Newbie 480: Game Over!

[pablito]

Vote Count

Erg0 (2): ZeekLTK, Porochaz
ZeekLTK (1): Erg0
peapod (1): Ripley
leetonicon (1): Civil Scum

Not Voting: peapod, leetonicon

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch!

[Porochaz]

Thank you

[ZeekLTK]

One of his main talking points against me was that I had only requested one of my voters to reconsider their vote, and while I wouldn't expect him to re-hash every point or suspicion about me in every post, here it sounds as if my panicking was the only set-off. Over the course of the post he flip-flops back and forth on me a little. Saying I do look scummy, then maybe not, and then 'well even if he is scum we may as well leave him there'. Eventually he accuses Ergo of exactly the behavior Ripley has just mentioned.
So, in that vein, Ripley the timing of other people's defense (Ergo) of me and deflection (Zeek) away from me, would make me lean towards accusing Zeek of scummy behavior.

Well I don't know what your point of this is because I have never come out and specifically said "I am sure CS is mafia", so I don't see why flip-flopping is worth pointing out or even "scummy behavior" on my part. Is it bad that I am still considering that you could be either scum or town and exploring both possibilities instead of picking one and blindly making accusations based on that choice?

That is what lead me to the point against erg0 - considering that you could be town and examining his actions from that perspective.

[Erg0]

ErgO: This post

Written by Zeet

Let's look at erg0 shall we? No one else seems to be paying attention to his actions and are just accepting that he is attacking me for questioning someone who is acting suspicious (is that pro-town?).

On page 1 what did erg0 contribute? The first random vote of the game, and then a post with very little (if any) substance to kinda remind us that "hey, I'm here... even though I'm not contributing anything".

All he says is that "CS seems to be a little panicky" to address the situation that was a major talking point of the first page (and still is), and he just leaves it to that. Then he waits and, instead of following up on his own suspicions, he picks out people (me in this case) who are making valid cases and, for whatever reason, tries to divert attention on them.

Is it because he is CS' scum partner? Maybe. Or possibly another answer is that he is scum and knows that CS is town, so he is free to defend him because if somehow we do lynch CS then erg0 can be like "hey look, I was never trying to get him lynched, I'm not suspicious".

I think this post sums up what I am thinking currently, he's trying to be both sides of the fence and it's not working very well. His latter posts whilst having substance don't sit right, in post 54 he is sorta defending CS and then says what both me and CS have been saying about leet. Whilst you suggested CS was a bit panicky early on (according to Zeek, Im going to go back and check this) and were unsure about him, you've defended him to quite an extent but there is nowhere in this thread showing why you changed your mind... It doesn't sit right with me at all and I'm going to go and look at the thread again to look at some of the content in your posts but I am already thinking your scum.

Major Fos: Erg0

whilst I read over and then will probably vote right afterwards

I never changed my mind on CS, I've said the same thing all along: he overreacted to being put at two votes. I don't believe that I ever said that this was scummy, or even that I was suspicious of him. Post 54 gives a pretty thorough explanation of why I don't necessarily equate panic with scumminess in this instance.

In fact, post 54 addresses the entirety of the post that you quoted, and neither you or Zeek have really commented on my reply (except to say that I was defending CS, which is true and consistent with my previous posts).

[Erg0]

Well I don't know what your point of this is because I have never come out and specifically said "I am sure CS is mafia", so I don't see why flip-flopping is worth pointing out or even "scummy behavior" on my part. Is it bad that I am still considering that you could be either scum or town and exploring both possibilities instead of picking one and blindly making accusations based on that choice?

That is what lead me to the point against erg0 - considering that you could be town and examining his actions from that perspective.

So you're voting me on the basis that I called you out on a craplogic case against someone that you don't believe is scum? Surely that just makes me perceptive?

[Civil Scum]

Overall however, Zeek's efforts have a pro-town feel and I am still more concerned with peapod.

