Newbie 1116 -- Game Over

[Workdawg]

Scum generally aren't suspicious of their partners, so if you agree with someone else's suspicions, that can mean that they are more likely to be the same alignment as you.

Or they are just copying you to hide their scum intentions... I would call it a null tell in most cases...

But my point was that for both the people he has voted thus far, he's mentioned it as a reason, which I find suspicious.

I haven't had a chance to give him a thorough read through yet, but he will be next for sure.

[VisceraEyes]

1 vote for each person. This is going to be a long day. -.- Now if Workdawg could just vote for Grimmjow and bigAl vote for Zach, we'll REALLY have an interesting day going on.

[VisceraEyes]

Basically, whilst VisceraEyes and Workdawg are both scummy, I don't get the feeling they're partners. Look at VE's vote for Workdawg. It's pretty scummy, because it seems like an attempt to save Viscera's own ass by jumping the most popular suspect. He will argue that he suspected Workdawg yesterday, perhaps even more then Cobbler (though why he thinks that makes his involvement with that wagon less suspicious, idk). But the important thing about this is that the way VE promotes WD as the alternative to him doesn't look like a bus to me.

The thing that kept me from voting Al yesterday was that, although he didn't seem to be doing anything that was particularly difficult for scum to fake, his suspicions did basically align with mine. Well, of those suspicions, he chose to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment, and today he seems to have dropped workdawg suspicion pretty much entirely for reasons I can't entirely fathom, and quietly returned to pushing the horrendously newbish Cymru along with Grimmjow. His posts as a whole kind of give me the feel that he's just filling up space and not working particularly hard on catching scum. What arguments he does make (Cymru for being illogical) don't seem like real scumhunting (being bad at logic is not scummy).

So what all that says to me is that Al is the most likely partner for

either

Workdawg or Viscera. Also, I kind of get a 'Knows VE is town' vibe from the whole 'You may know you're town' thing. At the same time, that rings slightly townish on VE for me... people who get frustrated that the town can't see that they're obvtown (in their own eyes) are usually town. It's not something the scum have the chutzpah to fake. I can recall a few times when I thought it painfully obvious I was town, and was frustrated and thrown off my game by the fact that other players didn't seem to see it.

My only grievance with your vote is that clearly you think that there's scum between Workdawg and myself, and bigAl's flip won't give you any information, by definition. You're saying that he's the most likely partner for myself or Workdawg...great. So if he flips red, we're down a mafia...but then who was his partner? You're in the same position tomorrow that you're in today. And what if he flips green? Not only were you wrong about him and we're down ANOTHER townie, but you STILL don't have any further information to help you decide between Workdawg and myself.

bigAl has been posting like a good IC which is refreshing, but game-wise, his posts have been mostly...noncommittal. But I think noncommittal in a TOWN way. He will agree with someone's suspicion in the same breath as give reasons why they could be wrong, rather than saying 'Oh, I don't know...I could be wrong but...' he says 'While I agree that X is scummy for Y reason...' or 'I disagree with you there, but...' Actually giving an opinion on things rings very Town to me, so I have a more town read on bigAl than scum read.

[The Fonz]

care to expand on your vote Mr. Fonz?

A question, Mr. Vile fan, do you think I am incapable of expanding on my vote?

You state you 'just want to know' why I didn't explain, and then vote me before I had the chance to explain?

I asked you to explain, which you didn't and then you say that I voted without letting you give reason. You refused to give reason... Suspicious Much?

No, not at all. I obviously decided I'd get more information out of other people by not giving reasons straight away. You basically seemed to be trying to prevent me using this scumhunting tool by immediately asking for reasons (which itself is an interesting and noteworthy reaction). In turn, please explain WHY you think it is scummy to temporarily withhold reasoning in order to gauge reactions.

(Also the reason you gave sucks.)

You suck. 'X is the most likely partner for either Y or Z, who are the two other scummiest' is good reasoning.

@The Fonz

- You didn't vote for bigAl yesterday because his suspicions aligned with yours? Back in post 628, you said I "concerned" you because I voted for VE, who you felt was obvtown. I'm a bit concerned that your voting seems to be based on who agrees (or doesn't agree) with you.

I didn't vote BigAl yesterday because I thought you were scummier. You were scummy because you appeared to be attacking weaker players with what I saw as manufactured, trumped-up reasons that didn't actually correspond in my eyes to actual scumminess, as well as seeming to be making more effort to 'look town' than 'help town.'

