Newbie 476: Slow, slow, slow, then FAST and over. Damn.

[Korlash]

Ehh.. I don't think you can automatically connect saying Mith is a resource to Jmar disagreeing with him about some subject... Just seems like a far fetched thing to be saying...

[jmar]

Sure, I'll explain, even though I have already. You came at me with a bunch of accusations that I thought were reaching at best. I defended myself, and you said "that's how a Mafia would act." When I say Mith is a resource to the town, I mean that he can help out the newer players, pick up on scum tells, and make worthwile and well-though out posts. It doesn't mean I'm going to blindly follow him wherever he may lead. There's still a good chance he's scum, so that would be utterly ridiculous.

Hopefully the rest of the people can see what I mean when I say you're reaching. You thinking I should vote along with Mith because I see him as a resource is probably the best example of it yet. I'm happy with my vote.

[Holy]

That was a terribly vague list, Holy. And my scumdar doesn't like it.

I know, I also thought it was a very terrible list. That was only the summary, if you really interested with the details, well okay, but I think when everybody knew about the reasons behind it, they'll laugh... lol.

This is my first play and first round with everyone, so I still don't know much about how they play, and can I trust their words or not. My main problem is, some player when play can tell lies like it was the truth, I'm not saying about a good play, I really mean about lies, and I usually bad recognizing a good lie.

So, my reasons behind that summary:
From:

And, no I am not scum (but my answer would have remained the same here even if I were scum...)

I trust this kind of word, especially how he worded it, IMHO if he is mafia, he will worded the 'I am not scum' with different way. But then again I don't know what kind of player is he.

So I'm going to remain voteless and see where the discussion gets us. But if I had to vote I would throw it on Sir Torn or Mith... I'm sure that will change by the time I actually vote though..

I don't think that a mafia would tell that blatantly who his 'suspects' was that early. And I believe who he told us that time were based from his guts, but if he a mafia who told us who would he vote that early without describing any reason, then he was a careless mafia. While my impression on him was he's not that careless.

See, Mith is probably town. Just from sheer mathematical odds he's probably town. (5 town, 2 scum).

Of course theres still the huge possibility that Mith is scum, in which case were probably all screwed.

I take this as 'might be' a townie confusion...
Overall, he is actively asking when he finds something is suspicious, and had acceptable answers when other players asking/suspicion him.

Scum hunt. There are two scum; find the other one or try to convince us of why you think stephy is scum (by the way, you shouldn't think she is scum, because it's WIFOM)

At first, I thought... what the hell... everything was WIFOM for him, while I think it was not...!
And now, I think, his WIFOM thoughts (at post #65 for example) is fair and come from an uninformative townie perspective.
Experiencing from my confusing WIFOM-like summary post before this...

Beacon of innocent goodness and love

mith

While overall his posts had no flaw..., I just don't like how the way he called himself. Bad reason, yeah...but I just didn't like it...

While for lionden_56, because he just recently replacing stephy_nz, I still don't have anything to say about him atm.
But because before the replacement I actually suspect stephy_nz, so silently IGMEOY

Okay, I guess that's from least scummy to mostly scummy...
Still could change though... sigh...

[havok95]

Jmar--I was baiting you with the mith question to see if you would respond defensively. Earlier, I said something along the lines of "you seem to trust stephy_nz, then you later say she's scummy. What's your opinion on stephy_nz?" and, rather than answer the question, you started talking about how you never said you trusted stephy and I was wrong to assume that, etc. I thought, if you responded in a similar fashion this time, I could bring it up to "trap" you. You had to go and spoil it by being rational. I'm taking my FOS off you for now. Even though I still don't know what "accusations" you're talking about, you've acted fairly town recently.

Back to the drawing board...I should just vote Korlash for the puns instead.

[jmar]

See, I thought my response to the stephy question was rational, because I never did say I trusted stephy. But anyways, I'm not sure how much I buy your "baiting." Seems a little like backtracking to me. Not sure though. You're still the scummiest on my list so far, so I'm keeping my vote.

[Korlash]

Ouch.. no one likes puns anymore...

And two points... First... "Trapping" in any way is kinda scummy... If you reread something and then come up with a lot of the same things happening you can bring them all up.. but if you intentionally try to make a person do something you can use against them it seems... well scummy to me... You could say your doing something to judge their response and if they do a certain one then you would jump on that case... Although I would think that its a lot like "Trapping" too... Or would it be baiting... I say this to get you to say that.. sounds like baiting.. same thing I guess...

