Mini 880 - Mini Quick and Dirty - Game Over

[ODDin]

ODDin = Is ekiM or PZ scummier for their actions so far

(Written the moment I saw the post, without yet reading the rest)
At this point, eKim. While I don't like PZ's actions in that they might be laying grounds for future scummy actions, it's still obviously a stretch to say that's a serious scum-tell.

Raskol - I disagree fundamentally that you need chasing shadows scumhunting D1 to look for scum on D2. In fact, I think it obscures scum, because chasing shadows is EXACTLY what scum want to do. You can make anyone look scummy in a PBPA, yet people who do this are regarded as protown for no reason. Scum depend on being able to use such scumhunting to both get townies lynched and appear pro-town. And you can use town reads just as well as scum reads to determine alignment.

Although this addresses Raskol, I think I might say something anyway. And that is that I agree with Raskol entirely on this. Scum-tells are still scum-tells, even on D1. They're usually weaker on D1, of course, but they're still there. It's possible to fabricate a case against a townie, of course, but that's the town's job to understand what's real and what's not.
Also, you do realise that if nothing happens D1 then D2 becomes the new D1, right? The arguments on D2 continue those on D1, the arguments on D3 continue those on D2 etc. Of course, you get stronger arguments by knowing people's alignments and sometimes due to the help of power-roles. But still, arguments that based solely on people's actions and words are also very important.

Also, if you have any serious town-tells, you might share those too.

Why are you pushing this issue? I've been about the most non-threatening person calling out a scumtell ever, constantly qualifying it with my overall concept of the early game being specifically not about finding scumtells and talking about how I think it's barely worth mentioning, yet you've still got a bee in your bonnet about it. What gives?

It's his right to point out wrong things you've said or question you. Why so edgy?
(Also, ironic seeing how you say less edgy = more likely town)

As for judging me, imagine I was scum using this playstyle. I have to either name my scum mates as town D1 or risk getting them lynched semi-randomly. Plus you'll have my opinion and scumreads as they come. Sorry, but I'm not going to be changing how I play.

WIFOM

Troll has seen enough of SerialCleryman's responses to pressure to not be interested in lynching him day one

Explain.

Sando's post 185 is just silly. Amish is actively helping the game - or trying, at least. He may be scum faking it, of course, so you can call his play a null-tell, but I can't see how it's actively scummy.
Also, you were asked who you think is scum, you answered with "look at my vote", but you weren't voting. So, yeah, that was kinda fence-sitting, plus you've basically avoided the question.
And when people point out the obvious here (without even strongly accusing you over it), you get all defensive and righteous.

In continuation of the Sando issue: getting run-downs and opinions *is* good for town. It allows you to analyse people. It allows you to understand what's going on. More info is good for town. What you're saying is ridiculous.

In the last 1.5 days, the following people haven't posted.

1. AGar
3. ekiM
4. ODDin
5. Ojanen
6. Papa Zito
9. Scien
11. VP Baltar

I'm starting to think this game is a practical joke played on us and they're all snickering in a Quicktopic somewhere wondering how long it'll take us to work it out.

I haven't exactly got heaps of free time lying around. I've got lots of stuff to do other than playing mafia. It's no that easy for me to meet the one-post-every-48-hours demand either, and I don't think it's fair of you to ask for more.

[Vi]

Official Vote Count

SerialClergyman (2) - Amished, Papa Zito
:arrow: ekiM (3) - Raskol, ODDin, AGar
AGar (2) - Scien, ekiM
Amished (2) -VP Baltar, Sando
Sando (2) - SerialClergyman, Zorblag

Not Voting:

Ojanen

12 alive, 7 to lynch
8.5 days left

[SerialClergyman]

unvote, vote ODDin

[ODDin]

Well, at least that got you to do something.
Now explain.