Therefore, you looked like scum. BigAl, I got a bad vibe off of him, but that had to be countered by the fact that he appeared to be using decent arguments to go after people that I thought were scum. At the most base level, attacking town and defending scum are always scum tells. This doesn't mean that town won't do them. Of course, the fact that BigAl ended up on the town-cobblerfone lynch is a bad sign. In newbie games, there's almost always one scum on a day one town lynch, and as often as not both.



Also, the below quote rubs me the wrong way.

The thing that kept me from voting Al yesterday was that, although he didn't seem to be doing anything that was particularly difficult for scum to fake, his suspicions did basically align with mine. Well, of those suspicions,

he chose to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment

, and today he seems to have dropped workdawg suspicion pretty much entirely for reasons I can't entirely fathom, and quietly returned to pushing the horrendously newbish Cymru along with Grimmjow.

It seems a bit, devious (for lack of a better term, I guess) to imply that bigAl knew his choice of wagons would be on "the town one." At the time, no one (except scum, of course) knew the alignment of either. Subtly implying that bigAl is scum, are we?

Wow this is scummy. Obviously, he knew if he was scum and didn't if he was town. That quote does not at all, in any way, however, say that he chose to wagon a player who he knew was town. He may or may not have known who was town at the time, however that's not at all the implication of that post. It says that when faced with a choice between a player the whole town now knows to be town, and a player who may yet be scum, he went for the one who is known town. If he'd gone for you and you'd flipped town, same deal. If he'd gone for you and you'd flipped scum, he'd be much more townish for being a direct cause of a scum lynch. It's simply true to state that 'Al chose the town one over the one of still-unknown alignment.'

At the end of the above quote, you also attack bigAl for "dropping" his suspicion of me. I have to say, I find your vote suspicious for the same reason. At the end of the day, you had cobbler and I at "a virtual tie", and yet now you are going after bigAl? Tomie was suspicious of me, and he got NKed. I would think that would have focused a bit more attention on me, but I'm sliding out for bigAl to take my place?

W. T. F? It's not like my read on you disappeared. I mean, my justification for voting al was:

asically, whilst VisceraEyes and Workdawg are both scummy, I don't get the feeling they're partners.

So what all that says to me is that Al is the most likely partner for either Workdawg or Viscera.

How do you go from 'Fonz thinks Viscera and Workdawg are individually scummy, but are unlikely partners, and therefore bigAl who is also individually pretty scummy and the most likely partner for either of them is the best vote' to 'Fonz has dropped his suspicion of Workdawg?' I have a hard time seeing how anyone honestly draws that inference. The attack on me for attacking BigAl is very much noted.

My only grievance with your vote is that clearly you think that there's scum between Workdawg and myself, and bigAl's flip won't give you any information, by definition. You're saying that he's the most likely partner for myself or Workdawg...great. So if he flips red, we're down a mafia...but then who was his partner? You're in the same position tomorrow that you're in today. And what if he flips green? Not only were you wrong about him and we're down ANOTHER townie, but you STILL don't have any further information to help you decide between Workdawg and myself.

Why would I care about that? I want to lynch the most likely scumbag. If we lynch him and he flips scum, then we have the ability lynch both of you and Workdawg if we so choose. 'Lynching for information' is scummy. You lynch who you think is scum. Period. Besides, there will be reactions to a wagon on him which can be analysed. For instance, you actually being willing to come out outright and say you think al is town, as compared with Workdawg's attempt to make out that I am scummy for attacking Al, makes you a less likely al partner I think.

As for your read, sounding reasonable but sitting on the fence seems like a great way for a scum IC to 'look town' rather than 'help town.' Where's the drive? Where's the leadership? Where's any attempt to set the agenda? These are things i expect from town ICs. He's playing a very reactive game, and that says scum to me.

[Workdawg]

You seem to have a couple broken quotes above which makes it kinda hard to follow, but I think I've got it enough.

Firstly... I was just saying exactly what you said about voting for BigAl. You didn't say anything about thinking either VE or I was scummier than him.

The thing that kept me from voting Al yesterday was that, although he didn't seem to be doing anything that was particularly difficult for scum to fake, his suspicions did basically align with mine.

Go back and read the bolded part there from my previous post (which you quoted). You said HE CHOSE TO WAGON THE TOWN ONE. If he's scum, then he did knowingly choose a town wagon. If he's not scum though, he chose an unknown wagon. I don't know if bigAl is scum or not (though I admit I'm leaning town), but I'm not defending him either. I'm attacking your comments as they are very clearly intended to make bigAl look scummy by skewing the situation, and that IS scummy. If you had said "he ended up on a town wagon", then I would have no problem; but you didn't. You chose to word it in a way that is inaccurate and makes him look incredibly scummy. The way you worded it, it sounds like we have 5 scum in here, because we all CHOSE to lynch town.

