Newbie 1104 -- Game over

[gbevilchaos]

Vote Lord of Graves

.

He tried to start a bandwagon on Frost and then stopped posting. He hasn't posted in several days and wasn't posting frequently before that.

Vote: Frostbite

So he hasn't been around and I don't even think he confirmed then he swoops in and puts a guy at L-1. Lurking plus trying to get a quick lynch on the fifth page. Smells like scum.

But my main reason is because he said he wanted to stay alive. Newbie reasoingn? Maybe. But only scum should ever try to appease town.

His reasoning was rather weak. He blamed Frostbite for lurking when he himself has lurked. He also tried to say that only scum should try to explain themselves to town. This isn't true - everyone should explain their votes. If this is what he believes, however, he wouldn't be explaining his vote if he was town. He attempted to explain his vote in his post, so I have to assume that he's acting how he thinks the scum should.

[forest_air]

so what info were you hoping for?

I was wondering if anyone would follow my vote. I also did that to see who else other than yourself would question my voting you. With so few people in this game, it was an attempt to get people to question my motives and for me to hopefully learn something about other players.

Plus I was wondering what CC would say. A few times when I changed my vote, he seems to imply that my reasoning for those vote changes was because of something he said. I find that scummy to note such things. There are other players in the game aside from him who I can decide to take their opinions from to decide on my vote.

Although he has been making a lot of posts, many of them were fluff, and his voting habits are making me suspicious.

Vote: CaptainCuddles

[Espeonage]

V/LA for the rest of the weekend

[gbevilchaos]

so what info were you hoping for?

I was wondering if anyone would follow my vote. I also did that to see who else other than yourself would question my voting you. With so few people in this game, it was an attempt to get people to question my motives and for me to hopefully learn something about other players.

Plus I was wondering what CC would say. A few times when I changed my vote, he seems to imply that my reasoning for those vote changes was because of something he said. I find that scummy to note such things. There are other players in the game aside from him who I can decide to take their opinions from to decide on my vote.

Although he has been making a lot of posts, many of them were fluff, and his voting habits are making me suspicious.

Vote: CaptainCuddles

FoS CC

I had noticed the fluff as well. I'm not going to change my vote to him yet, as I want to see where the inquiry about Lord of Graves goes, but I'm definitely going to keep a close eye on CC.

[noragar]

Vote:CaptainCuddles

[forest_air]

@noragar, care to explain your vote?

[noragar]

@noragar, care to explain your vote?

I suspected him early on (see http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 3#p3046023) and since that time, he hasn't said anything which would allay those suspicions, and I don't see anybody else as a more likely candidate at the moment.

[CaptainCuddles]

I see people voting as TS was asking people why they were being so conservative with their votes. Early on I screwed up because of some misunderstandings about how the games were played on MS.

@forest_air: Could you explain what you find suspicious about my voting habits? My current vote on Frost, I think, is justifiable. Others were random (TS) or OMGUS votes (which brought gb to L-1 >.> but then I really thought the entire game was going to end by June 3 and I didn't understand why people were being so slow).

The fluff posts was a result of, again, not understanding what the hell I am doing or the consequences of such posts. VI

[Twistedspoon]

yeah, I'm still swish with Lord of graves

[gbevilchaos]

yeah, I'm still swish with Lord of graves

Same. My top 2 scum candidates are Graves and CC at the moment, but Graves isn't getting any attention.

Can everyone post their opinions on Graves? We need to start discussing him. CC has been discussed already, and nothing new has really popped up. Let's wait for him to do something else wrong before we all default back to the guy who was the easiest target during his first few days of play.

[forest_air]

I see people voting as TS was asking people why they were being so conservative with their votes. Early on I screwed up because of some misunderstandings about how the games were played on MS.

@forest_air: Could you explain what you find suspicious about my voting habits? My current vote on Frost, I think, is justifiable. Others were random (TS) or OMGUS votes (which brought gb to L-1 >.> but then I really thought the entire game was going to end by June 3 and I didn't understand why people were being so slow).

The fluff posts was a result of, again, not understanding what the hell I am doing or the consequences of such posts. VI

You're not the only new person here. Even if you didn't understand what the hell you were doing, being new isn't really much of an excuse, as anyone could claim themselves to be new. This makes you seem more scummy.

And the OMGUS votes were pretty much what I was referring to.