Ummm...

Well I don't know what your point of this is because I have never come out and specifically said "I am sure CS is mafia", so I don't see why flip-flopping is worth pointing out or even "scummy behavior" on my part. Is it bad that I am still considering that you could be either scum or town and exploring both possibilities instead of picking one and blindly making accusations based on that choice?

That is what lead me to the point against erg0 - considering that you could be town and examining his actions from that perspective.

I'm glad you're doing it, if ur town. I just made the observation that your attacks/suspicions about me have not been all too consistent. I went on to say the manner in which you've done it appears townish.

As much as Ergo's defense of me could be viewed as a scum tactic, I'm still a bit stuck on leetonicon. As porochaz mentioned, his thinking isn't real noobish, it's just weird. The heat begins to come off of me and what does he do? Unvote, retract all reasoning, etc. etc. all u have to do is read his posts. The unvote doesn't set it off for me though. I'd say that it's his post after he unvotes.

eta weird... when I previewed my post, Porochaz's comments weren't there... believe me or not, but it looks like CS is completely off the hot seat.

This gives me the impression that he is worried about following, about shifting his position. His post right before this was strange too. Most troubling were the assumptions he adressed, not becuase he speaks as if corrected and falsly assuming, but because he cites disagreements between him and I as the justificaitons for his vote. He was voting for me because we weren't seeing eye to eye, is how this reads for me.
From his previous posts, this was clearly not behind any of his suspicion.

I came in with certain assumptions which may or may not have had any validity to them. These are below and hopefully justify why I've said/done what I've done so far. More importantly, my original intention was to then lay out why I'm still most suspicous of CS, by laying out places where he appears to be strategically twisting what I've been saying, the problem being that when I went back to cite places where he did, if I look at them objectively, he's making certain assumptions which are opposite certain assumptions I was making so I don't agree with him, but I can't say it's as scummy as I was thinking.

???? They show that you're behavior is very odd, you don't lay out why u are most supicious of me (in fact you unvote me after objectively viewing my assumptions, which are?), strategic twisting had nothing to do with any of the questions I asked you (just wanted you to clarify the ideas in your posts).
My disagreement with your assumptions and concept of BW's and whatever the hell else is what made you think I was scum, Leet?
(Ergo had recently mentioned that Leet's inactivity and dead-lock vote on me were suspicious)-> Leet goes on to invoke some strange/insincere reasoning as to why he no longer feels I am most suspicious. This looks a bit like justifying an unvote which would otherwise seem very suspect, and still does in my book.

Peapod is still lurking, and possibly Ergo is buttering me up, but Leet's insincereity is still my number one choice.

[Civil Scum]

I think that labeling Zeek's case as pure "crap logic" is a slightly unfair overstatement. I'm happy this sparked so much debate, and I'm happy the good guys came out on top!
Ergo, you seem quite defensive. I am sorry you are coming under so much fire for defending a noob, but you did explain what I had been trying to clear up in precise detail. So either you are perceptive or are buddying up, or both. I agree that Zeek's case against you, while not exactly crap logic, is about as strong as the one directed at me.

[Erg0]

Quick clarification: "craplogic" is not quite as derogatory as it sounds, it's just a term I (and many others) use for a case based on bad reasoning.

CS, scum would have no better idea of what you were trying to say than town. Once again, all this proves is that I'm perceptive enough to correctly interpret your intent. I come under fire for this sort of thing in almost every newbie game I play, so I knew what I was getting myself into.

[ZeekLTK]

Honestly I just think erg0 is grasping at straws at the moment to get the pressure off him, but if we assume the logic is as "crappy" as he claims it is, then why, after I initially said it (in the post that I changed my vote), did both Ripley and Porochaz basically say they were thinking the same thing? Porochaz even changed his vote as well, citing that as a main reason.