Point Numeral Duce... I kinda just reread a lot and I don't see anywhere where jmar actually says "I trust Stephy!" In any real way shape or form... So things don't look very good for you Havok... On the plus side... I am the kind of person to look at things from two sides.. (Sometimes 3,4, or 8... Depending on the situation...) and I can say that I see where you may have gotten that mixed up...

See, if I was "Attacking" someone in any way and another person was using my "attack" against me and saying it was to fast, to quick, not enough evidence, reasons are bad, blah blah blah I see that as defending the person I am attacking (Providing its not the person I'm attacking who said the stuff) and I see no reason to defend someone unless you have some form of trust in them... i.e. They are your scum partner, you have a good feeling they are town, you don't think a lynch is a good thing ATM, etc...

So I can see why you would think jmar trusted Stephy, especially if your like me and go a good week without a reread... But FYI I wouldn't keep using that in your posts anymore...

And Lastly Point D:

Oh, and the only way to offend me is to keep making awful puns. Seriously, that could get you lynched.

Back to the drawing board...I should just vote Korlash for the puns instead.

If your going to vote me for puns I would like to see a complete list of every one I have used this game along with your take on it, also include jokes...

[MeMe]

Vote Count

Holy

(1):

mith

havok95

(1):

jmar

Sir Tornado

(1):

Korlash

not voting

(5):

havok95, Holy, lionden_56, Sir Tornado

Four = lynch

[mith]

Holy, regarding your "reason" for putting me so high on your list - yeah, it's a bad one. Not only was it an obvious joke, but I could easily find other games where I have said similar. My placement on your list feels pretty OMGUSish.

More tomorrow. Well, today, actually, since it's 2am.

[Korlash]

I don't know.. I can see where she is coming from... You could just be trying to "seem really innocent/helpful" But I really don't think you meant anything by it...

And I know I shouldn't but I can't help but try and hold Holy to a completely different standard them everyone else... I just find it hard to judge everything she says the same as everyone else... I don't know.. right now I don't think it matters too much.. but it could come back and bite me later...

Oh Well I'm with Mith... I'll reread tomorrow... Right now.. its party time... Conga conga conga... conga conga conga...

[Holy]

About mith: yeah that's why I said> bad reason. Can not decide if it was a real joke or...

@Korlash: my posts really that bad? Awww, so I should open my english book again... ugh...

[Korlash]

Not THAT bad... but in mafia the way things are said, and what things could actually mean, are a very big tool we use (Scum uses it too unfortunately, to twist what we say against us) to find out the scum. I just don't want to make a mistake and make a case against you over something said wrong or taken out of context... I think I'll just do a bad mafia move and assume your town for a while

[havok95]

"Trapping" in any way is kinda scummy... If you reread something and then come up with a lot of the same things happening you can bring them all up.. but if you intentionally try to make a person do something you can use against them it seems... well scummy to me... You could say your doing something to judge their response and if they do a certain one then you would jump on that case

See, the only way jmar would get trapped is if he fell for it. I was trying to 'trap/bait' jmar into acting defensive rather than simply answering a question, like I felt he had done before. The only way this is bad for jmar is if he acts defensive rather than simply answering a question. And if jmar acts defensive rather than simply answering a question...he's scummy.

[jmar]

But trapping is completely different from asking a question and gaging a response. You used something that you admittedly knew was off-base. If I acted defensive to something that was baseless to begin with, you're the scummy one, not I, for trying to turn nothing into something.

[lionden_56]

Man, I was all on the havok train and everything, but I have to side with jmar on this one. Intentionally trying to trick someone into saying something incriminating is kinda sketch.

[Korlash]

And I agree with that. But you also have to agree that basing your questions on previous actions/statements in order to prove a point is a pretty good attack for both Town/mafia.

However, saying that acting defensive automatically makes you scummy, is in fact, a downright lie. Especially if the question is, in fact, loaded in any way, shape, or form. In this case I can't even remember what the question was and I'm too tired to backtrack and check it out so... I won't push this any further...

[Holy]

I don't know... I understood what jmar means about that mith and stephy thing or mith as resource thing, what I don't understand why should havok baiting jmar with something he already explained from one to another, again...

[mith]

Sorry, I keep getting distracted. Will definitely post again before the day is done.

[Korlash]

Ok... I look forward to it...

[mith]

Right.

What bothers me about Holy's post 138 is the inconsistency. She lists me and jmar as having "good posts", while she says havok has "confusing WIFOM posts"... yet says the same thing about all three of us with regards to alignment ("could be either townie or scum"). She goes with "neutral posts" for Sir Tornado and "not much post atm to assume anything" for lionden_56... yet goes "maybe townie" for the former and "still might be scum" for the latter.

