Newbie Game 1106: Death with a 2x4 (limps to finish line)

Korlash · Post Post #275 (ISO) » Thu May 19, 2011 7:04 pm

Ok let's start with the person I was waiting for the most, Poi. His original stance towards the Z 'case' was that it was weak. In post 232 he completely 180's that without any real indication of why he originally thought it was weak. This is a point I'm really torn on. On the one hand flipping your opinion like this as soon as the wagon starts to build seems scummy, but it was still while the wagon was in the early stages (before Quin's vote) and before the others(Gir, Anka, and Ant) had given their opinions of z. His recent stuff on z seems legit enough but I don't like him ending it with "You being at L-2 is reason to keep my vote on Ant." Still, other then that and the issue I'm torn with he seems on the level. This is a more clear read then I figured I would get with him so well done to me. Maybe you aren't so mysterious after all.

Since we left on a vote with Ant, let's visit him next. His 257 doesn't outright call z possible scum, but the way he ends it seems like he is keeping his foot in the door just in case. Short of this and his 269 though I don't think he has even mentioned z. While I certainly think the way he ended his z read is slightly suspicious, it isn't how I picture scum's role on this wagon.

Anka next. His 261 claims he is finding z scummier due to his most recent posts, but seems to produce a very lackluster clump of contribution along with it. He then edits in a 'I'm close to voting you but I'm going to play it safe around L-1'. The first point he makes in 266 seems outright contradictory 'if we lynch a townie we gain info, but if we lynch scum it will be hard to gain info' seem to be what he said essentially. That makes no flipping sense what-so-ever. I have to say I'm really not liking Anka's actions surrounding this wagon. Seems to be playing the subtle hand pushing the wagon along but without letting his own hands get too dirty.

Gir... I don't even have a clue where to start. I can't see how you can mix up two players 'entirely' if you are actually doing an honest read. I can certainly see how it can happen if you're giving a BS read though just to look good. Keeping players straight isn't a high priority when you're not looking for real evidence you know. Still, even given that I can accept people make mistakes. What I can't accept here is a key factor that allowed this mistake to happen, and that is the fact in his 252 where he (if I understand his 256 correctly) called z scum but mistakenly labeled it was guy he said nothing specific to back it up. Not a one. A vague "A lot of what he is saying is damning" and even a "I would lynch him at deadline" without a single shred of evidence as to why. The only plus side to him I see is that due to the name switch his vote wasn't actually plugging onto the bandwagon, but that's only a small amount of credit for him.

Overall I have to:

Vote: Gir(Doom)

I really need you to explain the whole name switch and how it happened, plus give your accurate read and response to the z wagon/case asap. I also want to know if it was simply the name, so therefore the case should still exist on z, or if you physically confused actions as well making the case mostly worthless.

Second would come Anka for what seems to be a subtle ploy to push the wagon forward, followed by Ant for irrelevant reasons and Poi gets fourth by default.

Korlash · Post Post #276 (ISO) » Thu May 19, 2011 7:24 pm

z wrote:1) This is what he did, and I've already explained why I think he gave it up after two posts. Regardless, the length of time he tunneled Gir is irrelevant; he was still blindly focusing on Gir while ignoring the rest of the game.

dude, you have a very narrow mind here. By your own logic then Embit is guilty of tunneling Ant in his first contribution post as well. Have you even taken the fact he missed a huge chunk of the game at first? That coming in and immediately commenting on the entire game could take hours and make a huge f'ing post to boot? Would you deny that when you enter a game late going after your biggest 'scum read' would be a way to 'get a foot in the door' and start to add some contribution?

z wrote:2) I don't even consider tunneling a scum tell if the person is doing it for legitimate reasons. The issues I have are:
a: He has no further questions for me, he has no comments on my recent posts, but his vote is still on me and he still finds me scummy.
b: He's accusing me of playing in an anti-town manner because I'm not giving all my thoughts on the game, but he himself is not giving all his thoughts on the game.
c: The inconsistency in his read on me (based on his reaction to Poiven's post after his initial vote on me). You can claim he didn't think I was scum until I responded all you want, but that's a load of crap.

