I feel I still need work. In.
Bleh. There's also a lack of games that I'd want to play. Occam's isn't starting anytime soon, and RL is about halfway through.I feel I still need work. In.
I'd disagree. You're in good enough shape that you can move on up to other games if you really want to.
In.Don't quit! It's a pretty fun game, why would you quit?
I clearly need a lot more work, and I'd kinda like at least one BM game as scum before I call it quits.
In.
I clearly need a lot more work, and I'd kinda like at least one BM game as scum before I call it quits.
Three ins into the last availible place.Exaaaaaactly what I was talking about.
If it's the difference between starting and not, you can move me to playing IC.Even if I do that, we'll still be short by one IC.
Powder Miner
I claim day Jack of All Trades. I inspected Powder Miner and got back that he is mafia watcher.
Jim Groovester, how long do you normally spend in the random voting stage before you're confident in your suspicions?
I'm asking how long that normally takes, though.Jim Groovester, how long do you normally spend in the random voting stage before you're confident in your suspicions?
I spend time RVing people because I don't have suspicions. As soon as I do, I stop random voting.
That's the correct way to go about the RVS. I don't leave it once I'm confident enough, I leave it as soon as I have suspicions.
Mipe9: I take it you've played before? What is your experience with the game? Have you read any games on this board?
Fair enough. I have always been an opponent of the "sit and watch" approach, but you seem pretty keen on it. We'll see.
UnvoteWould you care to elaborate just where I'm going wrong?
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
I'm asking how long that normally takes, though.
Also spouts some nonsense.
I don't need to ask questions or probe anyone to gather information. I can find scum just by getting enough information.
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
Powder MinerIt's funny, because in an open setup like this, it is clearly stated in the OP that neither of those roles are in the setup.
I claim day Jack of All Trades. I inspected Powder Miner and got back that he is mafia watcher.
In this setup, there are the possibility of extra roles. These roles are Cop and Doctor for Town, and Roleblocker and Godfather for Mafia.You lying scum.
Probably Jim Groovester, as the ICs tend to get offed fairly early (from what I've seen).Interesting.
Jim always dies. He's even made a joke of it, during Third Party Mafa, saying that Martyr would be a good role for him.Would you be suspicious of Jim if he made it to MYLO?
Yes, if any IC makes it to MyLo or LyLo, I would be suspicious of them, much more so in LYLo, as the ICs make attractive targets, (I haven't seen a game where a town IC has survived except for maybe the one with the court and assassins ad such (forgot the number) in which we beat the scum fairly quickly.
*rolls a die*
OK, Toaster, which alignment would you want to be if a new one was inserted into the game, or Mafia or town got a new player?
Like would you want to be Town, Jester....
Yes, if any IC makes it to MyLo or LyLo, I would be suspicious of them, much more so in LYLo, as the ICs make attractive targets, (I haven't seen a game where a town IC has survived except for maybe the one with the court and assassins ad such (forgot the number) in which we beat the scum fairly quickly.
...Oh.
Well I guess I wouldn't then... and I guess NKs aren't anything good to bas suspicions off of anyway...
[...]
Jafferey, I've never seen you around here before, so answer me a question. Let's say you're a Roleblocker. How would you pick a target?
[...]
[...]
Jaffery, do you reckon you would be a good scum player?
Also, some questions: what is FOS? MyLO? LyLO?
UnvoteWould you care to elaborate just where I'm going wrong?
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
He said that everyone benefits from people being open and honest. There are cases where even a town player should lie.Also spouts some nonsense.
You mean sterling pieces of advice.I don't need to ask questions or probe anyone to gather information. I can find scum just by getting enough information.
If I could only tell you the number of people who thought they could be successful at the game just by sitting back and observing.
Nope, sorry, being a passive observer doesn't work. You have to get into the thick of things if you really want to get good reads on people. Activity and aggression are much more prized attributes for town than any ability for observation.
mipe9, could you explain to me what the point of your opening post was?
I know, right? Wasn't this game "Beginner's bastard mafia XXVII?".Powder MinerIt's funny, because in an open setup like this, it is clearly stated in the OP that neither of those roles are in the setup.
I claim day Jack of All Trades. I inspected Powder Miner and got back that he is mafia watcher.QuoteIn this setup, there are the possibility of extra roles. These roles are Cop and Doctor for Town, and Roleblocker and Godfather for Mafia.You lying scum.
mipe9. This fakeclaim is so obvious it's painful.
Your reaction to being voted is wrong.
He said that everyone benefits from people being open and honest. There are cases where even a town player should lie.
Reaction fishing.
Reaction fishing.
That's nice to say, but you better tell me what sorts of reactions you were looking for, and what sorts of reactions were going to tell you who was scum before I let you keep on going with this nonsense.
Well, first of all, both of the ICs seem townish based on their reaction. You could have easily gone just like Orangebottle and gone "WHELP, THOSE ROLES DONT EXIST HERE" and got me voted off quickly. Because you didn't do that, you are townish.
How well they respond (or how well you say they respond) is a function of experience and familiarity with the style, not alignment.
1. Just ignoring it. I mean, it was obviously a joke so I wouldn't be suprised if most of the people would just pass over it. BUT, it's really weird that Powder Miner, the person who I was voting, just completely ignored my vote. He just casually said to Orangebottle that it's a joke.
3. Attacking me for it. I have no idea how experienced the people in here are, but if they are complete newbies, I wouldn't be suprised if the mafiateam would be Orangebottle/Powder Miner. The fact that somebody took my post so seriously to vote me seems more like 'eep, I have to protect my scumbuddy' thing instead of 'eep, I have to kill scum'.
If you stick a vote on a joke, I'm going to take it seriously.
Those are sketchy conclusions at best to draw from a reaction test.Well, first of all, both of the ICs seem townish based on their reaction. You could have easily gone just like Orangebottle and gone "WHELP, THOSE ROLES DONT EXIST HERE" and got me voted off quickly. Because you didn't do that, you are townish.
Hmm, I feel like I've already talked about this somewhere.How well they respond (or how well you say they respond) is a function of experience and familiarity with the style, not alignment.
That the ICs responded the way they did is because they're experienced enough to recognize a reaction test and what the proper response to it is. So it's completely unremarkable that Toaster and I would do that, so I'm curious why you're concluding that we're townish.
Nice buddying, though. You think we're town? Aww, it warms me up inside.
The thing is, you are ICs in a newbie game. New people listen to you. If this would be a 'regular' game, you would be neutral, but just from the fact that you are IC and you aren't 'abusing' your position means that you are town. If you would say "Hey, X is scum because blablabla", it doesn't matter if blablabla is a scumtell or not, there would still be 1-2 people who would just go "Oh, he is the IC and he says that X is scum, therefore X must be scum". And in case someone would go "Hey, but blablabla isn't a scumtell!", you can just say that he is wrong.
Orangebottle, if you were scum, who would you vote to lynch based on what has happened so far, and why?It's a mite early for that, but...
Your reaction to being voted is wrong.I have a question.
Orangebottle: Let's have a hypothetical situation that might not have anything to do with this game. You and X are scumbuddies. Y votes X, what do you do? Will you defend X, will you throw X under the bus or will you just ignore the whole situation? Or will you react differently?It depends on the context, really. In the last BM(it just ended), I bussed my buddy because I personally found him scummy, and then threw a few mislynches around and had an easy win. See, my scum game is like my town game; I vote for whomever is scummiest(that isn't me). Defending your scumbuddy is pointless, because it'll just lead to you getting lynched when he flips scum, or him getting lynched when you flip scum. So, i'd be better off bussing him or just ignoring it altogether.
Your reaction to being voted is wrong.I have a question.
Who the hell are you to tell us how we're supposed to react to your questions?
Furthermore, how is his reaction to being voted wrong?QuoteOrangebottle: Let's have a hypothetical situation that might not have anything to do with this game. You and X are scumbuddies. Y votes X, what do you do? Will you defend X, will you throw X under the bus or will you just ignore the whole situation? Or will you react differently?It depends on the context, really. In the last BM(it just ended), I bussed my buddy because I personally found him scummy, and then threw a few mislynches around and had an easy win. See, my scum game is like my town game; I vote for whomever is scummiest(that isn't me). Defending your scumbuddy is pointless, because it'll just lead to you getting lynched when he flips scum, or him getting lynched when you flip scum. So, i'd be better off bussing him or just ignoring it altogether.
Mindmaker Got you again. As mafioso, would you rather town had a doctor, or a cop? As townie with a cop and a doctor on your team, rather roleblocker or godfatherA doctor of course. It's so easy to play him completely ineffective (like I did).
Ed Boy: Are you going to ask more questions?I've asked a question in every post I've made so far (except the pre-game one). Or are you saying that I should be posting more?
Then who do you reckon would make a good scum player (other than the ICs)?[...]
Jaffery, do you reckon you would be a good scum player?
No, with my zero playing experience I have no confidence in my ability to play as scum or townie. I feel that I may be better at investigating than deceiving, but I couldn't say.
I had not been voted for until you made that post. How can I react wrong to something that hasn't happened yet?Your reaction to being voted is wrong.UnvoteWould you care to elaborate just where I'm going wrong?
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
I had not been voted for until you made that post. How can I react wrong to something that hasn't happened yet?Your reaction to being voted is wrong.UnvoteWould you care to elaborate just where I'm going wrong?
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
In RVS the vote is normally to put pressure on the person when asking them a question. You didn't ask a question, you just voted.I had not been voted for until you made that post. How can I react wrong to something that hasn't happened yet?Your reaction to being voted is wrong.UnvoteWould you care to elaborate just where I'm going wrong?
ed boy, you are doing it wrong.
It's a very mysterious thing. I might have randomly voted you without any real reason.
Mormota: What do you hope to get out of this game? If you could pick one of the four possible power roles (Cop, Doctor, Godfather, or Roleblocker), which would you pick? Why?
Mormota, are you new to this game? If not and you know the people here, who would you want as a scumbuddy?
I would try to guess which players might be doctor and cop, and try to pick them to increase my chances of success. Obviously I wouldn't choose my scum partner. If not sure I could choose a random target, and maybe cycle through targets then see if my choice had any effect by looking at the discussion following.
Jafferey, why do you even mention choosing your scum partner? Does it come up as a possibility for you?Since Motmota might take a while (prod requested), let's see who else we can ask...
Bloody ignorant Americans, other time zones exist too.
...we need another IC! Hooray!
I'm trying to get you to be less passive.Ed Boy: Are you going to ask more questions?I've asked a question in every post I've made so far (except the pre-game one). Or are you saying that I should be posting more?
Toaster:Why? Wwwhhyyyy?Because I am stupid.
Jim:If there were a vigilante in this setup and you were it, who would you be targeting tonight?
I don't need to ask questions or probe anyone to gather information. I can find scum just by getting enough information.
I'm an opponent of 'sit and watch' as well. It has too many disadvantages to it.Any explanation for this?
Also, I noticed a bit of contradiction between two of your posts.I don't need to =/= I won't.I don't need to ask questions or probe anyone to gather information. I can find scum just by getting enough information.I'm an opponent of 'sit and watch' as well. It has too many disadvantages to it.Any explanation for this?
OK, Vote Orangebottle OK, Orangebottle, if you were a townie, who would you want the scumteam to be?Ideally the scumteam would be good enough for the game to be fun, but not great as to make it unwinnable. As such, I'd want it to contain... perhaps you and Mormota(for hilarious irony).
Orangebottle, I rolled you again, so Ima ask you another question. What role would you rather the mafia have as a townie on a team with a cop and a doc?Vanilla mafioso.
Jafferey, why do you even mention choosing your scum partner? Does it come up as a possibility for you?
Mormota: In your opinion, what is the best method for hunting scum?
Since I don't know what the best method is, I'll tell you how I think I should hunt scum (Note that it didn't really happen so in the last game.). In the RVS, since I was late, hailing from Europe, I already had a few questions asked, so I could find someone suspicious. Currently, this is Jafferey. Now, I will push him until he either argues against all of my points in a satisfying way and proves he's town. (As much as it is possible to, at any rate.) If he does not, I'll take him for scum. After that, it's too far into the future.So, what do you think of what mipe9 is doing?
So, what do you think of what mipe9 is doing?
ed boy, as mafia what role would you rather have, Godfahter, or roleblocker.Probably Godfather. I don't reckon I'd be any good at rolefishing, so I wouldn't be able to make much use of it.
Jafferey, your thoughts on mipe9 and his approach?
Mormota, do you think roles are more important to town or scum?
if town don't have any special roles then they don't stand a chance.
What do you mean? Could you explain that in more detail, please?
Not voting: Mormota, Mindmaker, Toaster
The day will end Tuesday the 20th, 6PM GMT. You need 4 votes to extend and 6 to shorten.
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.Same.
Jeez, stacking votes much? Vote to extend.We have plenty of time left. Two IRL days, to be exact. Why are you so worried about Jaffery's votes being high?
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.
Jeez, stacking votes much? Vote to extend.We have plenty of time left. Two IRL days, to be exact. Why are you so worried about Jaffery's votes being high?
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.
Mindmaker: Are you going to sit on your vote, or ask more questions?Hey it's just taking a simple answer to get rid of that vote. I'm going to sit on it until I get one.
Jeez, stacking votes much? Vote to extend.We have plenty of time left. Two IRL days, to be exact. Why are you so worried about Jaffery's votes being high?
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.
I don't really think he's going to be lynched, I just think (rather hypocritical yes, but I'm questioning Jim too anyway) that people should be questioning everyone instead of all stacking on one person.
Definitely to town. Scum already have a rather sizeable advantage, and if town don't have any special roles then they don't stand a chance.
Unvote edboy, vote Jim Groovester. Jim, if you were an SK in this game, would you fear Doctor, Cop, Godfather, or Roleblocker most?
Day 1 has never been my strong suit. I can't come up with unique questions anymore...So you're just going to sit there until he responds? That's really passive.
I'll come back to you tomorrow morning, Jim. It's getting late.
Hurm, looks like you haven't read the next two lines of my post...Okay. Let's say they had very limited internet access, and could maybe post an hour out of every IRL day.
First off, the person who is running the game is doing it wrong, if a person is allowed to lurk all game long, no matter what reason. A replacement would have been long overdue.
I'd try to extend the game until I get something definite out of said person, since it would be too late for a replacement.
Also what is a valid reason? I've heard of people faking reasons (or at least they were very dubious, to the degree that there were some inside jokes about that person) that would allow them to lurk some more.
Lurking is only tolerable to some extent. Definitely not all game long.
I don't like seeing stall tactics.
What you have better be good if you're going to make me wait for it.
Let's also say that it's come down to the point where you, the mod, and the unreadable are tired of being in LYLO and you have to vote. The valid lurker has had no time to post. Where is your vote?
Let me guess. Option A makes me scum and the Organgebottle-approved-Option B makes me town.I'm willing to wait for a while. Don't take too long, though.
My answer would be the same regardless of alignment.
But as I said, answers tomorrow. You'll have to wait those 9-10 hours.
I'd like to know why you immediately thought he was stalling. People need to sleep, Jim.
I don't like seeing stall tactics.
What you have better be good if you're going to make me wait for it.
Unvote Jim Groovester, vote Mormota.
Hurm, I don't know Jim, maybe mipe9 because he was being ridiculous earlier. I really don't have reads on anyone.
Unvote Jim Groovester, vote Mormota.
Hurm, I don't know Jim, maybe mipe9 because he was being ridiculous earlier. I really don't have reads on anyone.
EBWODP:
Mormota, who would you be most afraid of with the doctor role?
OK then.
mipe9, who would you least like to have on your scumteam if you were scum?
You are among the three players left in the game. One of the others has been lurking (with valid reasons) all game, while the other is unreadable. You had been confirmed town by the Cop yesterday, and since he was NK'd they now turn to you. Which one has your vote?So many unknowns.
But he answered your questions. Why couldn't he answer mine?
Mindmaker and Powder Miner, if you're bored you can tell me who you currently suspect right now.
(Inb4 "Why would that worry you, if you were town?")
Just a question for Mormota: why do you find me suspicious? I mean all I have done is not said much, and that's just because I have been busy. Does that automatically signify that I am a mafioso?