[SerialClergyman]

Of your post, I didn't like:

1) Your overreaction to my mild calling out the amount of people not participating, with your name being one of them.
2) Your supporting of the narrative that I've done nothing when I've been both a focal point of discussion and an active participant in it.
3) Your goody two-shoes mafia theory spouting.
4) Your failure to act on your goody two shoes mafia theory spouting by providing much of content outside of mafia theory.

[Scien]

I count 4 or 5 players all uselessly saying something like 'I await PZ's case with fervour', which might indicate a lack of desire to scumhunt rather than just a lack of desire to commit too early.

Let me rephrase it then. I think PapaZ doesn't have a case, and even if he does it is 'meh'.

If he doesn't have a case, then that is bad, because he lied. If its 'meh', then its just typical begin game stuff, but I will likely not follow it.

In a way, me asking for his case IS scum hunting. But nice try.

As for Amished's play, it's been edgy. He's attacked one target who couldn't defend himself (lurker) and as soon as he materialised he attacked a target where he could share responsibility (joining the wagon). Looks vaugely scummy to me. (but again, scumtells D1 suck)

Could you explain why you believe either of those actions are more likely to be scum motivated than town? I think that both attacking non-posters (which IIRC, was the first attack you are talking about), and jumping wagons for pressure, are both typically done by town as well.

[In responce to asking opinions] Doing it doesn't help scumhunt, most of them are things like 'I think xxxx is pro-town at the moment' or 'getting slight scum read on yyyy'. It doesn't point anything out to anyone, and it becomes way too easy to then pull out replies later and turn them into a fake case. The most common of these being linking cases.

Er, could you explain for me more. If someone is backing up their claims for why they see someone pro-town or scummy, doesn't it sort of provide concrete evidence of your attitude to another player? If your view is weak, can't you say that its weak? I don't see how you can say that asking for other's positions on players is meaningless. I also don't see how someone could spin it as 'scummy' if you tell the truth about it.

In the last 1.5 days, the following people haven't posted.

Welcome to the weekend. Actually it is a rare occurrence that I post over them. But since I was prodded earlier I kind of felt obligated in this case.

I believe Agar for the moment. It seems that he was just joking. There might have been motives or not, and ekiM is right, I can't investigate that at the moment. But I still hold that I had things to question him about, and there was at least something to investigate.

Unvote

I personally see 'meh' in the argument between SC and the town. Yes, I don't agree with what he is saying about D1 play and how it is anti-town to build weak cases on people and pressure them. However, he has been unswerving in his answers to people so far, and has not flinched to get out of pressure. I believe he believes in his views. And if that is the case, he is acting as he would as townie.

Er, I guess that means I...

Vote: Sando

I also have a hard time not calling you Santos. And I apologize for that. My concerns are pretty much the above questions to you. To reiterate:
1) You seem to be ignoring that typically people back up their views on someone when asked for their opinion. How is this information useless to town? You don't think that going back later and seeing a confirmed scum's opinions on people help? You don't think you can read motives and logic on someones views on another?
2) If you treat the information you give as weak, or not enough to make your read slight pro-town/scummy, how do you expect people to twist it? How do you think that would not reflect badly on the twister?
3) Er, I think I am lost by something, what is the difference in your opinion by a rundown and an opinion?
4) Your original concern seemed to be 'If I give you my thoughts, they will be twisted against me'. Would you say that paraphrase is a good representation of one of your concerns? If not could you fix it for me?

[VP Baltar]

Also, saying that they haven't posted anything beneficial sets you up (as scum) later on to give you a precedent to dismiss some arguments that the person might have against you or one of your real scum buddies in the future, especially if they caught you with something rather strong in principle but they don't express it all that well.

There's scum motivation to do anything in the game.

Yeah, sure anything CAN be scummy, but lets look at the facts and reach the most logical conclusion. The fact is that PZ has not posted anything useful. Now, you are of course welcome to fill in the blanks for him, but that's not how I play. If a player cannot explain him or herself in the thread, then don't expect me to make all kinds of assumptions to do it for them. My point stands until I see something I deem to be of substance.

