

THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was looking for that post but couldn't find it when I was skimming. I knew you said something of that accord.

I will amend my last post now:

I'm not going to call an inactive player scumbag

until they say something scummy

, thus give me a reason to suspect them.

Laz did not

say

anything scummy

Bolded for the ease of other players to see. More votes for Kise plz.

[Kise]

You asked why I suspected Laz's lack of content

over the other players

who were posting minimally, or not at all (like Scott). I answered.

I'm not going to call an inactive player scumbag until they say something scummy, thus give me a reason to suspect them.

This simply means that I'm NOT going to suspect

non-talking

players until they give me a reason... Stop strawmanning. Post my quotes in their entirety, por favor.

Laz did not say anything scummy,

but his shyness makes me wonder why he's avoiding any direct conversation with the other players.

Laz's words =/= my suspicion
Laz's shyness = my suspicion

[Kise]

Bolded for the ease of other players to see. More votes for Kise plz.

This is propaganda. The quotes of mine you used were when I was replying to

2 different issues

. The first quote was a reply as to why I didn't suspect players like Scott. The 2nd quote was a reply as to why I felt Laz could be scum (his shyness > his words).

You're falsely matching up my words to misrepresent me. That's not cute, at all.

[VP Baltar]

In my book, Lazarus falls into the category of non-talking players. Unfortunately for you, you used one set of criteria to vote him and a completely different set to justify why you are not voting other people.

Contradictions and double standards equal scummy in my book.

[VP Baltar]

The first quote was a reply as to why I didn't suspect players like Scott.

You used Scotty/Furry as an example, but were referring to the inactive players in this game. You really think that lazarus does not fall into this category? I would argue that Furry has already said more than lazarus.

[Kise]

In case you missed it, Laz has made 5 posts. That means he IS a talking player. He's had more posts than D-strike, Ash, Huntress, Scott/Furry and Khamisa. No wonder your 'book' hasn't been published...

Are you basically asking me why (out of 6 players who

you define

as "non-talking") I choose not to vote for all 6? GTFOH. There's only 4 scumbags here, and it's not guaranteed that all of the non-talkative/minimal-activity players are those 4 scum. It's clear as day that KMD suggested that I vote for my top suspect, and that I did.

As far as anyone should be concerned, my vote on Fern is merely because I was "paid" to do so, since I would still rank Laz higher on my list of suspects.

FYI, there's more than 1 criteria when it comes to who you believe is mafia.

Scott/Furry had

zero

posts at the time, thus he gave me no reason to suspect him. What is it about this fact that you're not seeing/ignoring?

[Zachrulez]

So he says Lazarus is not scummy and then votes him?

Yeah...

Unvote Vote: Kise

[VP Baltar]

Scott/Furry had zero posts at the time, thus he gave me no reason to suspect him. What is it about this fact that you're not seeing/ignoring?

Are you saying you were referring only to scott in that post? It seemed you were referring to many lurking players and used him as an example.

My point is that you voted lazarus as being lurking scum who was sheeping along, while clearing a whole bunch of other lurkers because they had alledgedly not said anything. You also said that lazarus had not said anything scummy. It is not two different subjects. If you are going to have one rule for lurkers, you have to have it for all other lurkers.

Just for reference, here is a list of how many posts every player has made in this game. Note: this does not speak to content, just number of posts.

Ash=3
DarkStrike=3
dvdkid=10
Fernando=8
Furry=3
Huntress=3
Khamisa=3
Kise=33
kmd=32
lazarus=5
VP Baltar=30
Zach=11
Zazier=9

In my opinion, anyone with 10 posts or less at this time is lurking, and several of these are super lurkers.

As a side note:

mod, can you look into some of these players with the lowests post counts. I am sure they need to be prodded or replaced at this point

[Kise]

I never used the word 'lurker', so let me make that clear. Laz made a few posts, but what struck me as odd was his indirect commentary. He comes across like a sideline player who only agrees with others, so as to hide behind the opinions of others rather than put himself at the forefront. For instance, if he co-signs you and hides behind your opinion that

Player A

is scum, then if

Player A

is a mislynch, everyone will have their eyes set on you first instead of hounding him.