So maybe that is worth looking into (disregarding erg0 for a minute): it's one thing to have "bad logic" and post it yourself - it is another thing to agree with someone else's "bad logic" and make actions based on it. So what motives do Ripley and especially Porochaz have for agreeing with my "bad logic" (if anyone else besides erg0 and CS think it is bad too)?

[ZeekLTK]

Actually, Porochaz' vote really has me thinking, and wondering...

In his initial post he said "Major FOS: erg0".

But then 5 minutes later (literally, 5 minutes), he changed his stance from "FOS" to "vote" - and no one posted in between either, which makes it more odd.

Why? What changed, in the 5 minutes in between your posts, to make you go from "I want to express that I also think this guy is suspicious but there's not enough evidence for me to vote against him" to "I think this guy is most likely to be scum and will vote for him"??

[ZeekLTK]

Ah sorry for triple post but I went back and read it more carefully and I noticed that at the end he said he was about to vote

"Major Fos: Erg0 whilst I read over and then will probably vote right afterwards".

Sorry I overlooked that so I guess nevermind about post 84.

[Erg0]

Can you give quotes where Ripley and Porochaz agree with you? I can't see them saying that specifically, but I'm not sure if I'm looking at the right part of the thread.

I think that this line in Porochaz's first post explains the delay in voting:

Major Fos: Erg0 whilst I read over and then will probably vote right afterwards

It is a little strange to make a big post and then vote five minutes later with no additional reasoning, but I guess I can see how he might have written it up and then done a re-read before voting. I'm more interested in why he's quoting a case that I already responded to without acknowledging the response.

[Porochaz]

The overreaction aspect has been well explored, I didn't see a need to throw my two cents in as well at that point, because CS was already under plenty of pressure and I wasn't going to put him at lynch-1 for it. The appropriate thing to do at that point was look around for other topics of conversation.

But at that point you weren't prepared to defend him either. Surely if you thought that it wasn't scummy all the way through you may have played a bigger part on page 2?

Quite often the explanation for someone doing something really odd like freaking out on two votes is that they don't know any better. If you're going to freak out at two votes, you'll do it as a townie or as scum. Nobody wants to be lynched, after all. There's no question that it's overly defensive, but can you present a reason why it's

scummy

?

It wasnt just the over defensiveness, it was everything from and after the second request to take my vote down. A couple of people (including yourself?) told him that it was nothing to be worried about and its just to generate discussion. But he asked for a second time and OMGUS me purely on the basis I was voting him thats what made me think he was scummy.

Likewise, I don't necessarily think that Zeek is scummy, just that his page 1 argument wasn't as valid as others took it to be. The OMGUS vote isn't helping that situation, though.

Right time to clear this one up. You do know were talking about the OMGUS vote against me and leetonicon, don't you, because the leet one looked random enough. The only reason I ask is because when you talked about it you quoted post 12 (?) Which was the one he OMGUS leet.

I personally think the OMGUS vote was a big part of this and was a desperate scum trying to find a way out

I'm mildly suspicious of leetonicon, as he's kind of stayed out of the way while keeping his vote on CS. I don't like the way he immediately speculated on a CS/Porochaz pairing on page 1; it's far too early to be forming conspiracy theories. Still looking at everyone else

Whilst were here, he kept his vote on CS because it was random, at the start the only person to go against was CS. However I agree with you that his theory was strange and slightly to early.

The Fos then the vote happened purely because I wanted to make sure I had my facts straight before voting, I looked and found my reasoning to be good enough to vote without any further explanation. I mean if your looking for a reason why I voted just look directly above that post.

[Erg0]

Just briefly, the OMGUS vote I'm referring to is Zeek's vote on me in post 53.

I'll respond to the rest of your post later on.

[Porochaz]

Let's look at erg0 shall we? No one else seems to be paying attention to his actions and are just accepting that he is attacking me for questioning someone who is acting suspicious (is that pro-town?).