I don't pay attention to jokes either. I didn't even remember my joke to AGar about Berserking... If it's not related to the game at hand, I don't really focus on it.

What! You were just trying to rake me over the coals for ignoring PZ's drival thus far and now you are saying that you ignore joking stuff? Cognative dissonance alert.

If he ever wants, I think he can very well put his personal ending of the RVS at any point there. The way he worded it, even the "SRS BSNS" can be referred to as a joke later on

Yep, exactly.

AGar's instant OMGUS on ekiM in post 132 is quite interesting. AGar, how confident in this vote?

I count 4 or 5 players all uselessly saying something like 'I await PZ's case with fervour', which might indicate a lack of desire to scumhunt rather than just a lack of desire to commit too early.

Yer. I don't like how so many people chimed in after I said that and went "Oh, yeah. me too, me too!" Makes me feel more inclined to believe that PZ is town and there is probably at least one scum in that bunch waiting to prod his wagon on if it arose.

@Raskol v SC D1 theory discussion--that's enough folks. Raskol, that's how he plays. He's not going to change it. 'nuff said.

Edit: Actually, since you continued to harp on the issue Raskol, do you think this a scumtell from SC?

Is it Amished whinging at me to vote? I'll vote when I want to pressure someone or lynch them.

Actually, didn't he ask you your suspicions and you said look at your vote, which was actually non-existant?

There are only 2 people who I meta, Serial and Ojanen, Serial because I've known him a long long time, Ojanen because I've played 2 games with her, both with her as scum, 1 with me as her hydra partner as scum, so I trust my judgement there a lot more.

How can you have a meta on Oj if you've never played with her as town? That doesn't make sense, especially from someone who doesn't like meta apparently. You'd think given your distaste for it, you'd at least have a complete meta.

I've commented on Meta and provided it on the one person at the moment that I feel I can. I've commented on Amished refusing to even discuss joke-posts,

But you never replied to what your thoughts on me are. I said I was flat out ignoring PZ until he contributed something of substance and you didn't bat an eyelash. What's the difference between myself and Amished in that regard?

Just one problem, Sando---no one ever asked you for a stupid rundown post. You were asked who was scummy to you and why.

^this.

1: Fair enough if I got that wrong, I got that wrong, if noone asked me for a complete rundown of everyone, fine. I was in a rush and late to the game, I may have misread it as asking me for that sort of post. However, there's not a lot of difference between asking just who is scummy, and a complete run-down post. Clearly, anyone I don't include as scummy can be assumed as being seen as townie by me, and I'm providing even less info. So there's not exactly a lot of difference.

lol. what?

3: I haven't refused to give my opinions, I've refused to give my opinions in the format he wants. He asked me a very general question, I attacked him over it, not sure what the problem from you is.

Actually, you fabricated the format he wanted and then called him scummy for it.

---

Sorry for being absent for awhile and I'll try to keep my activity levels up. Also, Sando is obvscum.

Unvote, Vote: Sando

[Amished]

I just have time for a quick post.

@VP: Ignoring jokes (parts of a post that isn't game related) and ignoring whole posts when the post is about people in the game and possibly the actions that a person sees and wants attention directed towards are two very different things.

[Raskol]

@Raskol v SC D1 theory discussion--that's enough folks. Raskol, that's how he plays. He's not going to change it. 'nuff said.

Edit: Actually, since you continued to harp on the issue Raskol, do you think this a scumtell from SC?

No, not really. After we stopped arguing and I let it go, he essentially did what I asked anyway---which was to make a vote and a case on someone (ODDin), so I'm seeing it as him simply not wanting to do something "because I said so". I'm fine with him atm.

[BigBear]

I'm back guys, thanks for the Vote Count Vi, and I have sent out prods to the following players:

1. AGar
3. ekiM
5. Ojanen
6. Papa Zito

It is each their first time being prodded.