So many unknowns.When I say "Unreadable" I mean he's not dropping any scumtells, but you can't really tell what alignment he is. That is, to say, you're not sure if he's scum or town.
I assume both are voting each other. Is the lurker bringing good arguments, even though he has limited posting time?
By calling the other unreadable, I assume he's being active, has done his scumhunting, brings good arguments etc.
In which case I'll vote the lurker, obviously.
Um. No. Wanting to post coherently isn't a scumtell.But he answered your questions. Why couldn't he answer mine?
If people have the privilege to post once every other day, I'm going to take the freedom not to post at 1:30 am, if I don't feel like it.
Don't like posting when I'm tired and my thoughts are muffled.
(Inb4 "Why would that worry you, if you were town?")
I would ask Toaster a question, but since he became a Scum IC is he still actually in the game?No, he isn't. You have Darvi to thank for that.
I just wanted to anticipate the silly line of reasoning, in the manner of "Why would muffled thoughts worry you? If you were town, you wouldn't worry about what you have to post, right? Does that mean you have to conceal your mischievous nature?".(Inb4 "Why would that worry you, if you were town?")
How did that even come up?
Just a question for Mormota: why do you find me suspicious? I mean all I have done is not said much, and that's just because I have been busy. Does that automatically signify that I am a mafioso?
I just wanted to anticipate the silly line of reasoning, in the manner of "Why would muffled thoughts worry you? If you were town, you wouldn't worry about what you have to post, right? Does that mean you have to conceal your mischievous nature?".
Trust me, there's always somebody, who comes up with these sort of BS. I just wanted to spare myself that facepalm.
I'd also like to second that extension.
Jeez, stacking votes much? Vote to extend.This one.
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.
Orangebottle, what do you think of Jafferey?Jafferey? He's pretty unreadable. He's posted all of three times, so I don't have much to go on at all.
I would try to guess which players might be doctor and cop, and try to pick them to increase my chances of success. Obviously I wouldn't choose my scum partner. If not sure I could choose a random target, and maybe cycle through targets then see if my choice had any effect by looking at the discussion following.
Jafferey, why do you even mention choosing your scum partner? Does it come up as a possibility for you?Since Motmota might take a while (prod requested), let's see who else we can ask...
Bloody ignorant Americans, other time zones exist too.
I just mentioned my scum partner because I would be trying to eliminate things with no or low probability. This was a difficult question for me. In reality I don't really know how I would identify roles, probably go random for now, by being able to eliminate 1 member (my scumbuddy) this makes things a lot easier for me. And don't be fooled by the fact that I am saying "my scumbuddy" as though that is the way things currently are, and assume that I am projecting the fact that I am scum onto the question.
I understand why lack of posting may be a good reason for voting, but I don't see how that would automatically make me *very* suspicious. You seem to be very aggressively targeting me Mormota, and I find that suspicious in itself as though you are trying to draw attention away from yourself and cause a mislynch.
I would try to guess which players might be doctor and cop, and try to pick them to increase my chances of success. Obviously I wouldn't choose my scum partner. If not sure I could choose a random target, and maybe cycle through targets then see if my choice had any effect by looking at the discussion following.
Jafferey, why do you even mention choosing your scum partner? Does it come up as a possibility for you?Since Motmota might take a while (prod requested), let's see who else we can ask...
Bloody ignorant Americans, other time zones exist too.
Screw it. I am not going to get anywhere by being quiet.
Mipe9. Why have you been so quiet?
I am going to unvote and go with mipe9. mipe9, tell me who you think is scummy and why.Mormota and Jafferey for being a bit lurkish.
You mean like, make a new post with the edits in it??
Like this:I would try to guess which players might be doctor and cop, and try to pick them to increase my chances of success. Obviously I wouldn't choose my scum partner. If not sure I could choose a random target, and maybe cycle through targets then see if my choice had any effect by looking at the discussion following.
Jafferey, why do you even mention choosing your scum partner? Does it come up as a possibility for you?Since Motmota might take a while (prod requested), let's see who else we can ask...
Bloody ignorant Americans, other time zones exist too.
I just mentioned my scum partner because I would be trying to eliminate things with no or low probability. This was a difficult question for me. In reality I don't really know how I would identify roles, probably go random for now, by being able to eliminate 1 member (my scumbuddy) this makes things a lot easier for me. And don't be fooled by the fact that I am saying "my scumbuddy" as though that is the way things currently are, and assume that I am projecting the fact that I am scum onto the question.
I understand why lack of posting may be a good reason for voting, but I don't see how that would automatically make me *very* suspicious. You seem to be very aggressively targeting me Mormota, and I find that suspicious in itself as though you are trying to draw attention away from yourself and cause a mislynch.
Screw it. I am not going to get anywhere by being quiet.
Mipe9. Why have you been so quiet?
Because real life.I am going to unvote and go with mipe9. mipe9, tell me who you think is scummy and why.Mormota and Jafferey for being a bit lurkish.
Mormota and Mindmaker for voting Jafferey. That bandwagon appeared too fast for my liking.
PFP: Don't make me laugh. How were I even lurking? I asked a question and was waiting for an answer.
Your second point: I was the first to vote him ( With that reason at any rate. It is inconvenient to read back) so how is that "jumping on the bandwagon"?
Also, by a bit lurkish, I meant through this day.
According to the latest vote totals, you weren't the first to vote him.
Uhm guys, time is running out.We have 23 hours (technically 24, but I assume that Dariush meant BST instead of GMT) left. Depending on what happens before then, I'll probably vote to extend, though I'll wait to see how the next new hours shape up before voting to extend.
You sure you can make a decision? If not we need 2 more votes (I believe) for an extension.
Dariush meant BST instead of GMTNo, I didn't. I meant GMT.
UnvoteThis doesn't seem like scumhunting. Is there a reason you haven't quite gotten around to that yet?PFP: Don't make me laugh. How were I even lurking? I asked a question and was waiting for an answer.
Your second point: I was the first to vote him ( With that reason at any rate. It is inconvenient to read back) so how is that "jumping on the bandwagon"?
According to the latest vote totals, you weren't the first to vote him. Also, by a bit lurkish, I meant through this day.
Unvote
Screw it. I am not going to get anywhere by being quiet.
Mipe9. Why have you been so quiet?
Because real life.
I personally don't like Powder Miner[/color]'s reaction to Jafferey suddenly having a lot of votes. He immediately called for an extension even though we still had ~3 days left to mull it over, and none of them were anything more than pressure votes. Day one usually ends in a mislynch. So, Powder Miner, why were you so concerned for Jafferey's life?In other mafias, it's usually seen as scummy to stack votes D1, so I was directing that question to see if I could catch anyone of the four voting for Jafferey. After all, you are supposed to jump on scummy things, correct? I don't really care for Jafferey's life, I was trying to scumhunt. I also don't see what your problem with the extension is. It's normal procedure, and it's always good for town to have time to make decisions. Perhaps you'd like town to speed through lynches so they don't make good choices?
What part of real life? Give me specifics, as I have middle school homework, and often activities going on and yet I post every day. Admittedly, middleschool isn't much, but I have 10th grade homework, so it's a burden.
Also. Why are you nto pressing anyone else? Always press people. Always.
What part of real life? Give me specifics, as I have middle school homework, and often activities going on and yet I post every day. Admittedly, middleschool isn't much, but I have 10th grade homework, so it's a burden.
Also. Why are you nto pressing anyone else? Always press people. Always.
Don't demand specifics about people's life about why they're busy.
It's not a very polite thing to do.
In other mafias, it's usually seen as scummy to stack votes D1, so I was directing that question to see if I could catch anyone of the four voting for Jafferey. After all, you are supposed to jump on scummy things, correct?Catch them on what? They were all asking him RVS questions with a pressure vote. And yes. You are. Which is what I'm doing now.
I don't really care for Jafferey's life, I was trying to scumhunt.Scumhunt...how, exactly? By asking a strange question with no actual response?
I also don't see what your problem with the extension is. It's normal procedure, and it's always good for town to have time to make decisions.The town had three more days to go over it. An extension was entirely unnecessary at that point, and it looks odd that you'd extend for Jaffery when we still have plenty of time left to switch our votes around.
Perhaps you'd like town to speed through lynches so they don't make good choices?You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
Also, it's kinda funny how you're so sure that lynching Jafferey would be a mislynch. "Day one usually ends in a mislynch" Care to explain at all?
Oh, nice. You unvote as soon as somebody calls you out on it.
You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
This is worthless. You're hanging on the sidelines, tossing comments at other people without actually doing anything. Who do you suspect? Why aren't you questioning them? How does this lead to you finding scum?You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
Just because in almost every day one there is a mislynch doesn't mean that there should be a mislynch D1 on this game.
Ugh, that was a badly worded question.
Unvote mormota
I would ask Toaster a question, but since he became a Scum IC is he still actually in the game?
Oh, nice. You unvote as soon as somebody calls you out on it.
Yeah, I thought I had unvoted earlier.You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
Just because in almost every day one there is a mislynch doesn't mean that there should be a mislynch D1 on this game.
I answered already. No, he isn't.Ugh, that was a badly worded question.
Unvote mormota
I would ask Toaster a question, but since he became a Scum IC is he still actually in the game?
Dariush!
Shakerag, do you think you look scummy for replacing someone so lurky?Shakerag isn't playing yet. Go do some actual scumhunting.
I was pressuring Jafferey, but that plan's been scuppered now. Dariush said in the post right before mine that Shakerag replaced Jafferey, which I took to mean the Shakerag has started playing. Although he might not have logged on since that post, I can still leave questions for him.Shakerag, do you think you look scummy for replacing someone so lurky?Shakerag isn't playing yet. Go do some actual scumhunting.
I answered already. No, he isn't.Ugh, that was a badly worded question.
Unvote mormota
I would ask Toaster a question, but since he became a Scum IC is he still actually in the game?
Dariush!
Also, Jafferey has been replaced by Shakerag. The day is modextended by 24 hours to let our replacements get a hold of the current situation.
IronyOwl, why are you tunneling on me?
Dariush said in the post right before mine that Shakerag replaced Jafferey,Oh. Whoops. Totally didn't notice that.
Shakerag, do you think you look scummy for replacing someone so lurky?Well, looking at it the opposite way, if I was in a game and someone else who was lurky was replaced, I wouldn't have an immediate reason to suspect the replacement, because the person who was replaced was being lurky due to IRL issues. Knowing that, unless there was an obvious slip-up in the replaced-person's posts, I feel like I'd have to get all new reads on the new person.
Mipe9 for the most part.That is an adequate explanation. Analyze what the others say. It's the whole point of Mafia.
But since this is a PBP I wouldn't be able to give an adequate explanation, other than "what they said".
Hello everyone! This is my first time, so be gentle and all that.
Just to give some personal info, I'm in the Central time zone, and weekdays I'll be PFP, so posts may be scattered, but I'll be keeping an eye on the thread as I can. Evenings are busy, as are weekend days. I'm usually consistantly available nights (10:30 PM-ish CST), but that's at the mercy of my narcolepsy sometimes.Shakerag, do you think you look scummy for replacing someone so lurky?Well, looking at it the opposite way, if I was in a game and someone else who was lurky was replaced, I wouldn't have an immediate reason to suspect the replacement, because the person who was replaced was being lurky due to IRL issues. Knowing that, unless there was an obvious slip-up in the replaced-person's posts, I feel like I'd have to get all new reads on the new person.
Powder Miner and Mindmaker, do you feel that asking everyone to ask you questions because you are "bored" is a scumtell? Don't you think it would have been more townie-like to have been going after someone instead?
Powder Miner and Mindmaker, do you feel that asking everyone to ask you questions because you are "bored" is a scumtell? Don't you think it would have been more townie-like to have been going after someone instead?
You seem very careful about your phrasing. Why? You just came in and you instantly start giving excuses?That's a fairly simple explanation. I tend to trip over my own words when speaking, which leads to a fair bit of confusion as to what I'm trying to say. So when I can "speak" in text, I tend to make sure that I'm being as clear as possible to avoid said confusion. Also, my significant other is ... rather extreme about correcting my grammar on a daily basis, so I've been rather trained by her.
That's a fairly simple explanation. I tend to trip over my own words when speaking, which leads to a fair bit of confusion as to what I'm trying to say. So when I can "speak" in text, I tend to make sure that I'm being as clear as possible to avoid said confusion. Also, my significant other is ... rather extreme about correcting my grammar on a daily basis, so I've been rather trained by her.
As far as giving excuses is concerned, if you're referring to my "personal info" paragraph, that was just info that I thought would be helpful to give everyone an expectation of when I might and might not be posting. If you're referring to my response to ed boy, then you'll have to clarify for me what you felt was excuse making.
Mipe9.
I'm not quite sure what you did at the beginning of the game. It probably was supposed to be a trap.
Still, you pulled out of it quickly, as people started to question you, with no explanation whatsoever.
To your convenience this was the time where I started taking the heat, so you could lurk for a bit and let the situation cool of.
Explain yourself now or never.
Shakerag, I'll ask you the same question, as I asked the person you replaced. What do you think of mipe9 and his appraoch. I understand you just joined the game, so take your time to read up on it.
Shakerag, do you think you look scummy for replacing someone so lurky?Well, looking at it the opposite way, if I was in a game and someone else who was lurky was replaced, I wouldn't have an immediate reason to suspect the replacement, because the person who was replaced was being lurky due to IRL issues. Knowing that, unless there was an obvious slip-up in the replaced-person's posts, I feel like I'd have to get all new reads on the new person.
IronyOwl, why are you tunneling on me?I'm going to have to ask you to clarify what you mean by tunneling, Mipe9. From what I could see from the post, he was criticizing your scumhunting skills, and the points he made were very good ones. Bad scumhunting is effectively active lurking, which is a scumtell. Once IronyOwl starts criticizing you, you OMGUS him, which is also a scumtell.
You have not brought up anything new or original over the course of the entire game day. Why are you not doing anything, Mindmaker?You think so?
Powder Miner and Mindmaker, do you feel that asking everyone to ask you questions because you are "bored" is a scumtell? Don't you think it would have been more townie-like to have been going after someone instead?Shakerag, you'll notice that I went for someone in the post or in a post very near it (I can't remember which, unfortunately. I'm pretty dependent on the Topic Summary)
In other mafias, it's usually seen as scummy to stack votes D1, so I was directing that question to see if I could catch anyone of the four voting for Jafferey. After all, you are supposed to jump on scummy things, correct?Catch them on what? They were all asking him RVS questions with a pressure vote. And yes. You are.QuoteI don't really care for Jafferey's life, I was trying to scumhunt.Scumhunt...how, exactly? By asking a strange question with no actual response?QuoteI also don't see what your problem with the extension is. It's normal procedure, and it's always good for town to have time to make decisions.The town had three more days to go over it. An extension was entirely unnecessary at that point, and it looks odd that you'd extend for Jaffery when we still have plenty of time left to switch our votes around.
They're also RVS questions and requests to answer RVS questions, with pressure votes attached. All he has to do is answer their questions and poof, the vote is gone. RVS pressure votes aren't usually all that serious.QuotePerhaps you'd like town to speed through lynches so they don't make good choices?You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
Also, it's kinda funny how you're so sure that lynching Jafferey would be a mislynch. "Day one usually ends in a mislynch" Care to explain at all?
unvote
Mindmaker, looking back, you haven't really been digging all that deeply. You seem to be pretty content to ask one question, and sit back for a long stretch without branching out anywhere else.
After mipe9's act, you hopped on the bandwagon there and seem awfully keen to get others to hop on as well.
And your response to Mormota really smacks of OMGUSism.
It also certainly seemed odd as well, earlier, answering your buddy Orangebottle (who defended you) and not Jim.
So, what do you have to say for yourself and your obviously scummy behavior?
IronyOwl, why are you tunneling on me?
unvote
Mindmaker, looking back, you haven't really been digging all that deeply. You seem to be pretty content to ask one question, and sit back for a long stretch without branching out anywhere else. After mipe9's act, you hopped on the bandwagon there and seem awfully keen to get others to hop on as well. And your response to Mormota really smacks of OMGUSism. It also certainly seemed odd as well, earlier, answering your buddy Orangebottle (who defended you) and not Jim.
So, what do you have to say for yourself and your obviously scummy behavior?