[forest_air]

Same. My top 2 scum candidates are Graves and CC at the moment, but Graves isn't getting any attention.

Can everyone post their opinions on Graves? We need to start discussing him. CC has been discussed already, and nothing new has really popped up. Let's wait for him to do something else wrong before we all default back to the guy who was the easiest target during his first few days of play.

I'll do some re-reading and get back to you on that later on.

Fixed quote tag. ~~NS

[gbevilchaos]

I see people voting as TS was asking people why they were being so conservative with their votes. Early on I screwed up because of some misunderstandings about how the games were played on MS.

@forest_air: Could you explain what you find suspicious about my voting habits? My current vote on Frost, I think, is justifiable. Others were random (TS) or OMGUS votes (which brought gb to L-1 >.> but then I really thought the entire game was going to end by June 3 and I didn't understand why people were being so slow).

The fluff posts was a result of, again, not understanding what the hell I am doing or the consequences of such posts. VI

I'm scum. Oh wait, I didn't mean that. I'm just new. Forget what I said.

See how that defense doesn't work? Scumtells are scumtells, regardless of whether you're new or not. After you learn the nature of the game, experience doesn't matter as to how your posting should be interpretted. If you display a tell, we won't just dismiss it because you're new and didn't mean to appear scummy. You've appeared scummy and you have to deal with that.

[Nobody Special]

chkflip has been prodded.

[Nobody Special]

Votecount 1.06

198Frostbite - 2 - CaptainCuddles, Lord of Graves
CaptainCuddles - 2 - forest_air, noragar
Lord of Graves - 2 - Twistedspoon, gbevilchaos

Not Voting: chkflip, Espeonage, 198Frostbite

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

Deadline: June 3.

V/LA: Espeonage, through Sunday May 22

[chkflip]

Sorry about my absence - catching up now.

[forest_air]

@gbevilchaos: I think the reason that LoG isn't getting much attention is because of his lack of posting. He's also been quite inactive lately, and it's not like he's on the other side of the world, or had any reason to be gone. But he might have school/work or something or maybe got bored of the slow pacing of the game?

I was aware that LoG hadn't posted much already, but I simply failed to notice how empty his posts were. Maybe that's why I didn't really put him much into consideration when choosing whom to vote for. But CC voting for Frostbite, even when LoG didn't have a lot of information to go on, seems kind of scummy to me. Does LoG have any other reasoning to vote for Frostbite than the little he has given us? Do you, CC, have any more reason to keep your vote for Frostbite other than what you've already told us?

Aside from the voting, which he retracted as soon as he saw what was wrong, Frostbite hasn't done anything particularly scummy. Maybe he hasn't posted as much as we would have liked him to, but with his situation, there isn't much to be done, I guess.

Now I'm wondering why LoG voted for Frostbite with such little evidence. And CC's motivation to do so.

When you get on, Frostbite, can you tell us what you have to say about CC and LoG?

I'm still suspicious of CC, however, and as I said earlier, his "I'm new" excuse is rather lame. I'll keep my vote on him for the time being, but my suspicion for LoG has gone up.

[chkflip]

Scum skimming detected. Easy town cred attempt detected.

FoS

: noragar

What is scum skimming? It wasn't in the glossary and I can't really respond to the accusation without knowing what it is.

As far as easy town cred, I assume you mean answering someone's question about what abbreviations meant? Really??? That's scummy??? Why single me out to FoS instead of also FoS'ing Twisted who said almost the exact same thing at the exact same time?

I'm saying that the question was answered not two posts above the one I quoted. Answering the question itself isn't scummy, no, but the fact that you best case scenario "didn't see" the answer means that, at best, you were skimming the hell out of the thread at that point. Meaning you're scum just trying to blend in with that post. Doesn't sit well, especially since the timing wasn't as close as you're insinuating here.

[gbevilchaos]

@Mod: Is LoG being replaced? He's been inactive for half way to forever and we kind of need a response to the accusations against him to figure out how to vote.

[noragar]

I'm saying that the question was answered not two posts above the one I quoted. Answering the question itself isn't scummy, no, but the fact that you best case scenario "didn't see" the answer means that, at best, you were skimming the hell out of the thread at that point. Meaning you're scum just trying to blend in with that post. Doesn't sit well, especially since the timing wasn't as close as you're insinuating here.

Check the time stamps.