[ODDin]

1) Your overreaction to my mild calling out the amount of people not participating, with your name being one of them.

It's not easy for me to find time to read the game and participate meaningfully, and I'm doing the effort because I really want to play this game. It was kinda angering to be accused of not participating enough after that.

2) Your supporting of the narrative that I've done nothing when I've been both a focal point of discussion and an active participant in it.

There was a discussion, and I replied to things said in the discussion. I've talked about your playstyle as described by yourself.
Also, do you think that Raskol is scummy for saying what he did? If not, then you shouldn't think I am scummy either - I'm allowed to have the same opinion as he does, am I not?

3) Your goody two-shoes mafia theory spouting.

Too townie fallacy?

4) Your failure to act on your goody two shoes mafia theory spouting by providing much of content outside of mafia theory.

I've said all things I noticed upon reading the thread. I wasn't talking only about theory either, as is evident from the post and I don't feel any need to repeat it. I've also said all sorts of stuff before. And seeing that there's active discussion going on in many various directions, I don't feel the need to stir up new discussion to liven things up. It's very lively as it is.

[Ojanen]

Hi guys. I'm back.
Still sick, just waiting to see if I get pneumonia for doing everything you're not supposed to do while having a fever but I'm done with being on tour so it's ok.
I'll catch my breath and read up today.

[Sando]

How can you have a meta on Oj if you've never played with her as town? That doesn't make sense, especially from someone who doesn't like meta apparently. You'd think given your distaste for it, you'd at least have a complete meta.

I should clear up 1 thing, I know Serial very well IRL. After playing with Ojanen I chatted with him about it, and he's played with her as town a few times now I think, and told me she was awesome at it, so I read the games. She also plays or at least played quite differently as scum to town.

lol. what?

What's the difference between saying "The people I find scummy are XYZ", and "The people I find scummy are XYZ and the people I find town are ABC"? Not a lot really. He's asking for the first, I hate the second and misread his post as asking for that, but the point still stands, they're both fairly useless in my eyes.

But you never replied to what your thoughts on me are. I said I was flat out ignoring PZ until he contributed something of substance and you didn't bat an eyelash. What's the difference between myself and Amished in that regard?

I hadn't realised I'd been specifically asked for them, have I?

Actually, didn't he ask you your suspicions and you said look at your vote, which was actually non-existant?

Yep, I was saying that since I'm not voting, you can take that as an indication that as of yet, I don't have any strong opinions. I can't believe that it's that hard for you guys to figure that out...

1) You seem to be ignoring that typically people back up their views on someone when asked for their opinion. How is this information useless to town? You don't think that going back later and seeing a confirmed scum's opinions on people help? You don't think you can read motives and logic on someones views on another?

No, I find generic 'xxx is scummy because he's done 1 tiny screw up in 5 pages' people freakin useless, and way too easy to turn into a link case later on. You seem to think that it's a good idea to make an incredibly weak linkage case?

And Scien, saying that I was responding to being asked for opinions is an absolute lie, and one that I've cleared up multiple times. My posts will focus on a single player or only 1 or 2, I won't make big 'these 6 players are likely scum'.

I had thought this was just some pressure being applied for some weak explanation on my part, but maybe not. Is it really that un-obvious what I'm saying? I never said that providing any opinions are bad, merely that providing certain opinions in certain formats are bad.

[Zorblag]

@ODDin, SerialClergyman's responses to Troll's questions thus far have lead Troll to believe that it will be easier to get a read on him in future days. Troll believes him will participate and thus, so long as him does, Troll no be that interested in pursuing his lynch right now when there be others that Troll expects to be clearer on.

@Amished, Troll no meant to imply a town read on SerialClergyman which you seem to have taken from Troll's comments. Troll just feels that him will be better to look at closely later and that there will be better options to consider for the lynch today. Troll be happy enough with his answers and him be willing to give them. When there be better questions to ask that will be valuable.