Also, I

did not vote Laz because he was 'lurking' scum

. I voted Laz after KMD's suggestion. At the time, Laz was no more than someone I had my eye on because he behaved typical of scum I encountered in previous games. I honestly could have waited to see more of how Laz acted before I confirmed my suspicion, but KMD thought it would be a good idea to vote for my top suspect, and I only had 3 (Ash, Laz & D-strike; keep in mind I unFoS'd dvdkid), so I went with Laz.

And when

did I say

I cleared the lurkers? Nobody has gotten townie points from me as of yet..

As for everyone else who hasn't said much: Well, yes, VP, there are plenty of other quiet players who could fit the bill of shy-mafia-guy, but look at Scott/Furry.

CUT... ok, now this is the part where I divide a person w/ zero posts (Scott) from those with posts ranging between 1 & 10 (your definition of non-talkative).

I'm not going to call an

inactive

player scumbag until they

say something scummy

, thus give me a reason to suspect them.

Inactive player = Scott

Before his vote on Huntress, Fernando has made a lot of fluff posts. But with him, he stuck his neck out by accusing Huntress of acting scummy. Now compare that with Laz, who is keeping his opinions to himself, yet he thought KMD, Zaz & (I also think) Fernando would earn his vote. Both men are likely scum for all I know. At first I voted for Laz. Now, I'm going for Fern.

VP, based on your definition of lurking, are you also accusing Furry of being a lurker?

[VP Baltar]

Furry is the only exception to my list.

I want to hear other players weigh in on this because things are just getting more and more muddled the more we go back and forth.

[Kise]

An exception, ehh...

If you are going to have one rule for lurkers, you have to have it for all other lurkers.

Oh noes! It's the contradiction-scumtell!

[Furry]

Furry, I hope your computer crashes. How dare you bring ad hominem into this thread!

I needed to make a point, its a very good way of making a point. Also im not going to let anyone misinterpret me.

In case you missed it, Laz has made 5 posts. That means he IS a talking player. He's had more posts than D-strike, Ash, Huntress, Scott/Furry and Khamisa. No wonder your 'book' hasn't been published...

lol ad hom

It's clear as day that KMD suggested that I vote for my top suspect, and that I did.

Why would you ever need someone to suggest that?

As far as anyone should be concerned, my vote on Fern is merely because I was "paid" to do so, since I would still rank Laz higher on my list of suspects.

Then why make that vote

[Kise]

I'm pretty sure the answers are right above your post. Either way:

I didn't vote Laz right away because...

I honestly could have waited to

see more of how Laz acted before I confirmed my suspicion

, but KMD thought it would be a good idea to vote for my top suspect

And I voted for Fern because I just became a millionaire, 34 posts ago.

[VP Baltar]

Oh noes! It's the contradiction-scumtell!

So are you admitting you contradicted yourself, but you simply don't think that should be counted as scummy behaviour?

[Kise]

I never contradicted. I was talking about 2 different issues and you inappropriately linked them, thus making it appear as though one of my posts was in reference to the other. I don't like people misconstruing me, which is why I wanted to do it to you.

In my opinion, anyone with 10 posts or less at this time is lurking, and several of these are super lurkers.

If you are going to have one rule for lurkers, you have to have it for all other lurkers.

[VP Baltar]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say with those quotes.

You never said the word lurker. You said inactive player. Same thing.

You're contesting I'm arguing two different things. I don't believe I am. I would like other players to comment, and I won't be arguing with you anymore about it unless you bring new information to the table that I need to address.

[Darkstrike_11]

This is an interesting back and forth. I agree with VP that it is getting a bit too muddled, but right now I tend to be thinking that Kise is scummy. There was the contradiction over his post on lazarus, but also his earlier practise of throwing his vote and FOS around like crazy, usually picking up on small things, then dropping them as soon as he realises that other people weren't buying them, or following other people's accusations. I get the feeling that he is quick for a lynch and scum. Either that or he is a very over eager and paranoid townie. I'm going for the first option

[AshMC1984]

o hai

Just like to say, I'm not inactive and I was actually lurking in the true sense of the word. I've been watching the game, but not participating because I haven't really seen anything scummy yet, and I dislike the random vote stage immensely. I am an active sort of player (at least I will be once my exams are over ) and so please don't prod me!