CC asked a question at 6:55pm
TS posted an answer to the question at 6:58pm
TS posted again to correct the link from the first response at 6:58pm
TS posted to say "my name is on that page" at 6:59pm
I posted my response at 7:00pm

So your argument is that I saw the question that TS had already answered, realized (as scum) that this would be a brilliant opportunity to make myself seem like town, went off to find the URL of the glossary (instead of just copying the link from TS's message since his first link was wrong), created a mail message, copied the two definitions from the glossary into the mail message, copied the URL for the glossary into the mail message, and sent the message. All of this in two minutes???

You really think this is a more likely scenario than both of us seeing the question at the same time and answering it at the same time?

Yes, I saw after I posted my answer that TS had already responded also. But you can't go back and edit or delete posts, so there it sits.

So again - why is my "skimming the hell out of the thread" and answering a question more suspicious than TS skimming the hell out of the thread (two minutes sooner even) and answering the same question?

[gbevilchaos]

I'm saying that the question was answered not two posts above the one I quoted. Answering the question itself isn't scummy, no, but the fact that you best case scenario "didn't see" the answer means that, at best, you were skimming the hell out of the thread at that point. Meaning you're scum just trying to blend in with that post. Doesn't sit well, especially since the timing wasn't as close as you're insinuating here.

Check the time stamps.

CC asked a question at 6:55pm
TS posted an answer to the question at 6:58pm
TS posted again to correct the link from the first response at 6:58pm
TS posted to say "my name is on that page" at 6:59pm
I posted my response at 7:00pm

So your argument is that I saw the question that TS had already answered, realized (as scum) that this would be a brilliant opportunity to make myself seem like town, went off to find the URL of the glossary (instead of just copying the link from TS's message since his first link was wrong), created a mail message, copied the two definitions from the glossary into the mail message, copied the URL for the glossary into the mail message, and sent the message. All of this in two minutes???

You really think this is a more likely scenario than both of us seeing the question at the same time and answering it at the same time?

Yes, I saw after I posted my answer that TS had already responded also. But you can't go back and edit or delete posts, so there it sits.

So again - why is my "skimming the hell out of the thread" and answering a question more suspicious than TS skimming the hell out of the thread (two minutes sooner even) and answering the same question?

Your argument that you didn't skim is correct. It's unlikely that you saw TS's response. You were probably busy finding the link while he was posting.

At the same time, TS didn't skim. He answered the question after it was asked. He did the exact same thing as you. Don't try to deflect blame on a random person while trying to claim your own innocence. That looks scummy.

[noragar]

Your argument that you didn't skim is correct. It's unlikely that you saw TS's response. You were probably busy finding the link while he was posting.

At the same time, TS didn't skim. He answered the question after it was asked. He did the exact same thing as you. Don't try to deflect blame on a random person while trying to claim your own innocence. That looks scummy.

I'm not trying to deflect blame. My argument is that there's no blame to be deflected. My question is to Chkflip as to why when he sees two people do the exact same thing, he FoS's one of them and says nothing about the other one. At no time did I mean to imply that TS did anything scummy because he didn't.

Also, based on the context from Chkflip's message I had assumed that "scum skimming" was constantly reading the thread looking for an opportunity to jump in and do something. Based on gbevil's response, it apparently means something else. So I'm still looking for a definition. So if somebody could wait the appropriate amount of time to show that they're not "scum skimming" and take whatever precautions are necessary to make sure nobody else is answering the question at the same time, I'd appreciate if someone could explain what it is.

Thanks.

[Nobody Special]

@Mod: Is LoG being replaced? He's been inactive for half way to forever and we kind of need a response to the accusations against him to figure out how to vote.

If he hasn't responded to his prod in an hour and forty minutes, he's being replaced. (You have 48 hours to respond to a prod.)

[gbevilchaos]

I'm new so I could be wrong, but I thought scum skimming was looking over a thread quickly and not reading through the entire thing prior to posting. This would be scummy because only scum wouldn't need to read carefully to look for tells.

[chkflip]

Because my FoS isn't intently on answering the easy question. The FoS was for skimming, the fact that it was an easy question was just icing. I have seemed to made a mistake time wise so I can see you just not paying attention to the preview and hitting post again. There was more interest in your reaction to being called out at all tbh. Town motivated response imo.

Chaos has the definition correct iirc.