So, what do you have to say for yourself and your obviously scummy behavior?
Shakerag, I'll ask you the same question, as I asked the person you replaced. What do you think of mipe9 and his appraoch. I understand you just joined the game, so take your time to read up on it.
I am inclined to think that mipe9 is likely a townie. He had a very crazy and aggressive tactic early on to reaction fish, and I would think that, if he was scum, that would be a very risky thing to do, seeing as he has brought a lot of attention on himself for it. I think that since he thrust himself into the spotlight early like that, the scum in this game would try and get an easy bandwagon going on him. Therefore, looking at who was jumping on mipe9, why, and when could yeld clues about who is scummy this game.
Interestingly, you seem to be very focused on mipe9 yourself ...
To see how people react to being called out on it.In other mafias, it's usually seen as scummy to stack votes D1, so I was directing that question to see if I could catch anyone of the four voting for Jafferey. After all, you are supposed to jump on scummy things, correct?Catch them on what? They were all asking him RVS questions with a pressure vote. And yes. You are.QuoteI don't really care for Jafferey's life, I was trying to scumhunt.Scumhunt...how, exactly? By asking a strange question with no actual response?
I also don't see what your problem with the extension is. It's normal procedure, and it's always good for town to have time to make decisions.The town had three more days to go over it. An extension was entirely unnecessary at that point, and it looks odd that you'd extend for Jaffery when we still have plenty of time left to switch our votes around.
Perhaps you'd like town to speed through lynches so they don't make good choices?You still haven't learned to stop throwing bullshit around, have you? In almost every day one, town will end up mislynching town. It's not that big of a leap.
Also, it's kinda funny how you're so sure that lynching Jafferey would be a mislynch. "Day one usually ends in a mislynch" Care to explain at all?
I haven't really questioned you at all yet.
Unvote whoever the heck I was voting, vote for ed boy. I haven't really questioned you at all yet.I'm not happy about the lurking at all. Jafferey was very inactive (though now that he's been replaced hopefully the situation will improve). Mipe9 has also been active lurking a lot, as I listed in my earlier post. I'm a little on the fence about IronyOwl - he's not been in the game long, but I think he could have done better than only two posts.
What do you think of the lurkiness in this game so far (not the players lurking, the lurkiness). I think it's quite abundant.
I guess you're right, but I was suspicious of mipe9 but his lurkiness was due to RL... hm. GOne reading thread to dig stuff up on him. *shoulders pickaxe*I haven't really questioned you at all yet.
Thoroughness is great, but who do you suspect, and why aren't you voting them instead of jumping around from pressure vote to pressure vote?
AH, yes.You may want to check the middle section of page thirteen.
Mindmaker, where's your vote? Why aren;t you voting? Why aren't you pressing?
...Oh. Right under the vote count....AH, yes.You may want to check the middle section of page thirteen.
Mindmaker, where's your vote? Why aren;t you voting? Why aren't you pressing?
IronyOwl, why are you tunneling on me?
It's called scumhunting. He asked you a total of two questions. Why do you feel so offended, perhaps cornered by two questions, Mipe9?
Mipe9.Which thing do you mean? I've done so many great/stupid things in this game that I might not remember the one you are talking about.
I'm not quite sure what you did at the beginning of the game. It probably was supposed to be a trap.
Still, you pulled out of it quickly, as people started to question you, with no explanation whatsoever.
To your convenience this was the time where I started taking the heat, so you could lurk for a bit and let the situation cool of.
Explain yourself now or never.
Don't get into the mindset that scum are cunning and calculating and deliberate over every move because I've played enough games as town and scum to know that that really isn't true.Yeah, I have to agree with that. A 'perfect' scum wouldn't organize lynches and stuff like that, a perfect scum would act exactly like he would as town. The scum players goal is to act as town as they can so that nobody will be suspicious of them.
"tunnel vision is the product of a variety of cognitive distortions, such as confirmation bias, hindsight bias, and outcome bias, which can impede accuracy in what we perceive and in how we interpret what we perceive".
Incidentally, what is tunneling? It wasn't included on the list of terms in the original post.
IronyOwl, why are you tunneling on me?
It's called scumhunting. He asked you a total of two questions. Why do you feel so offended, perhaps cornered by two questions, Mipe9?
I don't care about the fact that he asked me two questions. I care about the fact that 100% of his posts are towards me.Mipe9.Which thing do you mean? I've done so many great/stupid things in this game that I might not remember the one you are talking about.
I'm not quite sure what you did at the beginning of the game. It probably was supposed to be a trap.
Still, you pulled out of it quickly, as people started to question you, with no explanation whatsoever.
To your convenience this was the time where I started taking the heat, so you could lurk for a bit and let the situation cool of.
Explain yourself now or never.Don't get into the mindset that scum are cunning and calculating and deliberate over every move because I've played enough games as town and scum to know that that really isn't true.Yeah, I have to agree with that. A 'perfect' scum wouldn't organize lynches and stuff like that, a perfect scum would act exactly like he would as town. The scum players goal is to act as town as they can so that nobody will be suspicious of them."tunnel vision is the product of a variety of cognitive distortions, such as confirmation bias, hindsight bias, and outcome bias, which can impede accuracy in what we perceive and in how we interpret what we perceive".
Incidentally, what is tunneling? It wasn't included on the list of terms in the original post.
In plain mafia & english terms, if you find a person who you think is scum and attack only that player and ignore everybody else, that's tunneling.
You have not brought up anything new or original over the course of the entire game day. Why are you not doing anything, Mindmaker?You think so?
How about you present me some of your achievements from Day 1?
Don't get into the mindset that scum are cunning and calculating and deliberate over every move because I've played enough games as town and scum to know that that really isn't true.Yeah, I have to agree with that. A 'perfect' scum wouldn't organize lynches and stuff like that, a perfect scum would act exactly like he would as town. The scum players goal is to act as town as they can so that nobody will be suspicious of them.
answering your buddy Orangebottle (who defended you)
To see how people react to being called out on it.And what did you learn from their reactions?
Guh. I suppose. Still, I think it was less than three days...Nope. Your post was on the 17th, day would have ended on the 20th. Now it's been extended for little reason.
Unvote whoever the heck I was voting, vote for ed boy. I haven't really questioned you at all yet.This question makes absolutely no sense. How could the lurkiness in this game be interpreted as anything other than the players lurking?
What do you think of the lurkiness in this game so far (not the players lurking, the lurkiness). I think it's quite abundant.
I'd like to paraphrase Jim here.You have not brought up anything new or original over the course of the entire game day. Why are you not doing anything, Mindmaker?You think so?
How about you present me some of your achievements from Day 1?
This really isn't a good excuse for you not doing stuff. You've even admitted that it's not much, but you're not really taking steps to correct that.You have not brought up anything new or original over the course of the entire game day. Why are you not doing anything, Mindmaker?You think so?
How about you present me some of your achievements from Day 1?
(I'm pretty dependent on the Topic Summary)We've been over this last BM. Open a new tab. If you absolutely have to, just go find the quote you want and then reply to it directly.
Unvote whoever the heck I was voting, vote for ed boy. I haven't really questioned you at all yet.How is this going to help you find scum? You've been bouncing around RV questions all game and have nothing to show for it.
What do you think of the lurkiness in this game so far (not the players lurking, the lurkiness). I think it's quite abundant.
I don't care about the fact that he asked me two questions. I care about the fact that 100% of his posts are towards me.So, you don't care that I only recently replaced in. You don't care that I might be active lurking. You don't care that both posts were advice. You don't care that both posts were the same advice. You don't care that I might have a point.
You managed to answer this, but you didn't manage to respond to this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2625797#msg2625797)?"tunnel vision is the product of a variety of cognitive distortions, such as confirmation bias, hindsight bias, and outcome bias, which can impede accuracy in what we perceive and in how we interpret what we perceive".
Incidentally, what is tunneling? It wasn't included on the list of terms in the original post.
In plain mafia & english terms, if you find a person who you think is scum and attack only that player and ignore everybody else, that's tunneling.
ed boy, what was your read on Jafferery? What's your current read on Shakerag?I was getting a bit irked with Jafferey before he dropped out, and was finding the lack of responses from him to be suspicious at the least. As for shakerag, I haven't really formed a big opinion of him yet, having joined the game so recently.
Orangebottle, how do you distinguish between people who are scummy because they're scum and people who are scummy because they're new?That's a very good question.
6PM GMT. (That's two hours from now!)No it's not.
Yes it is.6PM GMT. (That's two hours from now!)No it's not.
Due to daylight savings, most people who are normally on GMT are on BST, which has it the day ending at 5pm. GMT, however, has it at 6pm.Except at the moment where Dariush made that post it was 3PM GMT (http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/).
ExtendWhy?
ExtendWhy?
I'm satisfied. Unvote.
- Shakerag: Mormota,
Mindmaker, are you very surprised by these revalations?
Jeez, stacking votes much? Vote to extend.
Also, come on ask me some questions, I'm bored.
I'd also like to second that extension.
I want at least have some more posts by Jafferey.
Extend
Extend
Shakerags summary
I have a hunch Jim will hop in here and yell at me for this, but I think it is possibly noteworthy that Orangebottle was focusing on Powder Miner before his untimely demise.
Mindmaker's list of posts
That wasn't like planned. I wanted to clarify my position to Mipe9 and question him. This wasn't supposed to be my final vote...
So you're saying you would've changed your vote?
Why didn't you sooner? Why was your vote on mipe9 instead of the person who was going to be your final vote?
This is not an argument. This is a list of Mindmaker's posts. Summarizing them tells me nothing.
You need to have a point that you're making, and you need to find the best evidence that supports that point. Not all evidence possible.
More stuff
Fine, than replace me.
More stuff
Seven is still a lot, especially if you admit some of them are weak and shaky.
If you had to reduce it to three, which points would you pick? Which posts would you pick to show your points?
If you want to get better at the game, why don't you quit being a whiny buttface and play it through.
More stuff
Seven is still a lot, especially if you admit some of them are weak and shaky.
If you had to reduce it to three, which points would you pick? Which posts would you pick to show your points?
Why would I want to reduce it to three? Why seven "still a lot"? Isn't the whole point here to oust scum with as much proof behind our accusations as possible? And even if I admitted that one point is not as strong, since I think it is significant enough to note, why not include it with everything else and let the other players judge what I've presented for themselves?
I know you're an IC this game, but I'm not a person that just accepts what I'm being told. If you're here to teach, and I'm supposed to learn, then you're going to have to tell me reasons.
The "scumhunting" on day 1 didn't have any results. I didn't even see one good argument...
And still I'm the one being "useless" and doing "nothing". This is so tireing...
Why would I want to reduce it to three? Why seven "still a lot"? Isn't the whole point here to oust scum with as much proof behind our accusations as possible? And even if I admitted that one point is not as strong, since I think it is significant enough to note, why not include it with everything else and let the other players judge what I've presented for themselves?
I know you're an IC this game, but I'm not a person that just accepts what I'm being told. If you're here to teach, and I'm supposed to learn, then you're going to have to tell me reasons.
I didn't find anything that looked scummy that hadn't already been jumped upon, unfortunately.
So I jumped around trying to uncover something scummy.
Like I want to go after Mindmaker, but Shakerag already has him covered for the lurking.
I didn't find anything that looked scummy that hadn't already been jumped upon, unfortunately.Bollocks. If person A is pressuring person B, that does not forbid you from pressuring person B. Two people digging away at one person gives better results that one. I don't like how you're doing things, Power Miner. You're too concerned with keeping up with the scumhunting that other people are doing to do any scumhunting of your own. Have you got a proper explanation?
So I jumped around trying to uncover something scummy.
Like I want to go after Mindmaker, but Shakerag already has him covered for the lurking.
*Powder Miner
Because my main concerns were lurking, and it really doesn't do much good to have two people asking the same guy why he was lurking. They'll get the same answer.
Do I want to get better at it? I honestly don't know anymore...This sounds like you don't actually understand what you should be doing, and are thus getting frustrated because going through the motions isn't telling you anything.
The "scumhunting" on day 1 didn't have any results. I didn't even see one good argument...
And still I'm the one being "useless" and doing "nothing". This is so tireing...
I didn't find anything that looked scummy that hadn't already been jumped upon, unfortunately.
So I jumped around trying to uncover something scummy.
Like I want to go after Mindmaker, but Shakerag already has him covered for the lurking.
Mormota. YOu've been posting less than even Mindmaker. Care to explain the lurking?
Which posts to support those points? Well, 1) is, like, all of themYou can still provide one as an example. The closest he's come or furthest he's been might be good ones.
@IronyOwl: I ... was ... am pressing Mindmaker?Really? Let's see:
He's done nothing to help the town side. He's been responding defensively, and has poor justification for his actions. He's scum, and I would like to see him hang.How does this pressure him? You let him know you want him dead and roughly explain why, but you don't ask him anything directly and you don't give him any reason to think your opinion of him might change. Where does the panic come from? Where does the new data come from? If you're not accomplishing anything, it's not really pressure.
Yes, I'd like to find his partner, but Jim was ragging on my ass earlier about trying to call the scumteam ... "Calling scumteams tends to work out very badly for the town. ... Just look at each player individually, and judge each player individually."Nowhere does he say "ignore other players until your current target is dead." You're not doing anything with Mindmaker except discussing your presentation on him with Jim, and you're not doing anything at all with anyone else. Do you feel you're accomplishing as much as you could be right now?
I don't think Mindmaker is lurking, he's got a number of posts. If he was disinterested or busy ... then he wouldn't be posting.What about active lurking, then? What is it about his uselessness that screams "scum" rather than "lazy" or "busy" or anything else?
I think his vote was scummy because he had done nothing for four days prior, and then suddenly decided to vote on mipe9. Everyone was looking askance at mipe9 right about then, so I'm sure he thought it wouldn't look strange to be hopping on.That's backwards. If you already know he's scum, this perfectly explains why he did that. If you're trying to figure out whether he's scum or not, it only helps if that's the only reason he'd possibly act like that. So I'll ask you again: What was it about his mipe9 vote that seemed like scum hopping on a bandwagon rather than town hopping on a bandwagon?
Well, Jim can piss and moan about this all he wants, but I'm still going with my intuition there. It was too crazy of an act for scum to try in a beginner's gameEhhh, kind of. There are cases where someone can act so badly that it seems highly unlikely that they've got a team (and in this case, personal IC), but making ironclad, blanket assumptions tends to end incredibly badly at some point. Don't assume that just because you were right this time you'll always be right, or even that you were right for the right reasons.
and I have to think the scumteam was looking at that scene as a gift from heaven, because it would be very easy to mislynch mipe9 after something like that. So anyone jumping on mipe9 (and/or trying to get other people to weigh in on him) were certainly candidates for investigation.This is good reasoning. "Investigation" has to mean "scumhunting," however, not just noticing that they're useless, declaring them scum, and sitting around until they die.
*Powder MinerNot good enough. You can't just sit back and point out people who haven't been posting much. There's a lot more to scumhunting than finding lurker. Go back and look at people's posts and what the content in them is. That's what proper scumhunting is, and that's something you've failed to do so far. Having two people ask questions about someone's lurking may not have any benefit over one person, but having two people pick apart one person's posts will certainly be better than one person. You're not scumhunting at all, and I don't like that, Powder Miner.
Because my main concerns were lurking, and it really doesn't do much good to have two people asking the same guy why he was lurking. They'll get the same answer.
Fine, than replace me.So, do you really need a replacement?
IronyOwl, you are nice providing tips, but who do you suspect? If you could choose to kill off one person now, who would it be?This is a good question.
Currently, I don't particularly suspect anyone; with all the flailing that's going on, it's been difficult to pick out anything that seems outright scummy. Just about everyone is lurking, active lurking, and/or using questionable tactics.
Who I'd kill is tough for the same reasons, but I'd probably kill Powder Miner for his blatant admission to doing nothing but prodding lurkers. ed boy is probably second, since the feeling I'm getting is that he's here and roughly knows what he's doing, but has chosen to not do a lot of it.
Jim. I can ask you the same question as Irony. Who do you suspect? I haven't seen you do much else beside providing advice.