Now we are starting to get out of random votes and into discussion, my activity will rise.

Until then, why don't we try question time!

what are everyone's favourite alignments? I should think I would prefer a mafia role, as it would be fun to manipulate the unknowing townies.

Did anyone else get excited at being told that they were a policeman as their role before finding out that its actually a vanilla town role?

and finally, has anyone played in a game with more than one mafia group, and if so are there any different scum tells?

This post smells like bullshit.

Unvote;

Vote: Darkstrike_11

This is active lurking. Inactivity based lurking is one thing, active lurking is another.

er yeah I know, I pretty much said so.

Think about it. i'm watching the game, not finding anything interesting to say, or to ocmment on. I see people wanting a prod, so I post before I get it. Sure it's being "called out" on it, but no more so than an actual prod.

Okay sorry to ask questions, it's usually how I gauge reactions and feelings but whatevs.

VP you said earlier today that the random stage was still happening!

Also your wish to start bandwagons sort of loses its edge when you are telling people to do it, being quite clear that it is not an intentional wagon. Surely the whole scary, scumtell inducing potency of a wagon is in the possibility that it could end up in the victim's lynch. I don't think its a particularly scummy sentiment, but I would say it would probably be more efficient to ask questions and put a verbal heat on someone than fashion a wagon which the person it's aimed at knows that half the people will unvote at a drop of a hat anyway!

So my opinion on Zazier and her imaginary goddess friend's wagon is that it aint serious. Right now the most suspicious behaviour is KMD saying that he was "happy" with the Zazier wagon, when VP wanted a serious one. Wanting a wagon for the sake of it is scummy anyway, but to express happiness with a pseudo-potent yet jokey wagon is suspicious.

Apart from that, not much to go on. I'd FOS KMD, but I'm not even 40% sure about him.

that is my two pennies. Take them, find that you can't by anything with them in the current global economic climate and then throw them back at me. :/

Translation: "Blah, blah, blah, I'm so scummy, lynch me now".

Really? Not even 40% on KMD? Sheez, I thought for sure you were a good 43% on him! Policy lynch for the text-speak is also a possibility.

[Darkstrike_11]

This post smells like bullshit.

Translation: "Blah, blah, blah, I'm so scummy, lynch me now".

Really? Not even 40% on KMD? Sheez, I thought for sure you were a good 43% on him! Policy lynch for the text-speak is also a possibility.

Wow, I really love how you back up your excellent and well thought out points with a wealth of evidence and reasoning.

Also I fail to see any text speak, apart from "whatevs". And if that one word amongst the entirity of my post is what constitutes that, I doubt it's worth a policy vote.

yeah, well done, you correctly understood that my post was saying "I'm so scummy, lynch me now" yeah that was the ENTIRE point of that post. How insightful of you.

unvote
vote AshMC1984

for voting me for pretty much no reasoning. Unless you count the 40% thing as a reason, but I gathered that he was just being ad hom over something I wrote seriously. The text speak thing also seems petty. I could understand a policy vote if I was lying, or directly insulting you, but not for how I write! I actually took that attack worse than the one insinuating I was making stuff up!

[AshMC1984]

I was more referring to the "O hai", however I was just having a little fun with the text speak comment, but whatevs.

Ditto my original "attack" on DVD. More interested in reactions than my the source of my perceived accusation.

Since you seem to need my post fleshed out:
The first post - a cop-out - like it or not the RVS is there. Next time if you don't like it, pop in and post something to kick it into the real game proper. Not seeing anything scummy to comment on doesn't fly. It's called scumhunting.
Your first question is fluff - saying you hoped for a scum role is worse and is a slight scum-tell.
Your wording of your second question allows you to imply that you 'claim' vanilla (the only pro-town roles in this game -

shock

).

Second post: You request immunity from active lurking cos that's the way

you

roll.

Now adding OMGUS to your rap-sheet.