On the quote from my predecessor that's getting tossed around a bit: it's been bugging me as well, I will say that much. He obviously got a very strong read out of something the man put up. I've been digging through his ISO and I think I may know what it is, though whether or not I share his opinion is still in question; leaning towards yes, however, contingent on his responses to the following. Wall of text+quotes ahoy.
Humble Poirot wrote:
q21
started mild and is getting into the game. I dislike his defense/attack on xvart, which appears to me as if he was accusing whoever questions his motives.
q21 wrote:Lets analyse the responses to that self vote... 9 out of 11 players other than myself moved on without so much as a comment (maybe they laughed, maybe they didn't; I don't know, I don't have little cameras at everyone's computers to see if they're laughing). 2 out of eleven people called me out for it. Even if neither you not SSBF are scum, those numbers still prove that most townies paid it very little mind.
So... What's the relevance of this? What do you gain?
What do you think was gained by this statement? Perhaps it was simply a throwaway statement; perhaps there was an actual agenda behind it. I don't believe you have no opinion on the topic, however, especially since you're the one that called attention to it. The fact that whatever you may be thinking, you keep it back... I dunt liek sekerts.
----------------------------------------
Now,
quadz08
is a player who I have a lot of problems with. He seems to be posting in the fence in most situations, just reading what the general opinion is and leaning on the most, let's say, moderate way. He jumps on Vezo after there's a momentum against him
ISO 10 and then, after hearing some answers, takes back a few steps, acknowledges some things but mantains that vezok is still the most scummy person.
Then, after a read read, he goes after SSBF for what seems like a Mafia Discussion.
ISO 21 lacks real conviction for him to vote this person over anyone else.
I call bull here. Has anyone actually clicked the link? What about that post smacks of 'lacking conviction'? I'm having trouble seeing it and am hoping someone could elaborate for me. Is it the fact that he
voted
for the guy? (sarcasm, for the tone reading impaired) Because that's about as much conviction as it's possible to convey in this game, short of an investigation claim.
It's a mafia discussion that pertains directly to what's going on in the thread. You've stated an opinion based on your interpretation of apparent emotional context, but you haven't backed it up with anything. I would like to hear the deeper thought process behind this.
Tied to that, we coudl a kind of friendly and jokey attitude that could be his personality but strikes me as an attempt to befriend everyone to protect his persona.
He is definetly a strong scum read.
He doesn't stick to the known bandwagon and tries instead to dig into the motivation behind the post. This is normally a very good thing. Unfortunately, it doesn't come off sincere to me here. You imply (and explicitly state) scumminess without really telling us why. Now I use gut reads as much as the next guy, potentially more than some of the mafiaborgs you have around here; but when the man flips town, it does not end up reflecting well on you. You need to be prepared to either chin up and take the suspicion that follows, or explain further. I would greatly prefer the latter.
--------------------------------------
diddin
: I'm on the fence about diddin. Vote hopping happy. Agreeing Happy. Information shrew. I need to analyze his motives and I'd like more precise explanations regarding his case against SSBF.
I found from the wiki that you played at least 2 newbie games. Can you briefly summarize how you were lynched in each occassion? Thanks. It's not that I don't want to meta but i'd like to hear it from you (also, I don't want to meta
<- lazy)
This is all fine from my perspective, especially in light of the diddin issues that came up later on which I've commented on (which I will update in a separate post, since this one looks hella long in preview). However, there is one slight problem: you
never followed up on any of this
. As town it's somewhat excusable; you simply found better reads and decided to stick with those. Personally I would try not leave such things aside until I acquired enough information that I was satisfied, but that may just be a playstyle difference, I don't know.
As scum, however, it makes perfect sense. You've shifted the burden of proof from yourself to the other player, and can refer back to this when you run out of other people to attack. Setting up later plays so you have a fallback position.
----------------------------------------
Kagelord
has played a decent game and made good points. He got caught on a trap when he kept arguing about times with Vezok but it's understandable. If you think someone needs to lie about something it's probably because they lie about many things and he apparently tried to prove what he saw.
Kagelord specially makes a good point in
ISO 9 about the whole "n00b pass" thing. I'm completely adamant against a KageLord lynch. The only case that shows content is Oso's and I think it's fundamentally flawed.
Which brings me to
Oso
. He said that KageLord is covering in case the Vezo flips town or scum. But, if Kagelord was scum, why would he need to cover himself? HE'd know what would Kagelord flip (unless there's more than one scum team). This was pointed by someone but I needed to make sure it came across. I'm aware he answered in
ISO 18 but I'm not satisfied with it. If anything, it seems to be like an MD discussion about the certainty of your votes.
Oso seems to be of the idea that someone is scummy for not being confident about the flip of his votee and he is consistent with his idea. Oso claims many times he is sure about Kagelord but if Kagelord were to flip town after a lynch, wouldn't Oso claim he was wrong and try to move on?