I already said I don't have a problem with your accusing him of tunneling you. that's your thing, go for it and see where it goes. If things keep up like they have been I wouldn't be surprised if you manage a reasonable case out of it. But you're not going to get away with saying he was tunneling Gir, it's not going to happen. My advice for the sake of the game and the legitimacy of your attacks is just to let that one go and focus on this stuff.

z wrote:Are you implying town players could never do something scummy? Really?

No I'm not. are you intentionally trying to bastardize my posts here? If you are I wish you good luck, though you'll lose. And I don't think you have enough face saved to survive that defeat. best to keep things civil i think.

z wrote:There is no implication that he's necessarily scum. He asked a scummy question, that's that. I maintain it was a scummy question regardless of your insistence it isn't. I've explained why it's scummy, all you've done is essentially say he might not have realised it's scummy so it's not scummy.

We're just arguing semantics yet again z. If you say someone did something scummy, you have implied the chance of them being scum has increased. Are you outright saying they are 100% scum? Hell obviously no. If that implication didn't exist, there would be no reason to discuss the action, and so no reason for you to point it out. The implication is one of the driving forces behind the entire concept of scum hunting, but like I said, This is all semantics really.

My note mainly focused on the change in how you seemed to view the question before to how you view it now and the ironic contradiction of sorts it seemed to create.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #277 (ISO) » Thu May 19, 2011 7:51 pm

Korlash wrote:By your own logic then Embit is guilty of tunneling Ant in his first contribution post as well.

Don't pretend there are any similarities between what Embit did and what guy was doing.

Korlash wrote:Would you deny that when you enter a game late going after your biggest 'scum read' would be a way to 'get a foot in the door' and start to add some contribution?

The problem being that generally once your foot is in the door, you don't stand there with your foot in the door doing absolutely nothing.

Korlash wrote:I already said I don't have a problem with your accusing him of tunneling you. that's your thing, go for it and see where it goes. If things keep up like they have been I wouldn't be surprised if you manage a reasonable case out of it. But you're not going to get away with saying he was tunneling Gir, it's not going to happen.

He clearly showed the tunneling mindset, even if he let up after two posts on Gir. And I do think he'd have continued tunneling Gir had Quinn not subtly coached him out of it.

Korlash wrote:No I'm not. are you intentionally trying to bastardize my posts here?

Asking questions = bastardising your posts. Noted.

Korlash wrote:If you say someone did something scummy, you have implied the chance of them being scum has increased. Are you outright saying they are 100% scum? Hell obviously no. If that implication didn't exist, there would be no reason to discuss the action, and so no reason for you to point it out.

OK, and?

There was never an implication that he

is

scum, just that he asked a scummy question and is accountable for explaining it. And yes, he is accountable for explaining it himself, not having you ride in on your stallion defending him so he doesn't need to worry about it.

Poiven · Post Post #278 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 1:19 am

Ant, you addressed about a third of my points in post 181 and said you were on the way out the door, and never came back to it. I would like to see more of that addressed; you pretty much just straw-manned it and went for the weakest arguments.

And z, the only thing I still really have to comment on is the vote-hopping. You said it's "noise" and that you can see either side doing that. I don't see how that mars a read. Please explain this further.

mrguy888 · Post Post #279 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 6:02 am

I will be away with no internet this entire weekend so since I will have a lot of reading to do anyway I will post my thoughts on everyone when I get back.

Ankamius · Post Post #280 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 6:58 am

This conversation with zMuffinMan has progressively gone more and more into a dead end. When I first started to focus on him, that was because his play was the most suspicious to me. Now I see that I originally misinterpreted a lot of things from a reread today, but I'm still confused as to why zMuffinMan thinks withholding information is not scummy (at least in day one, where power role results aren't possible).

--

zMuffinMan wrote:Why did you ask, "What if someone had finished the bandwagon?"
if you think he will flip scum
? What would be wrong with that?