On page 1 what did erg0 contribute? The first random vote of the game, and then a post with very little (if any) substance to kinda remind us that "hey, I'm here... even though I'm not contributing anything".

All he says is that "CS seems to be a little panicky" to address the situation that was a major talking point of the first page (and still is), and he just leaves it to that. Then he waits and, instead of following up on his own suspicions, he picks out people (me in this case) who are making valid cases and, for whatever reason, tries to divert attention on them.

Is it because he is CS' scum partner? Maybe. Or possibly another answer is that he is scum and knows that CS is town, so he is free to defend him because if somehow we do lynch CS then erg0 can be like "hey look, I was never trying to get him lynched, I'm not suspicious".

unvote, vote: erg0

Can someone clarify OMGUS to me... I assumed it was purely voting for someone because they voted for you. Now Im not going into whether hes right or wrong here but it seems that Zeek has clarifyied his reasons why he voted for Erg0 and that this shouldnt be an OMGUS like Erg0 said it was the post below. I only bring this up now as I thought he was meaning CS's OMGUS vote on me.

[Erg0]

In the strictest sense, OMGUS is as you said: voting someone for no reason other than the fact that they voted for you.

I'm using it here in a slightly broader sense - I believe that the main reason Zeek found my actions scummy enough for a vote was because they were directed towards him.

[Porochaz]

K Thanks, thats fair enough I guess

[Ripley]

I've done a reread and will post my thoughts without attempting to form them into a neat essay with conclusions.

peapod: At the risk of getting slammed for pressuring an afflicted newbie, I think peapod needs to make a rapid decision as to whether she's ready to start playing properly and posting regular content. If not, she could ask to be replaced; there's absolutely no stigma attached to that, it happens all the time. The sooner a replacement gets the chance to start playing, if that's how it's going to end up, the better. Not only do they have less reading to catch up on, but the more pages that go past with one player not contributing, the harder it is for the rest of us to form any opinions about that player.

leetonicon, Porochaz: these two players are linked in my mind due to the strong similarities arising from their dealings with Civil Scum. Both vote him jokingly on account of his name. Civil Scum votes first one, then the other, then reverts to the first. Finally, both unvote CS almost simultaneously.

leetonicon seemed to come up with a string of theories, both general and specific, very early in the game: 2 bandwagons good, 3 bandwagons (I think) better; the notion of "unstable" or "incestuous" bandwagons; players at L-1 good; the idea that Porochaz and CS were working together. And all this as early as Post 22! CS has made some observations about leetonicon's posts with which I broadly agree. He (leet) has backed down quickly when his views are challenged, though you can't make too much of this from a newbie in their first game. I also thought CS made some good points about leet's Post 66:

I came in with certain assumptions which may or may not have had any validity to them. These are below and hopefully justify why I've said/done what I've done so far. More importantly, my original intention was to then lay out why I'm still most suspicous of CS, by laying out places where he appears to be strategically twisting what I've been saying, the problem being that when I went back to cite places where he did, if I look at them objectively, he's making certain assumptions which are opposite certain assumptions I was making so I don't agree with him, but I can't say it's as scummy as I was thinking.

???? They show that you're behavior is very odd, you don't lay out why u are most supicious of me (in fact you unvote me after objectively viewing my assumptions, which are?), strategic twisting had nothing to do with any of the questions I asked you (just wanted you to clarify the ideas in your posts).
My disagreement with your assumptions and concept of BW's and whatever the hell else is what made you think I was scum, Leet?
(Ergo had recently mentioned that Leet's inactivity and dead-lock vote on me were suspicious)-> Leet goes on to invoke some strange/insincere reasoning as to why he no longer feels I am most suspicious. This looks a bit like justifying an unvote which would otherwise seem very suspect, and still does in my book.

I don't see the "strategic twisting" leetonicon refers to. Civil Scum in Post 25 asked a lot of questions about the points leet had made regarding bandwagons etc. When leet replies (Post 35) he doesn't appear to think any twisting has gone on. So what does he mean? I agree that his arguments in post 66, and the list of assumptions, don't have anything to do with his reason for voting CS in the first place and don't really explain the unvote.