Ed boy. Could you provide more against Powder Miner? I do not find your specific explanation satisfying. Are you just hoping to get an easy mislynch?The reason why I am voting for powder miner right now is because I am not happy with the quality of his scumhunting. He seems to be posting for the appearance rather than doing any actualy scumhunting. That vote is on him to pressure him to start doing it properly. It will stay there until he hunts enough to satisfy me, or I find someone else scummier. In terms of mislynch danger, the day ends of tuesday. That's over 72 hours, plenty of time for him to get his act together.
Nevermind that, the reason I kept on jumping was becaus I really didn't find anything that suspicious.
IronyOwl. I've only seen from you so far telling people to scumhunt, not actual pressing. Can you explain why you're simply standing back and yelling at people to press when you're not doing much of it yourself? Perhaps you're trying to look active. Can you explain?
Ed boy. Could you provide more against Powder Miner? I do not find your specific explanation satisfying. Are you just hoping to get an easy mislynch?The reason why I am voting for powder miner right now is because I am not happy with the quality of his scumhunting. He seems to be posting for the appearance rather than doing any actualy scumhunting. That vote is on him to pressure him to start doing it properly. It will stay there until he hunts enough to satisfy me, or I find someone else scummier. In terms of mislynch danger, the day ends of tuesday. That's over 72 hours, plenty of time for him to get his act together.
Jim Groovester, who's (apart from powder miner) scumhunting are you least satisfied with?
Having put my vote on Powder Miner to pressure him into scumhunting, I'm poking around at other people, hence my prodding at Jim.Ed boy. Could you provide more against Powder Miner? I do not find your specific explanation satisfying. Are you just hoping to get an easy mislynch?The reason why I am voting for powder miner right now is because I am not happy with the quality of his scumhunting. He seems to be posting for the appearance rather than doing any actualy scumhunting. That vote is on him to pressure him to start doing it properly. It will stay there until he hunts enough to satisfy me, or I find someone else scummier. In terms of mislynch danger, the day ends of tuesday. That's over 72 hours, plenty of time for him to get his act together.
Jim Groovester, who's (apart from powder miner) scumhunting are you least satisfied with?
Aren't you suspicious of anyone else? Are you just putting out a vote and going to sit on it, scum? Ed boy.
Jim Groovester, who's (apart from powder miner) scumhunting are you least satisfied with?
Nevermind that, the reason I kept on jumping was becaus I really didn't find anything that suspicious.Right now, I feel the thread is in need of IC direction more than it is my personal scumhunting. As a prime example of this, I can't really tell who's being scummy and who just doesn't know what they're doing, so trying to scumhunt them is of somewhat limited utility.
IronyOwl. I've only seen from you so far telling people to scumhunt, not actual pressing. Can you explain why you're simply standing back and yelling at people to press when you're not doing much of it yourself? Perhaps you're trying to look active. Can you explain?
I believe I was told that I houldn;t back of from questioning someone just because another person had had the same question.This does not mean "parrot someone else's questions." I'm generally satisfied that yours was different, or at least packaged differently, enough to slide by, but don't take this to mean that blindly mimicking others, intentionally or not, is productive. If you want to ask something, ask it, but make sure you want it because of pressure or data, not to look like you're doing stuff or because asking questions fills up the Scum Reveal Themselves Now meter.
The reason why I am voting for powder miner right now is because I am not happy with the quality of his scumhunting. He seems to be posting for the appearance rather than doing any actualy scumhunting. That vote is on him to pressure him to start doing it properly. It will stay there until he hunts enough to satisfy me, or I find someone else scummier. In terms of mislynch danger, the day ends of tuesday. That's over 72 hours, plenty of time for him to get his act together.Pressure really only works if you remind them of it from time to time. Also, ultimatum pressure tends to be scummy, especially if you know the player in question might not be able to deliver.
Having put my vote on Powder Miner to pressure him into scumhunting, I'm poking around at other people, hence my prodding at Jim.
Because I started going after lurking because I didn;t really know what to do, I was ending up just waiting for something suspicious I could go for...But you said lurkers were your primary concern, not your primary concern for lack of anything better.
Shakerag. He's disappeared. I'm mostly pleased with what everybody's doing.
What question? I'm sure that I answered any question you asked me.
So, on that note, what about my response to Mormota wasn't satisfactory to you?
But you said lurkers were your primary concern, not your primary concern for lack of anything better.This wasn't in the form of a question, but the assertion is that you're a liar, so you might want to respond to it.
Jim, a couple of questions. Why, back near the beginning of the game, did you reply to mipe9 "You think we're [the ICs] town? Aww, it warms me up inside." I would think that posting sarcasm would be ill advised, as that can be difficult to recognize in text ... Also, you were one of the people voting for mipe9. Why did you decide to vote for him when you did? What made you keep your vote on him for the rest of the day?
Dariush: Did Mindmaker really request a replacement or is he just not posting? Prod requested if the latter.It looks like the former. I'll put up a notice.
I am so very sad that no one else has been drinking the same kool-aid as me. So, everyone, Mindmaker: Scum? Newbie? Other? Am I really the only one who saw something queer there? ???
ed boy:I am reminding Powder Miner of this, and I will continue to do so while I continue to pressure him. I wouldn't really consider it ultimatum pressure, though - there's plenty to time left before the day's end, and if I'm not very confident in someone's scumminess, I'm going to vote extend.The reason why I am voting for powder miner right now is because I am not happy with the quality of his scumhunting. He seems to be posting for the appearance rather than doing any actualy scumhunting. That vote is on him to pressure him to start doing it properly. It will stay there until he hunts enough to satisfy me, or I find someone else scummier. In terms of mislynch danger, the day ends of tuesday. That's over 72 hours, plenty of time for him to get his act together.Pressure really only works if you remind them of it from time to time. Also, ultimatum pressure tends to be scummy, especially if you know the player in question might not be able to deliver.
Because I started going after lurking because I didn;t really know what to do, I was ending up just waiting for something suspicious I could go for...You can't wait for the scum to reveal themselves. You need to go out and make them reveal themselves. Start picking apart what they do, and digging at their answers and their arguments.
I'm not sitting on my vote. I'm examining the scumhunting he's doing and pointing out the bits that dissatisfy me. Whenever he posts, I consider what he's doing and re-evaluate him.Having put my vote on Powder Miner to pressure him into scumhunting, I'm poking around at other people, hence my prodding at Jim.I have said this once and I will say this again, to make it clearer, since you did not respond to it. Are you just going to sit on your vote not doing anything against Powder Miner at all, scum? You are trying to pressure someone into scumhunting but you are not actually scumhunting yourself. Are you going to keep asking more token questions, like what you did to Jim?
I am so very sad that no one else has been drinking the same kool-aid as me. So, everyone, Mindmaker: Scum? Newbie? Other? Am I really the only one who saw something queer there? ???When mipe9 turned out to be town, I was surprised. I listed my reasons for voting him, and at the time I considered him the most scummy. I do stand by my reasons, because they were the best I had to go on at the time.
ed boy, as another voter of mipe9, what went through your head when you saw him flip town? Do you feel you still stand behind your reasons for voting for him in the first place?
What happened to your unhappiness here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2634914#msg2634914), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631270#msg2631270), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631174#msg2631174)? I wouldn't call you 'mostly pleased' with everybody.Jim Groovester, who's (apart from powder miner) scumhunting are you least satisfied with?
Shakerag. He's disappeared.
I'm mostly pleased with what everybody's doing.
Bump. Ed boy, are you going to post, or will you just sit there content with your vote, scum?The past 24 hours or so I've been moving into university accomodation and my participation has been limited, hence my lack of immediate responses to your posts. I'm all settled in now, so that won't be a problem.
What happened to your unhappiness here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2634914#msg2634914), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631270#msg2631270), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631174#msg2631174)? I wouldn't call you 'mostly pleased' with everybody.
You seem unhappy at Powder miner, Mindmaker, and Shakerag. Of the six people other than you left in the game, that's half, significantly less than the 'everybody' you mentioned in the earlier post.What happened to your unhappiness here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2634914#msg2634914), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631270#msg2631270), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631174#msg2631174)? I wouldn't call you 'mostly pleased' with everybody.
Most everybody I'm not yelling at is doing a decent job of scumhunting.
I don't understand why you care.
As for asking token questions, that's a part of scumhunting. You can't scumhunt without them. You need to ask more in-depth questions, certainly, but before the in-depth ones come the token ones.
I am asking more in-depth questions. Although you might consider my question of jim to have no point, it's so I can compare what he says that what I have observed of him and find discrepancies. I wouldn't consider it asked for the sake of asking.As for asking token questions, that's a part of scumhunting. You can't scumhunt without them. You need to ask more in-depth questions, certainly, but before the in-depth ones come the token ones.
We are in day 2. You had plenty of time to ask pointless questions day 1, you should have suspicions by now. Why aren't you asking those in-depth questions then?
Also, I'd like to point out that token question means a question asked for the sake of asking one.
Doesn't the day end on wednesday?Does now. It would have ended tomorrow.
though the replacee warned that he'll only get here by WednesdayBS. I said tomorrow afternoon. By which I meant at 3PM, after I got out of class and an hour after day end.
IronyOwl, you are nice providing tips, but who do you suspect? If you could choose to kill off one person now, who would it be?This is a good question.
Currently, I don't particularly suspect anyone; with all the flailing that's going on, it's been difficult to pick out anything that seems outright scummy. Just about everyone is lurking, active lurking, and/or using questionable tactics.
Right now, I feel the thread is in need of IC direction more than it is my personal scumhunting. As a prime example of this, I can't really tell who's being scummy and who just doesn't know what they're doing, so trying to scumhunt them is of somewhat limited utility.IC advice-giving does not preclude scumhunting. The town is always in need of people who actively attempt to find scum. Town who don't hunt scum are bad town and look like scum. Scum who don't hunt scum are easier to spot, although not so much from what I've seen of this game. Why aren't you hunting scum?
What is your opinion on IronyOwl's scumhunting? You seem to be suggesting that you approve of his efforts, nonexistant as they are.What happened to your unhappiness here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2634914#msg2634914), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631270#msg2631270), or here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2631174#msg2631174)? I wouldn't call you 'mostly pleased' with everybody.
Most everybody I'm not yelling at is doing a decent job of scumhunting.
Jim groovester, you seem slow to respond to my last post. I'm expecting you to say something.
What is your opinion on IronyOwl's scumhunting? You seem to be suggesting that you approve of his efforts, nonexistant as they are.
Shakerag:
Regarding your question, I'd have to say frustrated newbie.
I'm curious why so much of your effort was dedicated to hunting Mindmaker. Who else do you suspect of being scum? Why haven't you acted on those suspicions?
How much procrastinating have you been doing? This is a surprisingly good first post.
Would you be so kind as to try leading by example, Jim?
How much procrastinating have you been doing? This is a surprisingly good first post.
About an hour's worth.
My problem is as such:Jim groovester, you seem slow to respond to my last post. I'm expecting you to say something.
Who the fuck cares?
Is that the response you're looking for? It's the response I'm going to give you.
You seem to think that when I said I was unhappy with a few people, I meant uniformly unhappy, which is simply not true. For the things I'm not happy about there's still plenty of stuff that they're doing perfectly fine.
I don't see how this question is going to lead you anywhere. Tell me how my IC opinion on the players' in the game and their current state is at all relevant to how I am town or scum. Please, I am desperately interested to know.
Shakerag, if you're asking questions of the people who voted mipe9 about their votes, there must obviously be something you're dissatisfied about them with. Care to tell me what that is?
Maybe you're having trouble getting anything out of me because your line of questioning is terrible?Your opinion on other people matters because if you're town then it tells me what the results of your scumhunting is. If you don't have a strong opinion, or if there are inconsistencies in your opinion, then it either means that you're a bad scumhunter or that you're scum.
I'm forthcoming if you have good questions to ask.
You haven't answered how my opinion on where everybody is matters at all, because that's the most important part, isn't it? I'm certain it doesn't matter one fucking bit, but you don't seem to think so and you're not explaining why.
Irony owl, you've been very quiet. Have you managed to form an opinion of someone yet? Why have you not been scumhunting recently?Was getting a town vibe off Powder Miner, despite his generally terrible play. Not sure if I'm getting it any more, but I'm not getting the opposite either. Gut feelings are weird like that.
IronyOwl:I'm pretty sure I just explained this in the part you quoted. How am I supposed to pick out suspicious behavior amongst uncertain flailing? What makes a bandwagon or lack of scumhunting a sign of scum and not proof of not being sure what they're doing? And how does my scumhunting help others, notably whoever I'm pressuring, get better at it?IronyOwl, you are nice providing tips, but who do you suspect? If you could choose to kill off one person now, who would it be?This is a good question.
Currently, I don't particularly suspect anyone; with all the flailing that's going on, it's been difficult to pick out anything that seems outright scummy. Just about everyone is lurking, active lurking, and/or using questionable tactics.
If you don't particularly suspect anyone, why aren't you trying to find something suspicious? Or have you begun suspecting someone and simply not following up on your suspicions? You're all about telling other people to scumhunt, but when it comes to actual scumhunting, I find you sorely lacking, which sets off alarm bells in my head.
Because it's hard to do amongst noobs, and because it generally doesn't help people start doing what they should be.Right now, I feel the thread is in need of IC direction more than it is my personal scumhunting. As a prime example of this, I can't really tell who's being scummy and who just doesn't know what they're doing, so trying to scumhunt them is of somewhat limited utility.IC advice-giving does not preclude scumhunting. The town is always in need of people who actively attempt to find scum. Town who don't hunt scum are bad town and look like scum. Scum who don't hunt scum are easier to spot, although not so much from what I've seen of this game. Why aren't you hunting scum?
Well, mipe9 was lynched and flipped town. I find it a bit of a stretch to believe that he was entirely mislynched by town members, and that the scumteam just sat back and watched. With how mipe9 started D1, as I mentioned before, it would have been pretty easy for the scumteam to nudge suspicion and votes onto him. Therefore, I beleive that one or both of the scumteam voted for mipe9 D1, and/or were casting suspicion on him to draw other votes in.No. Bad. WRONG. "It would have been convenient for scum" is not even remotely the same thing as "At least one scum was doing it."
IronyOwl, I never had any problem with your responses to Mormota. Not sure what you meant by that question.Well, my response to Mormota didn't cover your question, evidently. Why not?
And sure, the thread might need IC direction, but can't you direct and scumhunt at the same time?
Your opinion on other people matters because if you're town then it tells me what the results of your scumhunting is. If you don't have a strong opinion, or if there are inconsistencies in your opinion, then it either means that you're a bad scumhunter or that you're scum.
Shakerag, if you're asking questions of the people who voted mipe9 about their votes, there must obviously be something you're dissatisfied about them with. Care to tell me what that is?
Well, mipe9 was lynched and flipped town. I find it a bit of a stretch to believe that he was entirely mislynched by town members, and that the scumteam just sat back and watched. With how mipe9 started D1, as I mentioned before, it would have been pretty easy for the scumteam to nudge suspicion and votes onto him. Therefore, I beleive that one or both of the scumteam voted for mipe9 D1, and/or were casting suspicion on him to draw other votes in.
So, I asked you about mipe9 before. What was he doing that made your opinion of him worse after you voted? You responded to Urist that you aren't getting any good reads off of anybody because all you see is "newbie, newbie, newbie, newbie, and so on, and not much else." Why was mipe9 different, then?
Urist:IronyOwl:I'm pretty sure I just explained this in the part you quoted. How am I supposed to pick out suspicious behavior amongst uncertain flailing? What makes a bandwagon or lack of scumhunting a sign of scum and not proof of not being sure what they're doing? And how does my scumhunting help others, notably whoever I'm pressuring, get better at it?IronyOwl, you are nice providing tips, but who do you suspect? If you could choose to kill off one person now, who would it be?This is a good question.
Currently, I don't particularly suspect anyone; with all the flailing that's going on, it's been difficult to pick out anything that seems outright scummy. Just about everyone is lurking, active lurking, and/or using questionable tactics.