I showed the quotes backwards, which might have been confusing. The quote order is:

zMuffinMan wrote:
Quinnster wrote:You placed the gut vote then walked away. What if someone had finished the bandwagon?
There are two things wrong with this.
You're either assuming or you know Ant will flip town, because if someone had "finished the bandwagon" (hammering Ant) and he flipped scum, I don't really see why this would be cause for concern, except that it would perhaps be difficult to for others to figure out my intentions.

zMuffinMan wrote:
Quinnster wrote:I find it concerning because of the possible implications. I'm not willing to lynch anyone yet, I don't have strong enough reads on anyone to warrant that.
Why did you ask, "What if someone had finished the bandwagon?" if you think he will flip scum? What would be wrong with that?

He never said that he thought Ant would flip scum. I'm wondering why you thought he did. I never said anything about whether he thought Ant would flip town.

zMuffinMan wrote:
Ankamius wrote:From what I'm seeing, you're adamant that voting without explanation is not scummy. I find this assumption scummy.
Why?

zMuffinMan wrote:I'm still not going to share every thought I have. It's just someone finally asked me for my reads, and you are asking questions about why I did what I did. Like I said, I'll answer questions, but I'm not going to voluntarily share all my thoughts unless I personally deem it necessary.

zMuffinMan wrote:My only concern is finding scum and getting them lynched. Whether or not you get a read on me doesn't matter in the slightest to me. If you want to form a better read on me, then feel free to ask me questions. Like I said, I'll answer any questions you have. I'll also make statements and give information about my reads from time to time if I think I need to as a point of discussion. But I'm not going to give every little thought I have just because you don't like my playstyle.

zMuffinMan wrote:And I'm wondering why you think you should find me scummy for making a vote like that out of the blue before I explain it.

zMuffinMan wrote:Withholding "information" isn't scummy...

zMuffinMan wrote:No, it isn't. There are a number of reasons to withhold information, and plenty of them are not scum-motivated.

You have consistantly said that there are protown reasons for withholding information, but you have yet to explain

why

withholding information isn't scummy. I am not the only one putting suspicion on you for this. If you show me an acceptable reason why withholding information on day one is not scummy, I will accept it.

As it is right now, withholding information in my eyes is scummy because you are putting pressure on someone without giving them anything to respond to, making the vote entirely ignorable. It also strikes my eye because it tells me that you're not willing to leave a trail until you have to.

Ankamius · Post Post #281 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 7:00 am

Either way, this game is starting to die.

@MOD: Requesting a prod for embit. It's been over 3 1/2 days since his last post and over 4 days since his last content post.

Mr. Flay · Post Post #282 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 7:31 am

Looking for a replacement for embit and Quinnster (who warned me his access died).

Ant · Post Post #283 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 11:42 am

Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:I was thinking about changing my vote to korlash, but maybe embit and mrguy888 are staying out of the conversation intentionally so they don't give away their roles in a slip up. Yep, keeping my vote for mrguy.

While your vote for mrguy888 was originally a random vote, you kept it because you felt he was keeping information from us by being inactive for a while. In this post you implicate three people but stick with the easiest target. Reads as scum.

I mentioned Embit for the same reason I mentioned mrguy, because he was inactive at that point.

...What? Why the heck did I write Korlash here? I really need to start reading my posts before I submit them. But I guess my absentmindedness isn't a good excuse, is it? I cleared up my issues with him and haven't even mentioned his name up until this point.

Poiven wrote:

Ant wrote:A lynch vote/pressure vote combo. I just want more info, that's all. Something about him doesn't seem right. But from the other game korlash has played in (the one he put in a link) it seems like he always puts himself out there. (part of his tactic on gathering info I guess)

You never really did explain what you found scummy about Korlash besides his self-vote, which he explained; and you seemed content with the explanation.

That's exactly it, I was content with his explanation. I didn't find anything else scummy about him.

Poiven wrote:

Ant wrote:Sorry, I posted that before reading korlash's new post, I thought it went through but it didn't. I realize the faults in my logic, though. I'm just confusing myself though. I'll just keep my vote and see what happens. Here's a question korlash: do you think I'm lying about my claim? Do you believe I am scum?

I find this post the scummiest. You realize the faults in your logic (you realize you're voting for someone for bad reasons) but you're just keeping your vote there?