@Sando, what would you like to see happen at this stage in the game. Apparently it's not asking who people find suspicious so what would be a better course for us to follow for now?

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[Sando]

4) Your original concern seemed to be 'If I give you my thoughts, they will be twisted against me'. Would you say that paraphrase is a good representation of one of your concerns? If not could you fix it for me?

No, it's 100% not. I'm not worried about my views being twisted in the format I play. People try, but because I've actually put a lot of time and effort into making a case or answering questions, it's normally pretty easy to go back and show how I'm being misrepresented or misinterpreted. If I provide just small bite size chunks of my thoughts before I've fully processed them, then yes, I think I'll get misrep'd on them later.

@Sando, what would you like to see happen at this stage in the game. Apparently it's not asking who people find suspicious so what would be a better course for us to follow for now?

Ok, now I am actually getting slightly angry...

For anyone that wants to accuse me of this, do you honestly want to say for everyone's benefit that you do not think that I have provided opinions on people in the game, or that I'm against opinions?

All that I don't want to see is mind-numbing recap posts that serve absolutely no purpose, and when I join and get asked a very general 'hey who's scum' that's what I think I'm being asked for. I've said this maybe half a dozen times, are you guys just deliberately ignoring that?

Do you guys really think that I'm still not providing opinions on players or generating discussion? Seriously?

[Zorblag]

@Sando, Troll sees you reacting to accusations for the most part. There be opinions there but Troll wonders what else you would like to see happening now. Surely that latest reaction show that this isn't what you would like to spend day one doing; Troll just be trying to figure out what alternatives you might prefer. Troll be attempting to provide a chance for you to be proactive rather than reactive.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[Sando]

I was trying to clear up a misconception of my opinions before I went to work.

I also attacked Amished and have been attacked in return. I'm defending part of why I find him scummy and trying to clear that up. I was not attacked prior to posting opinions, read 143 onwards if you want that one cleared up re accusation and responding to it. I've also accused Raskol of deliberate mis-rep and Scien of lying, just because it's in defence of myself that makes it less worthwhile?

I have some opinions on the Odin/SC argument, but I'd like to give it a bit for them to argue it out, I don't like arguing for others, and I have to go to work now anyways.

And I'm happy to spend D1 giving and responding to accusations, just not the same accusation 6 times. Happy to spend every day doing that actually.

[VP Baltar]

I'm done with being on tour

Rockstar by trade?

What's the difference between saying "The people I find scummy are XYZ", and "The people I find scummy are XYZ and the people I find town are ABC"? Not a lot really.

A hell of a lot, really. Pointing out two or three people you think are scum =/= saying the rest of the people are town reads. I don't even know how you are jumping to such a conclusion. Nor do I think anyone would generally consider saying "The people I find scummy are XYZ" to be anti-town, and especially not scummy as you are trying to make it out to be.

I hadn't realised I'd been specifically asked for them, have I?

Yeah, you were actually, by Amished if my memory serves me. And regardless of that, I'm asking you now.

Yep, I was saying that since I'm not voting, you can take that as an indication that as of yet, I don't have any strong opinions. I can't believe that it's that hard for you guys to figure that out...

If only we were all as bright of a star as you. So your stance is you have no suspicions and saying "I find XYZ scummy" is anti-town. You need lynching in the worst way.

My posts will focus on a single player or only 1 or 2, I won't make big 'these 6 players are likely scum'.

More exaggeration. No one asked you to give a list of six players who are scummy.

Do you guys really think that I'm still not providing opinions on players or generating discussion? Seriously?

Yes, very much so actually. I see you doing a lot of pouting about being questioned over not givig suspicions and then you continue to NOT ACTUALLY GIVE SUSPICIONS. What conclusion do you expect people to reach? Your Amished case is very flat and reads like something you slapped together just to get something out there. Not only that, but it is built on a false accusation and rather than admit that, you are arguing that you can infer the same thing from his statement and he is therefore still scummy. It definitely doesn't read to me like someone who is actively searching for scum. Give me a break.