I think highly of Oso's skills and I'm extremely wary when I disagree with most of his logic. I feel as if he was purposefuly setting things up for his own convinience. This of course, can be any number of things. Paranoia, inability to see a good point from my part, forgetting to put myself in his shoes.
Anyway, I'll keep an eye on him and hope that everyone does the same. He is both a great asset and a great danger.
Humble Poirot wrote:
I dislike quadz speech pretending he has to vote Kagelord because he has more votes right now (specially considering that the difference is minimal and it just changed momentarily from a tie).
Okay...
Vezok has my potential vote if I can't get a quadz lynch. So for all intents and purposes Vezok and Kagelord are tied. If someone chooses to vote, they can't claim it's because someone has got the lead or any other excuse.
Has anyone mentioned this before? If so, please speak up. You imply negative connotations for quadz's voting pattern, and in the
next line of the same post
say that you're prepared to do the
exact same thing
to ensure a lynch of someone you think is scummy. This is one of the most blatant hypocritical contradictions I've seen and makes me more uncomfortable than anything else you've written. The problem continues below in a more in-depth discussion of Kage's reaction to the same.
Kagelord makes good points about quadz's weird choice of voting him over vezok (whom he suspected).
quadz08 wrote:KageLord wrote:
quadz, you start off by saying, as you have been recently, that you think SSBF is scummiest followed by vezo. I'm wondering why you say in your next paragraph that you would switch to me to prevent a no lynch. I was just tied with vezo in votes, until Poirot unvoted, so more on either one of us would probably result in that person being lynched (if you switch to vezo, someone else will probably do the same). If vezo is the second scummiest to you and you would be willing to lynch him or SSBF as you say above, why switch to me instead of him?
Sorry, that was poor wording on my part. In my head, my earlier declaration of vezok as 2nd scummiest meant that I would switch to him if that's where the lynch looks to be happening. I pointed you out specifically because you're on the general radar and I hadn't mentioned you. To clarify, I am willing to switch to KageLord or vezok to ensure a lynch. I may be willing to switch to others as well, if the need arises.
This is basically why you will keep being my first suspect for a long time. You're basically excusing yourself of all responsibility (Oso, are you reading this? Isn't this the same thing Kage allegedly do and cause you to vote him?). You aren't even trying to find who might be scum (if there is one) amongst the two of them. You aren't trying to push your alternative lynch either.
To top it off, he continued to use this argument against quads right up until he gets lynched, and no-one called him on it (if I missed someone who did, I apologize). Is anyone getting good vibes off this in context?
Humble Poirot wrote:Err... Do you even read what I write? Could you name my 2 top suspects? When did I say you're scum or try to get you lynched yet?
What's the purpose of this emotional speech? Gather supporters? Prepare for a future fight or what? What if you're wrong? What if we're both wrong?
Also, as you consider I think you're scum... Do you consider I am with all that speech?
Oso wrote:If you want an informational lynch then call for one.
Please, Do not misrepresent me. This is a cheap tactic. I never wanted an information lynch. I'm going after my top scum suspect for the lynch and inspecting everyone else.
Oso wrote:And if you are going to use a flip to try and determine my alignment then I suggest it be KageLord, that way you can use 'killed a townie or bussed a partner' no matter what happens. Might be easier too as you can start planning posts for either eventuality now and not wait for the flip.
You're the only one talking about flips as if they justified something. I'm not focusing on flips but on getting who I think is scum lynched.
You're acting like a fanatic. Saying I'll do a bunch of evil things in the future or something. What's the purpose of all this? Tarnishing my image? I resent that, although you admit quadz scummyness to some degree, you consider only the scenarios where he is town and I'm a criminal mastermind who is out to get you. This all sounds like a bad appeal to emotion.
And there you have it. I still don't know if you're just being a fanatic... Stubbornly holding to your beliefs and imagining conspiracies or what. You may be even right about kage, but you've shown nothing to justify his lynch so far and neither has the rest of the wagon.
This is all fine as a defense in normal circumstances; except for the fact that you're responding to what you see as an appeal to emotion with emotionally charged language. Will someone play a really fast game of word association with me? I say 'fanatic'. What are the first three words that pop into your head?
If you had planned to play the 'logic vs instinct' card, you're kind of circumventing your own argument here. On it's own I would just say you probably just got carried away with your argument and didn't think too much of it. In light of my suspicions above I'm less inclined to let it slide.
Summary/conclusion: His manner of play makes me nervous from his opening post. He does make strong points and logical conclusions a good portion of the time, but I cant't help but be scratching my head at some of the apparent throwaway reads he puts in. Would reeeally like to hear from him on this, because if he is town he may be one of our biggest assets and I'd like to get this stuff out of the way asap.