If you don't particularly suspect anyone, why aren't you trying to find something suspicious? Or have you begun suspecting someone and simply not following up on your suspicions? You're all about telling other people to scumhunt, but when it comes to actual scumhunting, I find you sorely lacking, which sets off alarm bells in my head.Because it's hard to do amongst noobs, and because it generally doesn't help people start doing what they should be.Right now, I feel the thread is in need of IC direction more than it is my personal scumhunting. As a prime example of this, I can't really tell who's being scummy and who just doesn't know what they're doing, so trying to scumhunt them is of somewhat limited utility.IC advice-giving does not preclude scumhunting. The town is always in need of people who actively attempt to find scum. Town who don't hunt scum are bad town and look like scum. Scum who don't hunt scum are easier to spot, although not so much from what I've seen of this game. Why aren't you hunting scum?
Now, what was it about my responses to Mormota and Powder Miner that didn't address this?
How much procrastinating have you been doing? This is a surprisingly good first post.
About an hour's worth.
I mean in total. How many games have you read before you jumped in here?
I neglected to factor in the similarities between newbie behavior and scummy behavior. As such, I thought you were using the other players' newness as an excuse to not hunt. Taking that factor into account, I see the need for the ICs to get us to be at least competent before you two can truly begin scumhunting. In essence, you're hunting for scum by trying to reduce/eliminate newbie town mistakes and general uncertainty that the scum are hiding behind. I don't know why I didn't see that earlier. I'm still suspicious of you, but no more than I am of anyone else at this point.
Mormota, why are you voting ed boy? Is his vote for Powder Miner the only reason?
Now, what was it about my answers to Mormota and Powder Miner that didn't cover this?Your answers to Mormota and Powder Miner were given some time ago. I wanted to see if your position had changed.
So, I asked you about mipe9 before. What was he doing that made your opinion of him worse after you voted? You responded to Urist that you aren't getting any good reads off of anybody because all you see is "newbie, newbie, newbie, newbie, and so on, and not much else." Why was mipe9 different, then?
He did things I strongly recognized as being scumtells more than newbtells.
Here's a slice of his posts after I voted for him. 1 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2622752#msg2622752) 2 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2624743#msg2624743) 3 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2622282#msg2622282) 4 (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2625360#msg2625360)
You can see that he was doing absolutely no hunting whatsoever, and only reacting to what people asked questions of him. His vote on IronyOwl clinched it, since it was completely baseless and looked like a desperate move to do something, anything, to look town.
It was passive, reactive play, which looked very much like scum play.
Jim Groovester, who's (apart from powder miner) scumhunting are you least satisfied with?
Shakerag. He's disappeared.
I'm mostly pleased with what everybody's doing.
You can't wait for the scum to reveal themselves. You need to go out and make them reveal themselves. Start picking apart what they do, and digging at their answers and their arguments.
You can't wait for the scum to reveal themselves. You need to go out and make them reveal themselves. Start picking apart what they do, and digging at their answers and their arguments.
ed boy, your pressure vote for Powder Miner isn't scumhunting. While I believe your questions about Jim are valid, a pressure vote alone isn't enough to reveal PM as scum or town, unless it gets him lynched. So why aren't you investigating Powder Miner?
Mormota, you're being vague. What didn't you find satisfactory about ed boy's questions?
Shakerag, didn't you find anyone else suspicious other than Mindmaker? Why did you focus on him alone, not even bothering to ask a few questions from other people?
Regarding D1 voting:I put a pressure vote on Jafferey when he was not being active. At that point in the game, people haven't posted enough for me to be able to form a strong opinion, and lurkiness was pretty much the only thing that I could properly look for. Once shakerag replaced him, lurkiness was not an issue and thus I had no reason to keep the vote on him. As for voting for mipe9, I explained myself quite thoroughly in the post before I voted why I thought he was the scummiest player.
ed boy's vote stayed on Jafferey/Shakerag for most of the day, occasionally asking other people questions, but mostly sitting on his vote against a lurker. Once Jafferey was replaced and Shakerag proved to be more active, ed boy changed his vote to mipe9, four posts after Mindmaker did. His was the vote that sealed mipe's fate. ed boy, were you intentionally going after easy lynches?
Vote ed boy for the reasons I listed above. I'll probably have more questions for you soon, Mormota.You seem quick to vote. You didn't give my any time to respond between your FOS post and your votepost. The day's nearing it's end, and if you're trying to pressure me into doing something with that vote, then I don't have a lot of time to do it. Your reasons are pretty flimsy, too. You state that when I switch my vote away from someone when they stop doing something scummy as if it's a bad thing, and then you ask me why I voted for mipe9 when others have asked me, and I explained perfectly well why if you would have bothered to actually read the vote post (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.180). Do you have any better material, or is that it, Urist Imiknorris?
And how did mipe9's passive, reactive play differ from Mindmaker's passive, reactive play? Why vote mipe9 over Mindmaker? Also:
Can you seriously tell me, with a straight face, that you were "mostly pleased" with Mindmaker's scumhunting at that point?
Also, Jim, what's your strategy on replacements? How much weight will you give Mindmaker's posts compared to Urists's posts? Since he's coming in mid-ish D2, what do you think will give you the best read of him? Pressing? Or sitting back and watching? I'm still waiting for you to jump in on scumhunting and show us nubfaces how it's done.
Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me.
I was pressuring Jafferey, but that plan's been scuppered now.If you were town, you would know by then that the only plan you can afford to have is to find someone suspicious, then hammer away at them until they've given up enough information for you to decide whether they were town or scum. It's even in the OP, under the spoiler labeled "Dakarian's Scumhunting Bible, reposted here for your convenience." As for mipe9, your argument was that he hadn't been contibuting in any useful way. The same argument could have been applied to Mindmaker (first question after RVS is to Shakerag asking him what he thinks of mipe9 [in the same post as he votes for mipe], then gets defensive), Powder Miner (hops from player to player asking questions and never really following up on them), or Mormota (completely stops asking questions between the start of Jafferey's lurking and immediately before his replacement) - but mipe9 was the one who had the votes at the time. As I said, easy lynch.
You've really got it out for Mindmaker, don't you?Bold part added by me. Stop throwing up your IC-asshole-shield and deflecting my posts. I'm clearly analyzing your behavior right now; Mindmaker just happens to be part of what I'm probing you about. About the bolded part here, maybe you can go back and show me what I missed, because a large part of why I was focusing on Mindmaker in the first place was exactly that he wasn't asking questions.
If you can't see the difference then you have serious tunnelvision. Mindmaker asked and answered more questions and in greater detail than mipe9.
I don't expect perfection, I expect progress.I'm not under any illusion that I'm a better player than anyone here. Hell, if I was the driving force that made Mindmaker quit, then I feel kind of shitty about that. I am under the impression that this kind of game may involve tactics where you have to bear down on someone to get them to panic, and pick apart everything they do. Since it is a game, I'm not trying to make it personal nor take it personally if someone were to do that to me.
Now quit being a giant douche and looking down at people you think play the game worse than you.
You voted Jaffery to pressure him, then after you stopped RVS questions (minus the usual attached vote), you asked Orangebottle's opinion on Jafferey, reminded the latter that he hadn't answered your question yet, responded to Mindmaker's post re: time left in D1, then immediately after Shakerag replaced in, posted:The plan of putting pressure on a lurker is obviously going to be scuppered if the lurker is no longer a lurker.I was pressuring Jafferey, but that plan's been scuppered now.If you were town, you would know by then that the only plan you can afford to have is to find someone suspicious, then hammer away at them until they've given up enough information for you to decide whether they were town or scum. It's even in the OP, under the spoiler labeled "Dakarian's Scumhunting Bible, reposted here for your convenience." As for mipe9, your argument was that he hadn't been contibuting in any useful way. The same argument could have been applied to Mindmaker (first question after RVS is to Shakerag asking him what he thinks of mipe9 [in the same post as he votes for mipe], then gets defensive), Powder Miner (hops from player to player asking questions and never really following up on them), or Mormota (completely stops asking questions between the start of Jafferey's lurking and immediately before his replacement) - but mipe9 was the one who had the votes at the time. As I said, easy lynch.
You then proceeded to OMGUS me (with a FoS instead of a vote - is there a term for that?) when I called you out on it. That's not helping your case in my eyes. Why would my voting for you cast suspicion on me? Ed boy, you are either scum or lazy, and neither helps town.
As for why my FoS changed to a vote so quickly, the only reason I didn't vote for you immediately is because I wanted to hear Mormota's answer to my question. Had he not answered so soon after I FoS'd you, I would have waited for you to respond.
Also, I too am suspicious of Powder Miner's disappearance, but it isn't as important as your scumminess.
My bad, I didn't mean it to be used in the 'scum defending scum' sense, I meant it to be used in the 'attack someone because of their attack' sense.Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me.
That word's usage is specific, and you're using it incorrectly.
Chainsawing refers to when a scum player attacks a player who is attacking his scumbuddy, to discredit the attacker and take momentum away from the attack.
It's a scumtell people like to call before anybody flips scum, when they really shouldn't.
Powder Miner has disappeared.
The plan of putting pressure on a lurker is obviously going to be scuppered if the lurker is no longer a lurker.My question is why was it your plan in the first place?
As for OMGUSing, I would be hesitatent to call it that. It's the speed at which you jumped from no suspicion to FOS to vote that worried me (just as Jim's sudden vote worries me), not the fact that it was a vote for me.There is never no suspicion with me. There are only possible scum, might be scum, likely scum, and dead. At this point you are simply the likeliest I can see.
Annyway, Urist Imiknorris, I'm also a little suspicious of Shakerag for not doing much other than stare at Mindmaker. He should be scumhunting others, he isn;t and Mindmaker isn't answering him at all.I am the Mindmaker. It is me.
It was the start of the game. At that point, there is little material on anyone, because everyone has been posting so little. Encouraging other people to post is important because I need them to post so I can get material on them. He was posting less than the others, so I tried to encourage him to post more, so I could form an opinion.The plan of putting pressure on a lurker is obviously going to be scuppered if the lurker is no longer a lurker.My question is why was it your plan in the first place?
Also, I too am suspicious of Powder Miner's disappearance, but it isn't as important as your scumminess.
You've really got it out for Mindmaker, don't you?Bold part added by me. Stop throwing up your IC-asshole-shield and deflecting my posts. I'm clearly analyzing your behavior right now; Mindmaker just happens to be part of what I'm probing you about. About the bolded part here, maybe you can go back and show me what I missed, because a large part of why I was focusing on Mindmaker in the first place was exactly that he wasn't asking questions.
If you can't see the difference then you have serious tunnelvision. Mindmaker asked and answered more questions and in greater detail than mipe9.
But again, I'm not calling into question Mindmaker's play per se, but your analysis of it. What kinds of progress are you talking about? Going from not scumhunting to ... more not scumhunting?
Re: Powder Miner - Are you really serious, Jim? I don't exactly have any love for the guy myself, but come on. The lurker tracker has him as posting 22 hours ago ... only 2 more hours than IronyOwl. And I know I've seen you go 20+ hours without posting at least once before, if not more. If this is what the experienced players do for scumhunting, then it must obviously be way over my head. Maybe you can throw me a few crumbs of wisdom about why Powder Miner is getting a vote for something you've done yourself.
Also, why are you so quick to condemn powder miner? None of your recent posts have been hammering away at him, and you haven't shown any attention to him at all recently, which makes your sudden change of heart very suspicious. Given how close we are to the day's end, I can't believe that this is a simple pressure vote. You seem very keen for powder miner to hang for a mild case of inactivity, and I don't like that at all, Jim Groovester.
Also, I too am suspicious of Powder Miner's disappearance, but it isn't as important as your scumminess.
Are you now?
Interesting that you FoS him after I vote him.
If you've got legitimate issue with one of the ICs, you better not give IronyOwl or me any slack just because we're the ICs. We're still players in the game, and we could still be scum just like any one of you.
Avoiding asking questions because of our positions is akin to not asking us questions for any other reason. Taking on more powerful players is probably something a lot of everybody is going to have to go through at some point in their mafia career, so they might as well learn it here.
Annyway, Urist Imiknorris, I'm also a little suspicious of Shakerag for not doing much other than stare at Mindmaker. He should be scumhunting others, he isn;t and Mindmaker isn't answering him at all.I am the Mindmaker. It is me.
Might as well, Jim. Might as well.
Oh.
Shakerag, didn't you find anyone else suspicious other than Mindmaker? Why did you focus on him alone, not even bothering to ask a few questions from other people?
I think I responded to a similar question from one of the ICs earlier, but basically I first was suspicious of Powder Miner, and later Mindmaker stood out to me more. Looking back at my earlier notes, I was pretty suspicious of Orangebottle (whoops), but I was focusing on Mindmaker to see if I could get him to panic and slip up. I was expecting a number of different outcomes, but him up and quitting derailed my mental train of thought so badly, it took a while to clean up the clusterfuck of mental train cars and bits of mental train passengers.
tl;dr - lol tunnel vision
Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me. Apart from one minor question to IronyOwl and your recent question to Shakerag, your only non-responsive actions have been hacking away at me. Why have you not been looking at someone else?
Whoops? I find that suspicious, Shakerag. Why would you say whoops? There's no reason as town to point out how that suspicion was wrong. What I see is that as scum, you're trying to appear town. Why did you say that?
And there's no real reason for scum to point it out either.
And there's no real reason for scum to point it out either.
Yes there is. I even pointed it out. Inexperienced scum could think that makes them look like town.
Oh, goody, lynching the IC.
That's an intelligent move. Especially with the strength of the cases.
Pat yourselves on the back, you dumbasses.
Insulting people will make them want to get rid of you however scummy you look. It's not a question of mafia skill, but basic human psychology. However, this is sort of stupid. Extend.
With the game so close to the end of the day, a vote at this stage is pretty serious, and you seem to be throwing yours around rather lightly.This is a very good point, ed boy.
Also, why are you so quick to condemn powder miner? None of your recent posts have been hammering away at him, and you haven't shown any attention to him at all recently, which makes your sudden change of heart very suspicious. Given how close we are to the day's end, I can't believe that this is a simple pressure vote. You seem very keen for powder miner to hang for a mild case of inactivity, and I don't like that at all, Jim Groovester.
I am not required to be nice, I am required to teach.
I will be nice when the situation calls for it. E.G., I have to lead a completely helpless newbie by the hand to get them to even start scumhunting.
I will be wrathful and terrible when the situation calls for it. E.G., I have to bust the asses of newbie hotshits.
Also, Shakerag, I don't see any problem with the D1 votecount. It as pretty even from RVing, but three people had been voting for mipe9 because they found him suspicious, -after multiple extensions-, and with cases. They just turned out to be wrong.Interesting choice of words at the end there, Powder Miner. Sounds like you think that none of the people voting for mipe9 could have been scum trying for a mislynch. Maybe you know something the rest of us don't?
Jim: As much as it absolutely pains me to say, based on your responses to my questions I don't have anything I can confidently press further at this time. However I still feel that you're waving your IC-shield (encircled with bands of ego, and menacing with spikes of condescending) around to deflect attacks, so I'm far from convinced that you're a townie.
Also, Shakerag, I don't see any problem with the D1 votecount. It as pretty even from RVing, but three people had been voting for mipe9 because they found him suspicious, -after multiple extensions-, and with cases. They just turned out to be wrong.Interesting choice of words at the end there, Powder Miner. Sounds like you think that none of the people voting for mipe9 could have been scum trying for a mislynch. Maybe you know something the rest of us don't?
Outright ignore? Now why are you making things up Mormota? I didn't even know Urist was the replacement- I miss things pretty easily.
And the "lurking" people have been calling me out for is life, and you need to deal with it, why precisely would you ignore that? Also, what the heck is calling someone out on saying the word "whoopa?" That's completely ridiculous. And if you want me to drop the question on Irony and ask someone else one, so be it, unvote Irony (I think) Mormota, What's up with ignoring several of my posts in addition to voting shakerag for saying the word "whoops"?
You do seem to be getting somewhat defensive though.
Oh, goody, lynching the IC.I don't like how you're throwing the IC card around. One one hand, you're saying that you should not be placed above suspicion because you're an IC. However, there are posts like this where you make out as if you should get special treatment for it. Your arguments don't consist of 'I'm town, you shouldn't lych me', they consist of 'I'm an IC, you shouldn't lynch me'.