I just wanted to see what he would say. He didn't even react to it at all, though.

Poiven wrote:
Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:
Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't. But every game seems like a stretch. If he does then he must be used to having a lot of suspicion surrounding him.

It was proven that he does this very often; why are you still so suspicious of him?

His hidden reasons for voting for himself. He has already stated that he does it to gather more information by being attacked directly, but for what other reason could it be? Maybe he's just hiding the fact that he's scum by showing how willing he is to vote for himself, even if he does do it almost every game.

If he was a townie, then why even bother causing confusion by voting for himself?

Why would a scum vote for himself just to show that he is willing to? What other reason does he need than to gather information on other people? And if he does it almost every other game,
how is that a scum read
?

Ant wrote:
Ankamius wrote:
Ant wrote:I'll admit I am pointing fingers very quickly. Everyone seems town, though. Whoever is scum is doing a good job of hiding it. I'm just grasping at straws here.

Who seems most scummy to you? Is it still Korlash?

Honestly... Not any more. He did at first, but I guess the only one left is mrguy.

unvote

vote mrguy888

And that's how quickly you gave up your case on Korlash; even though nothing new had happened in that area. Why the change of mind all of a sudden? And why mrguy888? Just because he was inactive? Again going for an easy target just because you can.

I gave up because... there was nothing new happening in the area. And yes, i voted for Guy because he was inactive.

Mr. Flay · Post Post #284 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 11:54 am

jakesh97 replaces embit and Otolia replaces Quinnster, effective immediately.

Sixth Vote Count of Day One:

zMuffinMan - 2 (mrguy888,

Quinnster

Otolia)
Ant - 1 (Poiven)
mrguy888 - 1 (Ant)
Quinnster - 1 (zMuffinMan)
Dr Doom - 1 (Korlash)

Not Voting - 3 (

embit

jakesh97, Ankamius, Dr Doom)

With nine alive, it will take five votes to lynch.
Day One will end Friday, June 3rd at midnight server time.

Otolia · Post Post #285 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 12:01 pm

Hi guys. I am replacing Quinnster. I just read through the thread swiftly and nothing really made me want to keep my vote where it is.

UNVOTE: zMuffinMan

Otolia · Post Post #286 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 12:44 pm

Spoiler: Dr Doom

Spoiler: Ant

Spoiler: mrguy888

Spoiler: Poiven

VOTE: Mr. Doom

jakesh97 · Post Post #287 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 1:49 pm

Hey everyone. Ill be replacing Embit! Let's have a good game!

Ankamius · Post Post #288 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 2:03 pm

Welcome to the game Otolia and jakesh97. Good luck to you both and I hope you two have a good time. I'm looking forward to what both of you have to say about the game as it is right now.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #289 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 4:13 pm

Ankamius wrote:He never said that he thought Ant would flip scum. I'm wondering why you thought he did.

I've already explained this. In detail. A number of times.

Ankamius wrote:If you show me an acceptable reason why withholding information on day one is not scummy, I will accept it.

I don't want to clue scum in on who I think the most "town" players are. I don't want to give scum any clues about what I'm looking for when I analyse their posts - also for reaction purposes. It's unnecessary and redundant to flood a thread with every single thought you have and needlessly extends the length of the thread.

There, 3 reasons why it's not a good idea to share every bit of information you have.

Stop arguing with me on theory about my playstyle. There's obviously a reason I think it's not scummy, so obviously you should assume that I'd think it's not scummy regardless of my alignment, and therefore you're arguing a moot point, since it's not an alignment tell. Drop it. I'm done discussing this.

Korlash · Post Post #290 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 4:56 pm

z wrote:The problem being that generally once your foot is in the door, you don't stand there with your foot in the door doing absolutely nothing.

He had given two posts since then, one to defend himself and one dealing with your wagon, I don't think "absolutely nothing" is the right claim here. Although I wish you luck with your generalizing the players in the game though. Really hope that pans out for you.

z wrote:He clearly showed the tunneling mindset, even if he let up after two posts on Gir. And I do think he'd have continued tunneling Gir had Quinn not subtly coached him out of it.