Porochaz: Said he was sure CS was scum back on page 1, which now rings very hollow because Porochaz is voting for someone else. I've already asked him about this and he explained it was part tactical, part over-keenness:

The "sure" comment was A. To keep the pressure on Civil and B. a slight mistake on my part showing my over keenness in the game... I believe that him asking me to take a vote off is suspicious and I think that his OMGUS vote confirms that I should be voting for him currently, but no, to be honest, I'm not sure. I would be very foolish of me to be so. Only 3 people, myself included, have talked in depth, in this game, 33% of the suspects (viewed from me).

It's usually a mistake if you're protown to say anything that's untrue, even if your intent is in part to spark a reaction. It undermines your own credibility. It was never realistic to make such a claim so early in the game, and Porochaz knew at the time how few people had spoken. I've seen premature claims of "I'm sure X is town" from newbie townies before, but never on page 1.

However Porochaz does seem to be putting a good effort into scum hunting and I'm not particularly suspicious of him at this stage.

On to Erg0.

The overreaction aspect has been well explored, I didn't see a need to throw my two cents in as well at that point, because CS was already under plenty of pressure and I wasn't going to put him at lynch-1 for it. The appropriate thing to do at that point was look around for other topics of conversation.

Ah, the power of words. Is there any practical difference between "looking around for other topics of conversation" and "trying to change the subject"? Yet one sounds so much sneakier than the other.

I'm not sure what I think about Erg0 yet, to be honest. He seems quite open about directing the conversation, and according to himself makes a habit of stepping in to perceptively explain the intention of newbies. This is not a style I instinctively favor, though it might of course be just that: a question of style. But he has definitely been actively helpful to CS, who incidentally seemed on the whole not to be struggling particularly, but to be well able to defend and explain himself.

I think CS caused unnecessary confusion by describing his vote on leetonicon as "obligatory" without at the time explaining what he meant by that. I don't blame Zeet for misunderstanding. I don't think this issue is going to be helpful towards finding scum. It was just a distraction.

I have already said that I thought Zeet's other original point about CS's different treatment of leet and of Porochaz was worth making.

Over the course of the post he flip-flops back and forth on me a little. Saying I do look scummy, then maybe not

Yeah, but I do that kind of thing myself all the time, I see things about a person that seem scummy and things that don't. I don't believe there's any point holding back your thoughts until you've reached a firm conclusion about a person. Better to say whatever you think even if it's inconclusive. Somebody else may pick up on one of your thoughts and take it further. As I said at the start of this post, you can't always streamline your ideas into a neatly argued essay.

[leetonicon]

Ripley:
I know your comment on dropping out was directed at Peapod, but I've also not been posting that much for a variety of personal reasons and after weighing the options, I've asked Pablito to replace me. Hopefully doing so doesn't make for an overly neurotic experience for the rest of you. I'm going to try to post some sort of last analysis post later tonight but I've been trying to come up with something useful to add and haven't had a lot of luck lately.

Sorry all.

replaced by destructor

[Porochaz]

Tis ok, your going through it the right way and I hope your problems are resolved soon

[Ripley]

No need to apologise. I hope things go OK for you and that you enjoyed the game at least a little bit. I'll miss your avatar actually, so many people seem to go for dark sinister gloomy images, it was cheering to have something a bit sunshiny to look at.

[ZeekLTK]

I just want to point out my user name is ZEEK not ZEET... :p

[Porochaz]

Sorry I keep doing that... I usually realise before I press the post button and change it, I dont really know why I do it, so Im sorry Ill try and post Zeek from now on...

[Ripley]

Sorry... I've been doing it too. I'll be careful in future.

[Erg0]

Not me!

Also, I changed my avatar to lighten the mood a bit.