I wasn't voting Jim out of the blue. I already had my suspicions, I had spend several posts questioning him, and I had already FOS'd him. Jim's vote on powder miner had neither of the last two, and I suspect didn't have the first either. As for the final vote, that's because of timezones. Because of my timezone, I am online and on B12 shortly before the day deadline, which means that my activity comes right before day's end, and thus I tend to be among the last to vote.With the game so close to the end of the day, a vote at this stage is pretty serious, and you seem to be throwing yours around rather lightly.This is a very good point, ed boy.Also, why are you so quick to condemn powder miner? None of your recent posts have been hammering away at him, and you haven't shown any attention to him at all recently, which makes your sudden change of heart very suspicious. Given how close we are to the day's end, I can't believe that this is a simple pressure vote. You seem very keen for powder miner to hang for a mild case of inactivity, and I don't like that at all, Jim Groovester.
You seem to have done the same thing in the same post, except with even less than I had. Ed boy, your words don't match your actions. Explain yourself. I also find it interesting to note that if it weren't for the extension, you would have cast the final vote on both lynch-ees. I'm also having difficulty accepting your explanations for my previous line of inquiry. Don't be surprised if I go back to that.
ed boy, I'll have your case too. I have a feeling it's less artificial and less contrived because you're not going about it like you know everything there is to know about playing the game already. Still, I would know what it is and why my answers are apparently unsatisfactory.It feels to me like you're using your IC position to undermine lines of suspicion and questioning against you. When people do get answers out of you, they are often brief and can be inconsistent. You don't seem to be adding anything with your posts.
ed boy, I'd also like to know why you unvoted Powder Miner after he vanished. Wasn't the entire purpose behind your vote to get him to start scumhunting? Why would you drop it when he wasn't even posting, much less hunting?That vote was a pressure vote. With the day nearing it's end, I take votes a lot more seriously and a vote to pressure someone into doing something becomes very inappropriate. Powder miner's lack of activity then was a coincidence. I took the pressure vote off him about 24 hours before day's end in case something unforseen came up and I would not be able to get online between then and day's end.
Powder Miner:There's at least two things you should be responding to in this post, but you're not. Why not?IronyOwl, I never had any problem with your responses to Mormota. Not sure what you meant by that question.Well, my response to Mormota didn't cover your question, evidently. Why not?
And sure, the thread might need IC direction, but can't you direct and scumhunt at the same time?
I could, but I don't think it'd be very productive.
And I'm still calling you a liar, (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636803#msg2636803) so you might want to address that.
I was just pointing out that newbie hotshits may want to lynch you even if they don't find you scummy, because they might not like being called newbie hotshitsThen that's something they desperately need to work on. Trying to lynch people for no reason other than that they piss you off is a pretty surefire way to get into a tunneling match with another townie, likely resulting in at least one of you getting lynched for no goddamned reason.
Jim: As much as it absolutely pains me to say, based on your responses to my questions I don't have anything I can confidently press further at this time. However I still feel that you're waving your IC-shield (encircled with bands of ego, and menacing with spikes of condescending) around to deflect attacks, so I'm far from convinced that you're a townie.I haven't really seen this. Examples?
Irony owl, you're the other IC. Do you think that Jim has been using his IC status as an excuse too much, or not? Also, it's been two days since you last posted, why the lack of activity?As far as I've seen, all of his IC excuses have followed the same format:
My main suspicion is IronyOwl (I'm tired of backing off of, not only because he's lurking (although lurking without explanation does piss me off pretty badly and is in fact a scumtell), but because when he does post, he's not scumhunting much at all. He teaches as an IC, but he fails to scumhunt/Outright ignore? Now why are you making things up Mormota? I didn't even know Urist was the replacement- I miss things pretty easily.
And the "lurking" people have been calling me out for is life, and you need to deal with it, why precisely would you ignore that? Also, what the heck is calling someone out on saying the word "whoopa?" That's completely ridiculous. And if you want me to drop the question on Irony and ask someone else one, so be it, unvote Irony (I think) Mormota, What's up with ignoring several of my posts in addition to voting shakerag for saying the word "whoops"?
I'd like to know who your top suspect is, along with a case to go along with it. Make it a good one, because after a while I start feeling terrible about yelling at you all the time.
Impress me, Powder Miner.
when he does post, he's not scumhunting much at all. He teaches as an IC, but he fails to scumhunt/(emphasis mine)
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414
Like this post. He does a lot of IC instructing to players, but he manages to fail to do anything close to scumhunting except for remind me that he was asking we a question earlier. HE asks no new questions, he even doesn't address my answers to his other questions, nor add any other questions.
That's passive. Always, always, always, ALWAYS be scumhunting. It's scummy to be passive! And you cover up not pushing with the excuse that "Oh, it might not get him to slip, and you know, well, I'm not going to do anything because you know, I don't have much to base anything on." It's Day 2, you should have stuff to base it off of if you read the thread, and if you don't it's still OK to RV at Day 2, don't just sit there and be passive! Ask questions! Scumhunt!
Oh, goody, lynching the IC.I don't like how you're throwing the IC card around. One one hand, you're saying that you should not be placed above suspicion because you're an IC. However, there are posts like this where you make out as if you should get special treatment for it. Your arguments don't consist of 'I'm town, you shouldn't lych me', they consist of 'I'm an IC, you shouldn't lynch me'.
ed boy, I'll have your case too. I have a feeling it's less artificial and less contrived because you're not going about it like you know everything there is to know about playing the game already. Still, I would know what it is and why my answers are apparently unsatisfactory.It feels to me like you're using your IC position to undermine lines of suspicion and questioning against you. When people do get answers out of you, they are often brief and can be inconsistent. You don't seem to be adding anything with your posts.
Whenever someone asks you a question, you spend as much time griping about being asked the question as you do answering it. You seem to consider being questioned and suspected a terrible thing, and you're determined to make things and difficult as possible for the questioner. I can't see a town player wanting to be so difficult to read, but I can see a scum player wanting that.
ICs: Metagaming like I just did kinda makes me feel dirty. Is there a way to fix that?
The problem is, simply pointing out a bad line of questioning doesn't help a huge amount, or at least doesn't help as much as saying why. If I ask you a bad question, I don't know if it's a bad question or not. I think it's a good question, otherwise I wouldn't be asking it. If you simply say 'no, that's a bad question', then I'm going to try a minor variation on it to see if that variation constitutes a good question. If I get similar responses, then I won't know if you're town and being honest, or if you're scum trying to dissuade me from a perfectly good line of reasoning against you. However, if you were to say 'That's a bad question because of X,Y,Z', and explain the reason why it's a bad question, then not only will I see that it's a bad question sooner, but I will have a better idea of what constitutes a good question and what constitutes a bad question, and I can avoid bad questions in the future.Oh, goody, lynching the IC.I don't like how you're throwing the IC card around. One one hand, you're saying that you should not be placed above suspicion because you're an IC. However, there are posts like this where you make out as if you should get special treatment for it. Your arguments don't consist of 'I'm town, you shouldn't lych me', they consist of 'I'm an IC, you shouldn't lynch me'.
If I thought your arguments were good I wouldn't be complaining about them.
For example, did I give you shit when you said I wasn't scumhunting? No, because I could quite clearly see how you could think that, and to a certain extent, it was true.
Did I give you shit when you started asking me why I was pleased with Mindmaker? Yes, because that's an argument that will get you absolutely nowhere and has no relevance to whether I am town or scum.
I am a very powerful player in the game, and if you think I'm just going to flop over and let you lynch me just to be a nice guy, well, I don't know why you thought that, because that would be ridiculous. If you want to see me lynched, you're going to have to work harder. A lot harder than you are right now, because I will fight you every inch of the way, and I will not tone down any hostility and I will destroy all of your arguments as you struggle to present them. I will not hold back.
I hope you (and everybody else) will take a lesson away from this: Don't ever give up. Giving up is generally regarded as a scum tell (to be more accurate, it was generally regarded as a scum tell), but it's still always a good idea to fight and challenge as much as possible on the way down. If this makes your life difficult, sorry, but maybe one day you'll get to be in the same situation and come to appreciate my position here. If you do it well enough, you might even reverse opinions.ed boy, I'll have your case too. I have a feeling it's less artificial and less contrived because you're not going about it like you know everything there is to know about playing the game already. Still, I would know what it is and why my answers are apparently unsatisfactory.It feels to me like you're using your IC position to undermine lines of suspicion and questioning against you. When people do get answers out of you, they are often brief and can be inconsistent. You don't seem to be adding anything with your posts.
Whenever someone asks you a question, you spend as much time griping about being asked the question as you do answering it. You seem to consider being questioned and suspected a terrible thing, and you're determined to make things and difficult as possible for the questioner. I can't see a town player wanting to be so difficult to read, but I can see a scum player wanting that.
You should be taking notes.
If you ask me questions I think are unreasonable, I will make your life difficult.
I will point out, however, that I did spend a lot of time answering all of your questions and explaining why I thought you shouldn't be asking them. However, once you got your answer, you didn't stop asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. I answered the question to the best of my ability. Just because it wasn't the answer you wanted doesn't mean I'm going to change my answer if you ask again.
I've been making myself available to be read: I answered all your questions. Maybe if you're not getting any good reads, the fault lies with the questions? Or maybe you? At some point, if you're not getting anywhere, you're going to have to give up a line of questioning instead of accusing the person who's answering them of being scum.
I haven't been scumhunting because you're all noobs. It's hard to figure out who's not actually town when not even the townies are entirely certain what town is. Also, scumhunting people who are flailing tends to not help them stop very well, or at least usually no better than just pointing it out.That may be an excuse for not scumhunting, but it isn't an excuse for not posting. If people are acting too noobishly, then don't just post nothing for most of a day. That's not solving the problem at all, that's waiting for a mislynch. You could have, at the very least, pointed out which parts of people's posts were noobish. For example, there was the picking I was doing at Jim. At the time, I thought it was a perfectly good line of questioning, and the only person who was saying otherwise was Jim, whose claims I wasn't going to take as gospel given that he was the questionee. If you had told me that it was a bad idea, instead of doing absolutely nothing, then it would have come to an end a lot faster, and it would have saved us both huge amounts of hassle. Instead, the only thing you did for four days was post once to answer some questions against you. If you are town, then you could be doing a lot better, and you're doing a lot worse then I expect a town IC to be doing. Why did you not post anything, IronyOwn?
IronyOwl, you still haven't cast a vote yet.Yeah, that's gonna have to change.
It feels to me like you're using your IC position to undermine lines of suspicion and questioning against you.You keep saying this, but you're not really providing examples or (sound) explanations for why he's wrong. Producing either would do wonders for your case.
When people do get answers out of you, they are often brief and can be inconsistent.Examples. I assume you mean in a scummy way?
If you simply say 'no, that's a bad question', then I'm going to try a minor variation on it to see if that variation constitutes a good question. If I get similar responses, then I won't know if you're town and being honest, or if you're scum trying to dissuade me from a perfectly good line of reasoning against you. However, if you were to say 'That's a bad question because of X,Y,Z', and explain the reason why it's a bad question, then not only will I see that it's a bad question sooner, but I will have a better idea of what constitutes a good question and what constitutes a bad question, and I can avoid bad questions in the future.First of all, it's generally better to trim down quotes where possible, to avoid the WoT effect. More relevant to the subject, why don't you just ask about it? You've got two players who's main purpose is to help you play the game better, and you're playing trial-and-error with them using bad questions, without so much as bothering to explain that it's a pain in the ass? Why would you ever do that?
Irony Owl, I don't like your lack of activity. In the past four days, you've posted twice. Furthermore, there is an issue I have with one of your posts.As I said, busy. I didn't realize I'd been that scarce, though.
For example, there was the picking I was doing at Jim. At the time, I thought it was a perfectly good line of questioning, and the only person who was saying otherwise was Jim, whose claims I wasn't going to take as gospel given that he was the questionee. If you had told me that it was a bad idea, instead of doing absolutely nothing, then it would have come to an end a lot faster, and it would have saved us both huge amounts of hassle.I assumed you remembered and trusted Jim's starting thing about how he'll always be impartial as far as IC advice goes; ie he won't tell you your suspicions are shit just because he doesn't want to get lynched. Thus, I assumed Jim was handling your IC needs, especially since most of what I'd have had to say would be more or less parroting him.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414...
Like this post. He does a lot of IC instructing to players, but he manages to fail to do anything close to scumhunting except for remind me that he was asking we a question earlier.
HE asks no new questions, he even doesn't address my answers to his other questions, nor add any other questions.This is ridiculously false. I mean, the no new questions part is true, but you couldn't even handle the two I already had out to you.
Outright ignore? Now why are you making things up Mormota? I didn't even know Urist was the replacement- I miss things pretty easily.
And the "lurking" people have been calling me out for is life, and you need to deal with it, why precisely would you ignore that? Also, what the heck is calling someone out on saying the word "whoopa?" That's completely ridiculous. And if you want me to drop the question on Irony and ask someone else one, so be it, unvote Irony (I think) Mormota, What's up with ignoring several of my posts in addition to voting shakerag for saying the word "whoops"?
Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me. Apart from one minor question to IronyOwl and your recent question to Shakerag, your only non-responsive actions have been hacking away at me. Why have you not been looking at someone else?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
I asked you for your case and then you tell me you don't have one. Why are you voting me again?Basically, I accepted your point on mipe9 vs. Mindmaker, scrapped my second point about your comments about Mindmaker (because that was IC commentary, not game commentary), and I feel kind of "ehhh" on the Powder Miner vote. So that pretty much leaves me at a "suspicious" level with you for now. Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
You seem convinced that somebody on mipe9's lynch had to be scum. You have already been advised on why this is a terrible idea. I suggest you listen.Maybe not 100% convinced there was scum on the vote, but suspicious, certainly.
Additionally, you've talked about how you found Orangebottle suspicious. What were your reasons?
Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
Where's the lie? I never said I was going to change my vote. I still think Jim is suspicious, and until I find someone more suspicious I'm content with keeping it there.Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
Yet you still haven't taken it back. Lies, lies and lies, scum.
Where's the lie? I never said I was going to change my vote. I still think Jim is suspicious, and until I find someone more suspicious I'm content with keeping it there.Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
Yet you still haven't taken it back. Lies, lies and lies, scum.
Because you said the only reason the vote was on him was God of War. This is obviously not true since it is still on him.That would be because I'm still re-reading through the thread this morning to find someone I'm more confident about being scum.
The problem is, simply pointing out a bad line of questioning doesn't help a huge amount, or at least doesn't help as much as saying why.
Well. Not reading the thread, just randomly posting is outright ignoring everything everyone has said. Urist was very active by that time. Please point out which of your posts I ignored. About voting someone for saying whoops, well. It is a perfect opportunity for scum to, they might think, "prove" they're town by acting as if they felt sorry for being suspicious of someone who was NKed and was town.
I asked you for your case and then you tell me you don't have one. Why are you voting me again?Basically, I accepted your point on mipe9 vs. Mindmaker, scrapped my second point about your comments about Mindmaker (because that was IC commentary, not game commentary), and I feel kind of "ehhh" on the Powder Miner vote. So that pretty much leaves me at a "suspicious" level with you for now. Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
Just off the top my my head, there's this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2645734#msg2645734).It feels to me like you're using your IC position to undermine lines of suspicion and questioning against you.You keep saying this, but you're not really providing examples or (sound) explanations for why he's wrong. Producing either would do wonders for your case.
Take this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2643150#msg2643150), for example. The actual answers are only about a sentence each, and not particularly long sentences. As for inconsistent, there was the whole issue where I asked him what he thought of the scumhunting and he said that he was mostly happy, when he had recently spent several posts shouting at half the other players for bad scumhunting.When people do get answers out of you, they are often brief and can be inconsistent.Examples. I assume you mean in a scummy way?
It's because nobody would intentionally ask a bad question. I don't know that they're bad questions.If you simply say 'no, that's a bad question', then I'm going to try a minor variation on it to see if that variation constitutes a good question. If I get similar responses, then I won't know if you're town and being honest, or if you're scum trying to dissuade me from a perfectly good line of reasoning against you. However, if you were to say 'That's a bad question because of X,Y,Z', and explain the reason why it's a bad question, then not only will I see that it's a bad question sooner, but I will have a better idea of what constitutes a good question and what constitutes a bad question, and I can avoid bad questions in the future.First of all, it's generally better to trim down quotes where possible, to avoid the WoT effect. More relevant to the subject, why don't you just ask about it? You've got two players who's main purpose is to help you play the game better, and you're playing trial-and-error with them using bad questions, without so much as bothering to explain that it's a pain in the ass? Why would you ever do that?