[SerialClergyman]

Good solid post from Baltar above.

ODDin - Spouting goody two shoes town meta does not make you town. The very fact that you tried to invoke the too townie fallacy proves my point. Saying things like 'information is good for the town' and 'discussion is important' is just step one basic theory. It's so easy to say stuff like that as scum and try to pass it off as being a Good Town Citizen when it fact it tells the town nothing it doesn't already know and provides no useful data to look at.

It's like people who say 'I think we should be lynching the person with the best chance of being scum!'

Raskol was engaged in a theory debate with me about how to play D1. He wasn't assuming that I wasn't contributing, he said he'd be more likely ot lynch me if I wasn't scumhunting. Your posts made it sound like there was no participation.

Also, you do realise that if nothing happens D1 then D2 becomes the new D1, right?

Well, at least that got you to do something.

Clearly, given I've probably got the most posts in the game, this narrative is false.

And an overreaction is an overreaction. I made the point that 2/3 of the town hadn't posted in 1.5 days in a 2 day prod game. This made for quite lonely playing for the other four of us. You then seemed to take it as a personal attack about your time management. I think that's more likely than average to be a foil. After all, as you say in your goody two shoes manner, more info is pro-town, so people who are hanging on to post just before being prodded should be scrutinised, yes?

[SerialClergyman]

(I got simulposted - I meant VP's first content post on this page was good. That one was meh.)

I forgot to say since when do you base your scumhunting on whether or not discussion is lively?

[ODDin]

ODDin - Spouting goody two shoes town meta does not make you town. The very fact that you tried to invoke the too townie fallacy proves my point. Saying things like 'information is good for the town' and 'discussion is important' is just step one basic theory. It's so easy to say stuff like that as scum and try to pass it off as being a Good Town Citizen when it fact it tells the town nothing it doesn't already know and provides no useful data to look at.

It's like people who say 'I think we should be lynching the person with the best chance of being scum!'

I didn't "invoke" the Too Townie Fallacy. I was attempting to understand what you were trying to say here. If you want to say that what I said is a null-tell and doesn't give me town points, then I'm not going to argue with you. What I don't understand is how it gives me scum points. I said my opinion.

He wasn't assuming that I wasn't contributing, he said he'd be more likely ot lynch me if I wasn't scumhunting. Your posts made it sound like there was no participation.

You've been participating, but only in a very specific manner - you weren't really pushing anybody or accusing anyone. Most of your participation was a discussion of your own playstyle. It's not the sort of participation I find active and helpful, and it doesn't move the game forward. I can agree that you may indeed truly believe in this playstyle as town, and I'm not making the case that you're scum based on your play. I just said that the way you played wasn't helping the game much.
The fact alone that you've posted a lot doesn't, in itself, make your participation helpful.
Of course, you're now quite actively attacking me, and that's great.

And an overreaction is an overreaction. I made the point that 2/3 of the town hadn't posted in 1.5 days in a 2 day prod game. This made for quite lonely playing for the other four of us. You then seemed to take it as a personal attack about your time management. I think that's more likely than average to be a foil. After all, as you say in your goody two shoes manner, more info is pro-town, so people who are hanging on to post just before being prodded should be scrutinised, yes?

I was annoyed by it myself, knowing why I don't post more often, and fell annoyed in the name of everyone else as well. Not posting for a day and a half isn't enough to say they're "hanging on to post", and I feel it's wrong to scrutinise them for that - myself and everyone else on your list there. Sure, I'm all for pushing lurkers to post more, but those people aren't lurkers (at any rate, you have no evidence either way at the moment).
If you feel I've overreacted, okay, though I'm still not sure I did. How what I said is scummy I don't really see, however.

since when do you base your scumhunting on whether or not discussion is lively?