Just think of all the possibilities we have at our disposal when we can start using what we think someone might have done as evidence. Can you explain to me the "tunnerling mindset" and how Guy showed it?

z wrote:Asking questions = bastardising your posts. Noted.

And don't you forget it!

z wrote:OK, and?

Oh right, I forgot. You like to shave off most of what a person says and just look at one tiny piece by itself. I'll remember that next time. Gotta get straight to the point with you least you stray off the path and get lost.

z wrote:There was never an implication that he is scum, just that he asked a scummy question and is accountable for explaining it. And yes, he is accountable for explaining it himself, not having you ride in on your stallion defending him so he doesn't need to worry about it.

Hey now, if you get to have a little buddy in Ant why can't I have one in Quin? Er... Wait... Aww I lost mine. Can I have a new one?

Anka wrote:You have consistantly said that there are protown reasons for withholding information, but you have yet to explain why withholding information isn't scummy. I am not the only one putting suspicion on you for this. If you show me an acceptable reason why withholding information on day one is not scummy, I will accept it.

There are pro-town reasons... Why is it that people accepted me when I said it but are giving z such a hard time... Feels like a double standard...

zMuffinMan · Post Post #291 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 7:54 pm

Korlash wrote:Just think of all the possibilities we have at our disposal when we can start using what we think someone might have done as evidence. Can you explain to me the "tunnerling mindset" and how Guy showed it?

Regardless of how you want to define tunneling, and how many posts someone needs before it's considered tunneling (I assume the number is 7 because that seems like a good arbirtrary number), he came into the game, ignored everything else that was happening while focused entirely on one player, then moved on to focusing entirely on another player while still ignoring everything else in the game. It is entirely possible he just wanted his foot in the door so he could proceed to ask no further questions....... but I don't think that's the case.

I'm not interested in debating whether or not he was tunneling with you, my point initially is that he was focusing entirely on one player at a time, while attacking me for not giving all my thoughts on the game... If you don't see the irony here, you're blind.

Poiven · Post Post #292 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 11:14 pm

Ant wrote:
Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:I was thinking about changing my vote to korlash, but maybe embit and mrguy888 are staying out of the conversation intentionally so they don't give away their roles in a slip up. Yep, keeping my vote for mrguy.

While your vote for mrguy888 was originally a random vote, you kept it because you felt he was keeping information from us by being inactive for a while. In this post you implicate three people but stick with the easiest target. Reads as scum.

I mentioned Embit for the same reason I mentioned mrguy, because he was inactive at that point.

...What? Why the heck did I write Korlash here? I really need to start reading my posts before I submit them. But I guess my absentmindedness isn't a good excuse, is it? I cleared up my issues with him and haven't even mentioned his name up until this point.

The mention of Korlash doesn't seem to be an accident, as you mention him a few other times. This is serious backpedaling.

Ant wrote:
Poiven wrote:

Ant wrote:A lynch vote/pressure vote combo. I just want more info, that's all. Something about him doesn't seem right. But from the other game korlash has played in (the one he put in a link) it seems like he always puts himself out there. (part of his tactic on gathering info I guess)

You never really did explain what you found scummy about Korlash besides his self-vote, which he explained; and you seemed content with the explanation.

That's exactly it, I was content with his explanation. I didn't find anything else scummy about him.

Poiven wrote:

Ant wrote:Sorry, I posted that before reading korlash's new post, I thought it went through but it didn't. I realize the faults in my logic, though. I'm just confusing myself though. I'll just keep my vote and see what happens. Here's a question korlash: do you think I'm lying about my claim? Do you believe I am scum?

I find this post the scummiest. You realize the faults in your logic (you realize you're voting for someone for bad reasons) but you're just keeping your vote there?

I just wanted to see what he would say. He didn't even react to it at all, though.

Of course he didn't react to it, there was nothing to react to. It was a vote from someone saying "I don't even know why I'm voting for you anymore." If you wanted a reaction, why didn't you somehow incite one, through questions or something of the sort?

[quote="Ant]

Poiven wrote:
Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:
Poiven wrote:
Ant wrote:Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't. But every game seems like a stretch. If he does then he must be used to having a lot of suspicion surrounding him.