Because I didn't know it was a bad line of questioning. As far as I was concerned, it was a good line of questioning, and actively asking you to criticize it would be unnecessary. Even if you said the same thing, I would take someone's criticism of my arguments a lot more seriously if they did not have the incentive of being the one argued against.For example, there was the picking I was doing at Jim. At the time, I thought it was a perfectly good line of questioning, and the only person who was saying otherwise was Jim, whose claims I wasn't going to take as gospel given that he was the questionee. If you had told me that it was a bad idea, instead of doing absolutely nothing, then it would have come to an end a lot faster, and it would have saved us both huge amounts of hassle.I assumed you remembered and trusted Jim's starting thing about how he'll always be impartial as far as IC advice goes; ie he won't tell you your suspicions are shit just because he doesn't want to get lynched. Thus, I assumed Jim was handling your IC needs, especially since most of what I'd have had to say would be more or less parroting him.
Once again though, if this wasn't the case, why didn't you just ask me about it?
I apologize for missing that. What I meant was that you seemed to be tunneling a lot, and I was asking you why you had not picked at other people the same degree.Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me. Apart from one minor question to IronyOwl and your recent question to Shakerag, your only non-responsive actions have been hacking away at me. Why have you not been looking at someone else?
I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
You asked me a question, I didn't understand, and you can't be bothered to explain? Why did you even ask the question then?
I will admit that I was a bit too sceptical of your answers, but I would heavily dispute your claim that you offered a good explanation every time. There's no explanation here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2640730#msg2640730), for example. Even when you do offer explanations, they're rarely satisfying (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2644217#msg2644217).The problem is, simply pointing out a bad line of questioning doesn't help a huge amount, or at least doesn't help as much as saying why.
I did. Every time.
If I weren't playing the game, I would have the same opinion about everybody's progress as I do now, so is my opinion really all that relevant to the game itself? NO.
You didn't listen to what I had to say.
So you have your vote on someone you're not confident is scum, at this stage in the day?Because you said the only reason the vote was on him was God of War. This is obviously not true since it is still on him.That would be because I'm still re-reading through the thread this morning to find someone I'm more confident about being scum.
If you haven't formed a strong opinion, then you should have voted to extend, which you did not. You were twice perfectly willing to lynch someone without being confident about it, which I find very scummy, Shakerag. Your vote's been sitting on Jim for quite some time, even when you admit that you have nothing bit a gut feeling about it.Where's the lie? I never said I was going to change my vote. I still think Jim is suspicious, and until I find someone more suspicious I'm content with keeping it there.Vote's still on you for now because God of War kept me from looking at the thread last night.
Yet you still haven't taken it back. Lies, lies and lies, scum.
PFP: Unvote. I wasn't planning on letting that sit out there as long as it has, but stuff happens. Yeah, I've still got a gut suspicion on Jim, but I suppose it doesn't warrant letting a vote sit on him for now.
Yesterday evening I dropped my case on Jim; was going to look at the thread in the evening and didn't. This morning, caught up on questions asked; was going to look over the thread in more detail and RL stuff happened. This afternoon, I (along with a number of you) noted that I still had my vote on Jim, but lacking anything significant and still being RL busy, unvoted somewhat belatedly. Had I known yesterday that I wouldn't have gotten around to finding my next-most-suspicious person until now, I would have unvoted then.PFP: Unvote. I wasn't planning on letting that sit out there as long as it has, but stuff happens. Yeah, I've still got a gut suspicion on Jim, but I suppose it doesn't warrant letting a vote sit on him for now.
Then why didn't you unvote until you had been called on it?
Powder Miner, now you're ignoring me. Ignoring people gets you votes. Votes get you lynched, and if you manage to be that scummy as town, that puts us at either MyLo or LyLo, depending on the nightkill. Either you're scum or you just don't care anymore but can't be bothered to get a replace.when he does post, he's not scumhunting much at all. He teaches as an IC, but he fails to scumhunt/(emphasis mine)
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414
Like this post. He does a lot of IC instructing to players, but he manages to fail to do anything close to scumhunting except for remind me that he was asking we a question earlier. HE asks no new questions, he even doesn't address my answers to his other questions, nor add any other questions.
I asked him about this. Read his response to me. Go on, it's in the post you linked to. Both ICs have explained their current lack of scumhunting, and have given us newbies a way to get them to start - improve our games to the point where they can tell the scum from the newbs. After that, if they aren't hunting, it's their own damn fault.
Unvote. Powder Miner, you aren't hunting scum, you aren't actively participating, and now you've "graduated" to using an already-answered (multiple times) question as half of your argument, and using "lurkers = scum" as the other half.
IronyOwl: Looking back, you seem to have much more of an issue with Powder Miner than with ed boy. Why is your vote on the latter?Like I said, I'd gotten a town vibe off Powder Miner earlier. His flailings have also seemed more... non-malicious, I guess? If I'd thought his ignoring points and so on was intentional I'd be over him in an instant, but I don't really get the impression that it's an act. ed boy I'm less sure of.
Just off the top my my head, there's this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2645734#msg2645734).Those are the obvious, singular examples, yes. Do you have any more? If not, your case isn't really "he's been doing X," and more "he did X this one time." Those can be substantially different. For instance, I agree his "Oh sure lynch the IC" bit focused more on the IC part than the terrible reasons part, but that's the only real example I can think of, and I think it was mild enough to not really be a good reason by itself.
Take this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2643150#msg2643150), for example. The actual answers are only about a sentence each, and not particularly long sentences. As for inconsistent, there was the whole issue where I asked him what he thought of the scumhunting and he said that he was mostly happy, when he had recently spent several posts shouting at half the other players for bad scumhunting.
It's because nobody would intentionally ask a bad question. I don't know that they're bad questions.That's not (directly) what I'm asking. You admitted to realizing/suspecting they were bad after Jim pointed them out. So, why was your response to ask slightly different questions in an attempt to feel out the edges, rather than just ask someone else, like me, about it?
Because I didn't know it was a bad line of questioning. As far as I was concerned, it was a good line of questioning, and actively asking you to criticize it would be unnecessary. Even if you said the same thing, I would take someone's criticism of my arguments a lot more seriously if they did not have the incentive of being the one argued against.You're contradicting yourself.
Hey, Irony, if you'll look at the bottom of my previoud post, you'll find I answered your question.Wrong question. That's the one I said I still found unsatisfactory, but didn't feel there was any more progress to be made with. The one I'm talking about is the one you're just now answering below. I've had it out to you for a long, long while.
And I ALSO KNOW THAT YOU'RE SUPPOSEDLY NOT SCUMHUNTING BECAUSE YOU'RE ICING/TOO MANY NOOBTELLS!Several points.
But if you don't end up sumhunting, you'll never end up being able to seperate the tells. It alo makes me feel a bit to much like you're hiding behind your IC role. If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't get away with not scumhunting, you wouldn't be able to IC. You'd just be active lurking. And when it boils down to it, that's precisely what you are doing. It really doesn't matter if we're too noobish, or if we need lots of ICing, if you're only being an IC, you're not doing a single thing for the town. And you're not even scumhunting right now. You're defending yourself.
Irony, here's a little lesson I learned when I got lynched last game. You can call someone's argument crap and bull all you want but you need to back it up. Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige....
One: Why did it take you so long to mention this part? As I've said (repeatedly) this question has been out to you for a long, long while, and you've just now gotten around to saying this part. Why? You've given very brief, vague versions before, mainly consisting of "Why can't you do both" or "You should scumhunt too" or similar, but this is the first time you've explained yourself fully, and the first time you could be interpreted as responding in a concrete way to the explanations I gave for it much, much earlier.I first asked this question way, waaaaay the fuck back here:
Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.This is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:
Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
Three: I feel my ICing is helping quite a bit in some areas. Would you care to point out an example or two where it's been completely worthless?Helping Shakerag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2632331#msg2632331) to avoid crippling assumptions, break out of his complacency, and refine his case. He took some further convincing for the theory part, but admitted (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636748#msg2636748) most other points were not just good, but helpful to improving his game.
Four: I am scumhunting. Saying blatantly, demonstrably false things tends to ruin your case, so unless you'd care to explain why I'm not actually scumhunting ed boy or why we should all live in the past for a moment, I'm pretty sure you should just admit to spouting bullshit and move along to real arguments.
ed boy:Looking back, I was tunneling a lot and grasping at straws. I had a gut feeling that his answers were hiding something, and I was scrabbling for something in his posts to back it up. Emphasis on the was, though, I've dropped that horrible line of enquiry now.Just off the top my my head, there's this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2645734#msg2645734).Those are the obvious, singular examples, yes. Do you have any more? If not, your case isn't really "he's been doing X," and more "he did X this one time." Those can be substantially different. For instance, I agree his "Oh sure lynch the IC" bit focused more on the IC part than the terrible reasons part, but that's the only real example I can think of, and I think it was mild enough to not really be a good reason by itself.
Take this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2643150#msg2643150), for example. The actual answers are only about a sentence each, and not particularly long sentences. As for inconsistent, there was the whole issue where I asked him what he thought of the scumhunting and he said that he was mostly happy, when he had recently spent several posts shouting at half the other players for bad scumhunting.
Also, the short answers part. What issues do you have with that? Or more specifically, what do you think he should have been saying that he didn't?
It was only after much prodding of similar questions that I began to suspect that I may have been barking up the wrong tree.It's because nobody would intentionally ask a bad question. I don't know that they're bad questions.That's not (directly) what I'm asking. You admitted to realizing/suspecting they were bad after Jim pointed them out. So, why was your response to ask slightly different questions in an attempt to feel out the edges, rather than just ask someone else, like me, about it?
I did not see the need to ask anybody because I was convinced that I had found some dirt on Jim. As far as I was concerned, asking someone else about it would have added nothing, because the thought that my line of questioning might be wrong did not even cross my mind. It was only after a long time that I started to question my own interrogation. As for why I would have taken your advice more seriously, it's because I would have taken anybody but Jim's advice more seriously than Jim's, because they would be indepentent of the enquiries.Because I didn't know it was a bad line of questioning. As far as I was concerned, it was a good line of questioning, and actively asking you to criticize it would be unnecessary. Even if you said the same thing, I would take someone's criticism of my arguments a lot more seriously if they did not have the incentive of being the one argued against.You're contradicting yourself.
On the one hand, you claim that you thought your questions were good, and thus there was zero point to asking the other IC about them.
On the other, you're claiming you'd have taken my advice a lot more seriously.
If my advice was so much more reliable than Jim's, you really can't make the claim that asking me about it struck you as completely pointless, especially not when claiming you were trying to feel out whether they were, in fact, bad questions at the time.
Extend. Or at least a votecount.Here's a votecount:
when he does post, he's not scumhunting much at all. He teaches as an IC, but he fails to scumhunt/(emphasis mine)
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414
Like this post. He does a lot of IC instructing to players, but he manages to fail to do anything close to scumhunting except for remind me that he was asking we a question earlier. HE asks no new questions, he even doesn't address my answers to his other questions, nor add any other questions.
I asked him about this. Read his response to me. Go on, it's in the post you linked to. Both ICs have explained their current lack of scumhunting, and have given us newbies a way to get them to start - improve our games to the point where they can tell the scum from the newbs. After that, if they aren't hunting, it's their own damn fault.
Unvote. Powder Miner, you aren't hunting scum, you aren't actively participating, and now you've "graduated" to using an already-answered (multiple times) question as half of your argument, and using "lurkers = scum" as the other half.
I apologize for missing that. What I meant was that you seemed to be tunneling a lot, and I was asking you why you had not picked at other people the same degree.You asked me a question, I didn't understand, and you can't be bothered to explain? Why did you even ask the question then?Mormota, according to the LT, you seem to be pretty single-minded in chainsawing me. Apart from one minor question to IronyOwl and your recent question to Shakerag, your only non-responsive actions have been hacking away at me. Why have you not been looking at someone else?I'm not sure I understand what you mean.
Extend. Or at least a votecount.I quoted you in the quote you're quoting here. Also, I love how you say your gut was the only thing keeping me from being a guaranteed lynch. That both means you'd be willing to stake a lynch on nothing but your gut AND that you'd be willing to use your IC status to manipulate everyone else.
Powder Miner:Irony, here's a little lesson I learned when I got lynched last game. You can call someone's argument crap and bull all you want but you need to back it up. Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige....
The ironyowl here is palpable.
I mean, seriously. You've been giving brief, quoteless posts all game long, providing vague assertions, and then completely ignoring it when people question you on it (or anything else, for that matter). Where the fuck was this wisdom when my gut was the only thing keeping you from being a guaranteed lynch? Do I really have to spell it out for you that presenting a case requires at least as much substance as discrediting one?
But alright, sure. I'll provide nice, fancy quotes for everything I've said, despite most of it concerning your vague, quoteless bullshit. And then, you're going to respond in kind, or you'll be fucked, because that's going to be the absolute end of your excuses on this shit. I hope my assertion that you're town didn't make you think you could pull whatever RiA you wanted and get away with it, because that's not how that works.IT certainly didn't. I don;t care if you say I'm town, because I think you're scum. This is exactly the same situation that I was in wih Orangebottle (or maybe Mormota) last Beginner's Mafia, except it's Day 2, meaning more suspects and less confirmedness (although don't think this doesn't still mean I don't think you're scum).
So, here we go:I ANSWERED THAT. I SAID THAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BECAUSE I NEVER FOUND AN ANSWER OF YOURS TO MORMOTA UNSATISFACTORY!
Point One:One: Why did it take you so long to mention this part? As I've said (repeatedly) this question has been out to you for a long, long while, and you've just now gotten around to saying this part. Why? You've given very brief, vague versions before, mainly consisting of "Why can't you do both" or "You should scumhunt too" or similar, but this is the first time you've explained yourself fully, and the first time you could be interpreted as responding in a concrete way to the explanations I gave for it much, much earlier.
I first asked this question way, waaaaay the fuck back here:Spoiler: Eternal question to Powder Miner (click to show/hide)
That was six days ago. The response in question had been given seven days ago:Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Spoiler: Answer to "Who do you suspect?" (click to show/hide)
Twelve hours ago, you finally got off your ass and gave an answer that wasn't uselessly vague. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) It took you a fucking week to answer a question and provide an explanation for your case.
Why?
Point Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.
This is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again. And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them. I would also call it profanities, but I swear not to do so, since I'm only 13. So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
[misquote]So, with my defense we get the truth, which is what I actually said, scum:Spoiler: Powder Miner fucks up (click to show/hide)
Point Three:Your ICing does help. But if you don't scumhunt, we lose. Scumhunting is needed.Three: I feel my ICing is helping quite a bit in some areas. Would you care to point out an example or two where it's been completely worthless?Helping Shakerag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2632331#msg2632331) to avoid crippling assumptions, break out of his complacency, and refine his case. He took some further convincing for the theory part, but admitted (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636748#msg2636748) most other points were not just good, but helpful to improving his game.
Helping ed boy (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993) explain his case on Jim. Note the improved specifics of the response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2648647#msg2648647) relative to the vagueness of the explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2646622#msg2646622) I was objecting to.Only had this as a seperate section due to a quote screwup I'm far too lazy to deal with.
Point Four:Bouncing around an occasional question to look active (A bit hypocritical, I'm sorry, but I didn't do that on purpose- I just couldn't find anything suspicious) while not following up on it doesn't count. I;m sorry.Four: I am scumhunting. Saying blatantly, demonstrably false things tends to ruin your case, so unless you'd care to explain why I'm not actually scumhunting ed boy or why we should all live in the past for a moment, I'm pretty sure you should just admit to spouting bullshit and move along to real arguments.
[/quote]Spoiler: IronyOwl hunts for scum (click to show/hide)
I look forward to your detailed and well-thought out explanations for all of this, in addition to why you needed this before you could field any responses of your own. And yes, that last part is a real, genuine question that you will need a fucking awesome explanation for.