[cymru96]

wow...disrespecting my country is pretty lame...

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

[VisceraEyes]

wow...disrespecting my country is pretty lame...

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

This is the second time you've been caught calling someone scummy for withholding reasoning when the circumstances surrounding the vote lend to the idea that he has reasons, but has a reason for withholding them.

I typically wait for 3 strikes, but...

UNVOTE: Workdawg

VOTE: cymru96

[cymru96]

really though...why withhold infomation?...shouldn't townies help each other out by telling all that they know.

[Nobody Special]

Votecount 2.04

cymru96 - 2 - Grimmjow, VisceraEyes
bigAl - 1 - The Fonz
The Fonz - 1 - cymru96
VisceraEyes - 1 - Zachrulez

Not Voting: Workdawg, bigAl

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Deadline: July 29 (expired on 2011-07-29 14:00:00)

V/LA: Zachrulez through July 17

[Zachrulez]

1 vote for each person. This is going to be a long day. -.- Now if Workdawg could just vote for Grimmjow and bigAl vote for Zach, we'll REALLY have an interesting day going on.

Lynch please.

[Zachrulez]

wow...disrespecting my country is pretty lame...

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

The vote itself is devoid of reasoning, but there was/is reasoning leading up to the vote.

[VisceraEyes]

1 vote for each person. This is going to be a long day. -.- Now if Workdawg could just vote for Grimmjow and bigAl vote for Zach, we'll REALLY have an interesting day going on.

Lynch please.

Yes yes, you're suspicious of me. I notice you're not doing much to further your case against me. What's the hold up? I know you're not at a loss of material...I was the only person you found suspicious in the WHOLE of day 1 and the only person you've expressed interest in lynching today.

[Zachrulez]

1 vote for each person. This is going to be a long day. -.- Now if Workdawg could just vote for Grimmjow and bigAl vote for Zach, we'll REALLY have an interesting day going on.

Lynch please.

Yes yes, you're suspicious of me. I notice you're not doing much to further your case against me. What's the hold up? I know you're not at a loss of material...I was the only person you found suspicious in the WHOLE of day 1 and the only person you've expressed interest in lynching today.

Well I'm V/LA for one, and for two, what pro-town purpose does the post I quoted serve?

[VisceraEyes]

Encouraging discussion, insinuating that we should start considering consolidating our votes, having a little laugh at the circumstances... Just trying to save this thread from the bowels of the [Game Over] threads really. Hope you're enjoying your time away! I myself am going to King's Island tomorrow! ^^

[Zachrulez]

Yeah, lets get everyone voting everyone, that will be productive and non chaotic.

[VisceraEyes]

That was the idea sir...grow a sense of humor my guy. Perhaps my jest about using the [sarcasm] tag should be employed.

[Zachrulez]

wow...disrespecting my country is pretty lame...

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

This is the second time you've been caught calling someone scummy for withholding reasoning when the circumstances surrounding the vote lend to the idea that he has reasons, but has a reason for withholding them.

I typically wait for 3 strikes, but...

UNVOTE: Workdawg

VOTE: cymru96

Do you think this is actually scummy or are you just going to go back and forth on which one of these two looks more likely to get lynched at any given moment?

[VisceraEyes]

I genuinely find it scummy. Note the appeal to emotion and everything. Granted, the logic behind it is reasonable...assuming he didn't have a reason, he could have been stalling for time. But considering the tone of his posts since he replaced in, I doubt he would have posted a 1-liner vote without some sort of reason. And like I said...he pulled this out yesterday too at the beginning of the day when bigAl voted for him with no reason given. It was a similar situation too - bigAl's post left me thinking that he definitely had a reason for his vote that he was intending to share later...but cymru96 immediately voted for him stating that he didn't have a reason for voting for him. It feels like he's trying to make these guys' actions look suspicious when they aren't.

[bigAl]

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

Cy: with Fonz's 6000 posts and dozens of games, there's no way that he was just stalling to think of a reason. Why put a vote out there when he could just keep quiet and not have to come up with a reason to begin with? It's not a vote without reasoning, it's a vote without stated reasoning. Even if he were stalling for time, now that he's explained his reasoning (which seemed valid reasoning to me), why are you still thinking him suspicious? He explained why he withheld info - to gauge reactions to the vote.

[The Fonz]

Go back and read the bolded part there from my previous post (which you quoted). You said HE CHOSE TO WAGON THE TOWN ONE. If he's scum, then he did knowingly choose a town wagon. If he's not scum though, he chose an unknown wagon. I don't know if bigAl is scum or not (though I admit I'm leaning town), but I'm not defending him either. I'm attacking your comments as they are very clearly intended to make bigAl look scummy by skewing the situation, and that IS scummy. .