It was proven that he does this very often; why are you still so suspicious of him?

His hidden reasons for voting for himself. He has already stated that he does it to gather more information by being attacked directly, but for what other reason could it be? Maybe he's just hiding the fact that he's scum by showing how willing he is to vote for himself, even if he does do it almost every game.

If he was a townie, then why even bother causing confusion by voting for himself?

Why would a scum vote for himself just to show that he is willing to? What other reason does he need than to gather information on other people? And if he does it almost every other game,
how is that a scum read
?

Ant wrote:
Ankamius wrote:
Ant wrote:I'll admit I am pointing fingers very quickly. Everyone seems town, though. Whoever is scum is doing a good job of hiding it. I'm just grasping at straws here.

Who seems most scummy to you? Is it still Korlash?

Honestly... Not any more. He did at first, but I guess the only one left is mrguy.

unvote

vote mrguy888

And that's how quickly you gave up your case on Korlash; even though nothing new had happened in that area. Why the change of mind all of a sudden? And why mrguy888? Just because he was inactive? Again going for an easy target just because you can.

I gave up because... there was nothing new happening in the area. And yes, i voted for Guy because he was inactive.[/quote]
But what made you change your mind from wanting to keep the vote to get information and changing the vote if nothing new happened there? If we accept zMuffinMan's (was it his? Maybe it was Dr Doom's, I'm not 100% sure) logic that you don't care who you lynch, as long as you lynch someone, and that your main target as new scum would be the IC, then this fits very well. Your case against the IC wasn't picking up any followers and so you just moved on to someone else, giving up a worthless case; because to you every case is as worthless as the next.

--

Moving on. zMuffinMan, after grilling you (along with others) and seeing your responses, I'm seeing it more as a play style. I think sometimes you can be a little crass and unnecessarily aggressive, and that gives off a slightly scummy read at first, but I think it's just who you are, and not who your alignment is. Willing to let that case go.

--

Otolia, I don't quite get what you are trying to say with the quoted posts. If you could post your own analysis to them, that would be really helpful; it just seems rather random.

Poiven · Post Post #293 (ISO) » Fri May 20, 2011 11:16 pm

EBWoP: "I gave up because... there was nothing new happening in the area. And yes, i voted for Guy because he was inactive.[/quote]"

That should be in the quote block from Ant, as that was the statement I was responding to.

Otolia · Post Post #294 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 1:04 am

Poiven wrote:Otolia, I don't quite get what you are trying to say with the quoted posts. If you could post your own analysis to them, that would be really helpful; it just seems rather random.

There is almost nothing to comment so far. A L-1 wagon was disbanded, the biggest wagon now is far from convincing. Everyone is trying to jump onto the smallest clue. It's a phase I particularly hate because it can get messy for me.

Poiven · Post Post #295 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 1:16 am

In what way can it get messy for you?

Why the vote on Doom? And I still don't quite understand the pattern of what you quoted.

Otolia · Post Post #296 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 1:56 pm

@Mr. Flay :

Can you prod Dr. Doom please ?

jakesh97 · Post Post #297 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 3:48 pm

Aww.. way to much information for my brain to handle. All the pages before this were odd. Too much changes in opinions. :/
btw, I am a total noob and probally will lurk and listen to the discussion slightly more then I partake in it. Insted of me trying to figure out this sloppy twelve pages, if you have any serious scumreads could you please post them again for all of us to see once more. It will just make things easier.

Ant, I would be voting for you but I agree that your just newbish as am I. I tend to be like you sometimes and just sheep the more experianced players. I'm just not sure what to do on my own yet.

Ankamius · Post Post #298 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 4:41 pm

Right now, I'm pretty much stuck until Dr Doom posts why he finds me scummy. Since zMuffinMan has explained himself adequately, I'm not as suspicious of him as I was before. I still find everyone else except for Dr Doom and Ant more protown than proscum. I'm finished waiting for Dr Doom and I still find him scummy, so VOTE: Dr Doom

Poiven · Post Post #299 (ISO) » Sat May 21, 2011 9:54 pm

Otolia, please stop avoiding my questions