Perhaps I wasn't clear. What I meant to say is, when there's enough discussion going on, I feel can perfectly well scumhunt within the bounds of the already existing discussion, and thus don't try to artificially create discussion out of nowhere (by aggressively pushing a very weak case, bandwagoning without much reason and things of the sort).

[SerialClergyman]

Reaching point of diminishing returns.

Overreaction to being called out = awareness of how you're viewed and putting effort into rejecting it = scummy.

Also - seems you've found time now there's a vote on you.

Spouting goody-two-shoes theory = sounding town without doing anything that is pro-town or anti-scum = scummy.

[ODDin]

Overreaction to being called out = awareness of how you're viewed and putting effort into rejecting it = scummy.

Most generally, yes. Consider the specific argument, however. The issue has very little to do with the game - you weren't really accusing people of being scum, and I wasn't defending against being scum. But if you wish to interpret my reaction as scummy, I can't stop you.

Also - seems you've found time now there's a vote on you.

I have a more or less free evening because I've finished all of my assignments for this week, and the next ones are only due next week, so it's a bit of a breather. But you're free to think I'm lying.
(Also, even if I were scum, it would take more than one vote in early D1 to scare me...)

Spouting goody-two-shoes theory = sounding town without doing anything that is pro-town or anti-scum = scummy.

Now that's one hell of a stretch. I think I'm doing enough pro-town / anti-scum things. I've been pointing out scum-tells or town-tells I see about people since the beginning of the game. Seeing that neither you nor anyone else has been accusing me of not scumhunting enough prior to this, I guess I'm not the only one with this opinion. So, I'm "spouting goody two-shoes theories" IN ADDITION to scum hunting, not instead of it. And on its own, I can't see it as a scum-tell.
If you think I haven't been scumhunting enough, explain how.

[AGar]

Picking up my prod.

I'm a bit interested in the back and forths going on. Amished, why are you so interested in getting peoples opinions out right away? And for SC/Sando - why are you so interested in keeping that to a minimum? Just for the sake of full discussion, because I seemed to have missed it other than "I want to know" and "I don't need to submit to your demands", respectively.

AGar's instant OMGUS on ekiM in post 132 is quite interesting. AGar, how confident in this vote?

I wish I could say I had no failings in my confidence, but he's gone rather inactive, so I can't get a better read of him. However, I feel it fulfills it's purpose right now.

I'm interested in this meta discussion, particularly VP's take on one point. I've played with a few people in this game (Papa Zito and VP have both finished games with me). So I obviously know their styles. Now I've played a game where VP and I were townies and two games with PZ - one where I was scum and he was town, one where he was town and I was town. Under VP's argument, I couldn't really assume a meta for either of them as scum. However, I know of several games where PZ was scum, and I could easily read them over, no? That seems to be something you somewhat overlooked, VP.

Quick bit @SC (and all others interested) - I will have spurts where I don't post for an entire day. Unfortunately, it's the way my schedule is built. I can't post much on Mondays or Wednesdays usually - I'm busy as all get-out. Yesterday was honestly just a bad day for me though. Usually I'm more active on weekends.

[SerialClergyman]

Ok, maybe my post about activity came off as harsher than intended. I was somewhat frustrated that we have a lot of good active players and yet only about 1/3 of people were posting. I expected that given 48 hours was prod-able, there would be more activity.

I am not the activity warden, I've lurked through D1 before, and not posted for a while before, I don't mean to be overly critical, I just felt the game could use more participation than just the 4 players who were (lets face it) writing semi-walls about theory that noone else would read.

AGar - unlike Sando, I don't have a problem with giving my reads. What I object to is people asking me to tell them who is scum or who is town when I don't have a good enough idea yet. It makes me feel like I have to take a stance I don't believe in, or 'make up' reasons why they are scum, and I know for a fact doing that leads me to tunnelling and playing badly. So if someone asks me a question I don't have an answer to, like tell me who is scum, or place your vote on someone non-random, I can't give them what they want. Believe me, you'll hear a lot about my reads throughout the game.