I just get the impression from her that she's not really trying to catch scum. Perhaps early on my impression might be skewed by the fact that stephy_nz never responded to her accusation, but she's spent most of her time since my vote defending herself (granted, that's to be expected to a point, but she's only ever had one vote on her, and there was plenty else to talk about), and the reasoning she gives in 152... well, let's look point by point:

Regarding Sir Tornado - Does no one else find it curious that her reasoning here is that she feels like his

wording

is trustworthy? She's been consistently playing the ESL card, yet in spite of the fact that she doesn't know what sort of player he is and has concerns about her own wording coming off wrong, she considers herself capable of judging another player on this basis alone?

Regarding Korlash - If I'm remembering correctly, Korlash's gut was aching for Sir Tornado and myself because of our IC status. Not because we were his "suspects". (I disagree with this line of argument anyway... Mafia are no less likely to say who they might vote for without reasoning... if anything, they're more likely to do so.)

Regarding me - We both agree it's a bad reason. It doesn't bother me that I'm second on her list. What bothers me is that she doesn't seem to have any particular reason for putting me that high (aside from, I'm assuming, the fact that I'm voting for her). Like I said, OMGUSish.

I dunno. The whole thing just seems kinda thrown together because she had to appease me, rather than because she has actual suspicions and actual reasons for those suspicions.

havok95 has moved up to second. I don't like this baiting thing at all. Need to remember to do a reread of his posts at some point.

[jmar]

I agree with you for the most part mith, although I've got holy second and havok first. I'd like to hear something from SirTornado though, he's quickly moving up my scum list with his lurking.

[Korlash]

I too am leaning towards Sir Torny... for I believe my activity promoting vote was placed on him and yet.. nothing...

So... Is he qualifying for prod value yet or what? To tired to look up his last post... Just finished with my angry Gene Wilder impression in another game and that always make me sleepy... *yawns*

So.. *poke sir Tornado*
>.>
<.<
*Then steals his wallet*
=D

[Holy]

What bothers me about Holy's post 138 is the inconsistency. She lists me and jmar as having "good posts", while she says havok has "confusing WIFOM posts"... yet says the same thing about all three of us with regards to alignment ("could be either townie or scum"). She goes with "neutral posts" for Sir Tornado and "not much post atm to assume anything" for lionden_56... yet goes "maybe townie" for the former and "still might be scum" for the latter.

I just get the impression from her that she's not really trying to catch scum.

I said you and jmar have "good posts", and I think I said that to Korlash too, because when I read posts from all three of you I can understand your reason when asking or explaining something, and I didn't see anything wrong or so scummy about the explanation, that's why I haven't vote yet.

About confusing posts/answers from havok, I still do feel that way a bit, but after I put aside my rage, I try not to judge him too early and try to think from other perspective.

I don't know why you got that impression. I do try, w/e.

Regarding Sir Tornado - Does no one else find it curious that her reasoning here is that she feels like his

wording

is trustworthy? She's been consistently playing the ESL card, yet in spite of the fact that she doesn't know what sort of player he is and has concerns about her own wording coming off wrong, she considers herself capable of judging another player on this basis alone?

What is ESL card?
I don't think I'm that capable to judge another player just from that "not scum" word, that's why I try to start poke Sir Tornado, asking him with little question first.

Regarding Korlash - why should his gut just because of IC status, this is a mafia game, I thought IC and probable mafia status, that's what he feared i guess. Did you think his gut for IC and maybe townie? You want to lynch townie???
Anyway, Korlash, maybe you could explain a little more about this?

And because I didn't think I'm a person capable to judge that well (I try to think from other perspective too when I read posts), that's why the list from post 138 still -mafia or townie- confusing alignment at that time. Still a raw list.

[Holy]

I re-read havok's posts over and over again (because his posts kind of 'twined' for me), and the impression I got is not getting better.
And fyi, I put my

FOS on havok95

because of that baiting thing.

[MeMe]

OK slackers -- deadline time. We'll set it for

11:15 a.m. EST Friday, October 26

(about one week from this post).

Here's how it works: when the deadline hits, night falls regardless of whether players have reached a majority decision. Player with most votes at deadline will hang. Usually mods require there be at least half the usual number of votes...in this case, however, I'll require at least 3 votes. If there's a tie for three votes, whichever player got there first is the lucky winner of a noose 'round the neck. If no player has at least 3 votes, everyone keeps breathing, though night will still fall. If a majority decision is reached before deadline, night will fall as usual.

Got it?

[mith]

Holy, you kinda glossed over the whole "inconsistency" thing there. Try again.

ESL = English (as a) Second Language. Sorry, that's not a particularly standard acronym even for native english speakers - just got into a habit of using it in some Antrax games back in the day.