No, you're being dishonest.

I said 'He chose to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment.' That is true, it is the situation as we can see it. In neither case (town or scum) was it a choice at the time between a known town player and a player of unknown alignment. If he's town, it's a choice between two players of unknown alignment, and if he's scum, two players of known. Therefore,

I could not possibly have been implying anything about what he knew then,

because stating that he was deciding at the time between a player he knew was town and a player he didn't know the alignment of

does not make any sense.

wow...disrespecting my country is pretty lame...

Lighten the fuck up, taffy boy.

You want to know why I think your act was scummy- You come back on day two with a vote without resoning which is suspicious in itself. You would have been questioned so you decided to make a vote and then stall for time to think of a reason.

1) Voting without a reason is not at all, ever, scummy in itself. I explained this on day one, I'm not going to do it again.

2)

Valid points but seriously... Fonz... I don't think you are incapable of expanding your vote I just want to know why you havent stated your reason.

This post appears to convey the belief that I do have a reason. Then later you turn around and say you think I didn't have one and made one up later. You have contradicted yourself.

[cymru96]

People see things differently over a period of time...it seemed that you had a reason and now it doesn't. You probably did have a reason but surely if you were town you would tell the town any info/suspicions that you have.

Also, please don't tell me to lighten up after you've insulted me and my country. What right do you have to first insult me, and then to tell me to lighten up?

[Workdawg]

No, you're being dishonest.

I said 'He chose to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment.' That is true, it is the situation as we can see it. In neither case (town or scum) was it a choice at the time between a known town player and a player of unknown alignment. If he's town, it's a choice between two players of unknown alignment, and if he's scum, two players of known. Therefore, I could not possibly have been implying anything about what he knew then, because stating that he was deciding at the time between a player he knew was town and a player he didn't know the alignment of does not make any sense.

The thing that kept me from voting Al yesterday was that, although he didn't seem to be doing anything that was particularly difficult for scum to fake, his suspicions did basically align with mine.

Well, of those suspicions, he

chose

to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment,

and today he seems to have dropped workdawg suspicion pretty much entirely for reasons I can't entirely fathom, and quietly returned to pushing the horrendously newbish Cymru along with Grimmjow.

chose
- 8 dictionary results
chose
1    [chohz]
–verb
1.
simple past tense of choose.

That's exactly what you said. Chose indicates past tense, which would mean at the time of the vote based on context of the quote.


Also, FWIW, I agree with cymru. Insulting him personally, and his country, is crossing a line. It has NO benefit to the game.

[The Fonz]

Oh, for fuck's sake. I called him a sheepshagger in a quote tag, which is a common colloquial term for 'Welshman' same as 'Yank' for American, 'Canuck' for Canadian, or 'Limey' for Englishman. It'd be like an Irishman being offended at being called a paddy. Fans of Welsh football teams sing 'One nil to the sheepshaggers' when they're winning ffs.

And I know what tense chose is in, you patronising ass. If you cannot see that 'He chose to wagon the town player' means 'he chose to wagon the player that we now know is town' and not 'he chose to wagon the player he knew at the time was town,' you're an idiot. You're trying to twist my words in order to misrepresent my intentions, and this is hella scummy.

It's like the Oedipus example. Oedipus chose to sleep with his mother. He didn't know she was his mother at the time, but he took a decision to sleep with a woman who, in fact,

was

his mother, so the statement is true.

[Nobody Special]

I am going to admit, up front, that I am a culturally ignorant American (as far as international relations go).

That said, I would like the country/culture/national/etc. comments to stop. It's unrelated to the game at hand, and it's detracting more than it's adding.

Any further discussion on this should be taken up with me through PM.

Thanks.

[Grimmjow]

The thing that kept me from voting Al yesterday was that, although he didn't seem to be doing anything that was particularly difficult for scum to fake, his suspicions did basically align with mine.

Well, of those suspicions, he

chose

to wagon the town one over the one of unknown alignment,

and today he seems to have dropped workdawg suspicion pretty much entirely for reasons I can't entirely fathom, and quietly returned to pushing the horrendously newbish Cymru along with Grimmjow.

That's exactly what you said. Chose indicates past tense, which would mean at the time of the vote based on context of the quote.

I actually agree wholeheartedly with Workdawg on this. It does seem as though you are indicating that he knew while on the wagon that he was town. Which does, in turn, cast a scummy light on Al.

FoS: The Fonz