Unvote. Powder Miner, your answers to both my and Irony's questions will determine whether or not I vote for you.when he does post, he's not scumhunting much at all. He teaches as an IC, but he fails to scumhunt/(emphasis mine)
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414
Like this post. He does a lot of IC instructing to players, but he manages to fail to do anything close to scumhunting except for remind me that he was asking we a question earlier. HE asks no new questions, he even doesn't address my answers to his other questions, nor add any other questions.
I asked him about this. Read his response to me. Go on, it's in the post you linked to. Both ICs have explained their current lack of scumhunting, and have given us newbies a way to get them to start - improve our games to the point where they can tell the scum from the newbs. After that, if they aren't hunting, it's their own damn fault.
Unvote. Powder Miner, you aren't hunting scum, you aren't actively participating, and now you've "graduated" to using an already-answered (multiple times) question as half of your argument, and using "lurkers = scum" as the other half.
I realize that if I wanted an answer from you, I should have phrased it as a question: Why are you accusing IronyOwl for something he's explained multiple times without doing anything to support your accusations? Forming an argument takes effort; you can't just wait for the scum to come out and say "Oh, I bow before your power of red text, even though there is no threat of me being lynched. I'll admit everything. I'm scum." You need to make them slip up and reveal it to you, and you can't do that with a case that either is based entirely on crap reasoning or has nothing supporting it. Your case is both.
I've said this multiple times. Or maybe I haven't, but I will take no excuse for not scumhunting, not event hat we are too nooby to read. This is a Beginner's MAfia, and if the ICs can;t read us, they shouldn't have signed up. Also, I beg to differ about "crap reasoning" and "nothign supporting it", as my deconstructing IronyOwl's post will show.There's a difference between ICs being unable to read newn players, and ICs being unable to read new players constantly. New players vary greatly in readability and the ICs have to do what they can.
Ed boy, I have no idea what you thought I said.You appear to be using how good an IC IronyOwl is as an argument when it comes to the question of whether or not to lynch him. That is what I have a problem with.
My problem is not that IronyOwl is an IC. I neve said that was the problem.
My problem is that he was using that as an excuse to not scumhunt.
Let's do this
I quoted you in the quote you're quoting here.No you didn't. He quoted the entirety of your post. Those two lines were all there is. Go ahead and check.
Also, I love how you say your gut was the only thing keeping me from being a guaranteed lynch. That both means you'd be willing to stake a lynch on nothing but your gut AND that you'd be willing to use your IC status to manipulate everyone else.You raise a couple points, then lose them by shoving words into his mouth. IronyOwl: Would you be willing to do either of the things he claims, and if so, why?
I would like to bring up an issue here: Your spelling, punctuation, and overall presentation, namely the fact that the quality of such is inversely proportional to the number of votes on you at the time. Examples:Quote from: IronyOwlBut alright, sure. I'll provide nice, fancy quotes for everything I've said, despite most of it concerning your vague, quoteless bullshit. And then, you're going to respond in kind, or you'll be fucked, because that's going to be the absolute end of your excuses on this shit. I hope my assertion that you're town didn't make you think you could pull whatever RiA you wanted and get away with it, because that's not how that works.IT certainly didn't. I don;t care if you say I'm town, because I think you're scum. This is exactly the same situation that I was in wih Orangebottle (or maybe Mormota) last Beginner's Mafia, except it's Day 2, meaning more suspects and less confirmedness (although don't think this doesn't still mean I don't think you're scum).
You don't need to yell, we can hear you just fine. I'm fairly certain his issue with your answer isn't that you haven't given it yet, but rather the fact that it took you almost a week to do so.Quote from: IronyOwlSo, here we go:I ANSWERED THAT. I SAID THAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BECAUSE I NEVER FOUND AN ANSWER OF YOURS TO MORMOTA UNSATISFACTORY!
Point One:One: Why did it take you so long to mention this part? As I've said (repeatedly) this question has been out to you for a long, long while, and you've just now gotten around to saying this part. Why? You've given very brief, vague versions before, mainly consisting of "Why can't you do both" or "You should scumhunt too" or similar, but this is the first time you've explained yourself fully, and the first time you could be interpreted as responding in a concrete way to the explanations I gave for it much, much earlier.
I first asked this question way, waaaaay the fuck back here:Spoiler: Eternal question to Powder Miner (click to show/hide)
Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Not going to touch this one.
I think you have the ICs' priorities wrong. You assume that their primary goal is to play the game and their secondary goal is to teach us newbies. I think it's the other way around, what with Irony's response to my questioning here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414).Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.
I see no misquoting. Please explain how what you said isn't what you meant.Quote from: IronyOwlThis is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again. And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them. I would also call it profanities, but I swear not to do so, since I'm only 13. So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.[/quote]
At this point I take it back about you scumhunting ed boy.But it's too little, too late, and only after I launched a savage attack on you.AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you call that savage. I call it "voting IronyOwl." And then after the "Irony-scumhunting-ed boy" point, I call it "thrashing desperately at IronyOwl in hopes of getting other people to see him as scum so you don't get lynched." You have not convinced anybody.
Quote from: Urist ImiknorrisI realize that if I wanted an answer from you, I should have phrased it as a question: Why are you accusing IronyOwl for something he's explained multiple times without doing anything to support your accusations? Forming an argument takes effort; you can't just wait for the scum to come out and say "Oh, I bow before your power of red text, even though there is no threat of me being lynched. I'll admit everything. I'm scum." You need to make them slip up and reveal it to you, and you can't do that with a case that either is based entirely on crap reasoning or has nothing supporting it. Your case is both.
I've said this multiple times. Or maybe I haven't, but I will take no excuse for not scumhunting, not event hat we are too nooby to read. This is a Beginner's MAfia, and if the ICs can;t read us, they shouldn't have signed up. Also, I beg to differ about "crap reasoning" and "nothign supporting it", as my deconstructing IronyOwl's post will show.
I think you have the ICs' priorities wrong. You assume that their primary goal is to play the game and their secondary goal is to teach us newbies. I think it's the other way around, what with Irony's response to my questioning here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414).(reposting because I wouldn't want to be pointed to a WoT and told the answer's somewhere in there)
I will be a completely impartial source of advice that I will freely give at every opportunity, whether I am asked for it or I decide to give it on my own. You can trust that everything I have to say will be given in good faith, even if it comes at a personal cost to me in this game.
I quoted you in the quote you're quoting here. Also, I love how you say your gut was the only thing keeping me from being a guaranteed lynch. That both means you'd be willing to stake a lynch on nothing but your gut AND that you'd be willing to use your IC status to manipulate everyone else.
Let's do this
I fail to see how I was tunneling. I was going after several people, just one at a time. Why should I spread my effort among several people? If I manage to ask a scum too, he wouldn't feel worried because I'm after several other people, not only him. That's not what I want.
Powder Miner, now you're ignoring me. Ignoring people gets you votes. Votes get you lynched, and if you manage to be that scummy as town, that puts us at either MyLo or LyLo, depending on the nightkill. Either you're scum or you just don't care anymore but can't be bothered to get a replace.
Unvote. Powder Miner, your answers to both my and Irony's questions will determine whether or not I vote for you.
You know what? There won't be a Part Two. I don't want to wade through the rest of that post. I'll just respond to this last bit:
So do you suspect him or not? Why or why not?
If you don't, who else is there, and why aren't you doing anything about them?
You know what? There won't be a Part Two. I don't want to wade through the rest of that post. I'll just respond to this last bit:
Promising to deliver a complete case and then backing out, Urist Imiknorris? Why aren't you willing to go through the trouble of proving your point? Are you afraid of something, scum?
a) Again, lol savageQuote from: IronyOwl<ed boy scumhunting spoiler removed>At this point I take it back about you scumhunting ed boy.But it's too little, too late, and only after I launched a savage attack on you.
I look forward to your detailed and well-thought out explanations for all of this, in addition to why you needed this before you could field any responses of your own. And yes, that last part is a real, genuine question that you will need a fucking awesome explanation for.
a) Again, lol savage
b) Funnily enough, you never answered his question.
Powder Miner is so scummy it hurts. He cannot answer more than the simplest questions without extensive prodding, he's only gone after one person the whole day, and he hasn't really tried to defend himself from the people who are actually voting for him.
I do indeed suspect Powder Miner, due to his lack of scumhunting, his inability to make a good case, and now the fact that his answers reeked of desperation, as if he would do anything to not be lynched except defend himself.
People shouldn't be entirely concerned of defending themselves. If they are only defending themselves, they are not contributing.But if they're being attacked and not defending themselves, they're more likely to be lynched, which is bad for their side unless they're jester or something like that that isn't in this game. You'd expect a player to at least try to defend themselves, because if they don't it means they just don't care anymore, and won't contribute anyway.
Why did you vote him, unvote then vote again? If you find him "so scummy it hurts", then what reason did you have for that? It's not like he was any better before.I unvoted him because I wanted to go back through everyone's arguments once I was done with the things I needed to do yesterday and start hunting other people in addition to him. I probably should have waited to unvote until I had gotten back home, because when I read his response I became fully convinced he was scum and that hunting other people could wait until D3. In fact, when I responded to his post I had completely forgotten that I had unvoted him (as evidenced by my thinking that his post was made with three votes on him). That's how bad I thought it was.
Dariush: Does the "weekend time stop" rule apply to the current extension?Yep.
But if they're being attacked and not defending themselves, they're more likely to be lynched, which is bad for their side unless they're jester or something like that that isn't in this game. You'd expect a player to at least try to defend themselves, because if they don't it means they just don't care anymore, and won't contribute anyway.
I unvoted him because I wanted to go back through everyone's arguments once I was done with the things I needed to do yesterday and start hunting other people in addition to him. I probably should have waited to unvote until I had gotten back home, because when I read his response I became fully convinced he was scum and that hunting other people could wait until D3. In fact, when I responded to his post I had completely forgotten that I had unvoted him (as evidenced by my thinking that his post was made with three votes on him). That's how bad I thought it was.
After thinking about it for a second, I must concede that it isn't.But if they're being attacked and not defending themselves, they're more likely to be lynched, which is bad for their side unless they're jester or something like that that isn't in this game. You'd expect a player to at least try to defend themselves, because if they don't it means they just don't care anymore, and won't contribute anyway.
Okay, it's bad play, but is it scummy play?
What about his response made you fully convinced?
Besides effort, there's not a whole lot different between Powder Miner before he threw up that wall of text and Powder Miner afterwards.
However, I see more arrogance and unexperience than scum behaviour in you now.
(emphasis mine)Yesterday evening I dropped my case on Jim; was going to look at the thread in the evening and didn't. This morning, caught up on questions asked; was going to look over the thread in more detail and RL stuff happened. This afternoon, I (along with a number of you) noted that I still had my vote on Jim, but lacking anything significant and still being RL busy, unvoted somewhat belatedly. Had I known yesterday that I wouldn't have gotten around to finding my next-most-suspicious person until now, I would have unvoted then.PFP: Unvote. I wasn't planning on letting that sit out there as long as it has, but stuff happens. Yeah, I've still got a gut suspicion on Jim, but I suppose it doesn't warrant letting a vote sit on him for now.
Then why didn't you unvote until you had been called on it?
Shakerag, you never said who your next-most-suspicious person wasTrue.
, you didn't vote them, and you didn't question them.True and true.
I find this highly suspicious.Possibly.
Surely if you had someone new at the top of your "Who's Scum" list, you would at least say who.Also true.
This is also your last post before the Powder Miner/IronyOwl thing (no idea what to call it) became the center of attention.Clusterfuck works for me. Anyway, any association there is coincidental, because (as I mentioned before) I'm available/PFP during the day, evenings are out, and nights are iffy. So they finally decided to ... do ... whatever it was that was going on there at the time when I'm never going to be available.
Were you using it as an excuse to disappear and let us lynch an innocent townie? Did you perhaps feel lucky that you didn't even need to bother making a case against someone to get us to lynch?Well, this kind of ties in with your first few comments. I found it amusing how IronyOwl answered my question of his voting ed boy over PM, because that pretty much sums up how I've been feeling about PM for most of the game now. I think he's definitely the scummiest-looking person out there right now, but I can't quite convince myself that he's actually scum. <joke>Of course, by stating that, Murphy's Law dictates that he will be scum, and I will be kicking myself in the ass later</joke>. And outside of that, I haven't been able to find any substantial reading to condone a vote so far. I'd say I'm most suspicious of "IDK my BFF Jim", but there's nothing definitive there. Mormota feels town-ish to me, and maybe possibly IronyOwl too.
Clusterfuck works for me. Anyway, any association there is coincidental, because (as I mentioned before) I'm available/PFP during the day, evenings are out, and nights are iffy. So they finally decided to ... do ... whatever it was that was going on there at the time when I'm never going to be available.
Well, this kind of ties in with your first few comments. I found it amusing how IronyOwl answered my question of his voting ed boy over PM, because that pretty much sums up how I've been feeling about PM for most of the game now. I think he's definitely the scummiest-looking person out there right now, but I can't quite convince myself that he's actually scum. <joke>Of course, by stating that, Murphy's Law dictates that he will be scum, and I will be kicking myself in the ass later</joke>. And outside of that, I haven't been able to find any substantial reading to condone a vote so far. I'd say I'm most suspicious of "IDK my BFF Jim", but there's nothing definitive there. Mormota feels town-ish to me, and maybe possibly IronyOwl too.
Mindmaker was pretty suspicious to me at the time, but now I wonder if that just wasn't a whole lot of newtells instead. And I'm not really picking up anything one way or another on you, Urist.
And I was looking at ed boy's contributions lately, and that seemed to pan out too. I'm fairly worried about one or both of the ICs being on the scumteam, because I think we'd be all thoroughly fucked if that happened.
I quoted you in the quote you're quoting here.No, you didn't. Explain what you meant by this.
Also, I love how you say your gut was the only thing keeping me from being a guaranteed lynch. That both means you'd be willing to stake a lynch on nothing but your gutIf my gut says you're not scum, I'm not going to lynch you for being a shitty player. What about this is scummy or a bad idea to you?
AND that you'd be willing to use your IC status to manipulate everyone else.You don't even know where you're going with this, do you?
Yes, but that was, what, four (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) days ago (as of this quote)? My explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414) was not long after, but your response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2649155#msg2649155) certainly was.Quote from: IronyOwlSo, here we go:I ANSWERED THAT. I SAID THAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BECAUSE I NEVER FOUND AN ANSWER OF YOURS TO MORMOTA UNSATISFACTORY!
Point One:One: Why did it take you so long to mention this part? As I've said (repeatedly) this question has been out to you for a long, long while, and you've just now gotten around to saying this part. Why? You've given very brief, vague versions before, mainly consisting of "Why can't you do both" or "You should scumhunt too" or similar, but this is the first time you've explained yourself fully, and the first time you could be interpreted as responding in a concrete way to the explanations I gave for it much, much earlier.
I first asked this question way, waaaaay the fuck back here:Spoiler: Eternal question to Powder Miner (click to show/hide)
If this was the original reason you were suspicious of me, why is this the first time you've ever mentioned it?Quote from: IronyOwlThat was six days ago. The response in question had been given seven days ago:Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Spoiler: Answer to "Who do you suspect?" (click to show/hide)
Twelve hours ago, you finally got off your ass and gave an answer that wasn't uselessly vague. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) It took you a fucking week to answer a question and provide an explanation for your case.
Why?
What makes a bandwagon or lack of scumhunting a sign of scum and not proof of not being sure what they're doing?
Well, which is it, said or meant? If it's said, why isn't this a careful dissection of what words mean instead of vague accusations of misinterpretation? If it's meant, why are you phrasing your inability to communicate what you mean as a scumtell from me?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.
I went through very elaborate efforts to explain, in detail, the logic of your argument and why it was worthless. If that hinged on misquoting your meaning, your response would have been a rather simple dismantling of my interpretation by pointing out what those words and phrases actually mean. Instead you've got a fairly emotional rant about how I've been misquoting you, without really bothering to explain why, and not explaining why at all until later on. Why?Quote from: IronyOwlThis is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again.Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them.So you saw me doing something scummy, and instead of calling me out on it and explaining why it was baseless and thus a scum ploy, you kicked the can down the road and insisted I fancy up my posts more. Why?
So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?It's a lot of text for saying absolutely nothing, except that you're emotional and defensive.
So you consider this a laughable, scummy misquote, but admit that you might have posted it and can't be bothered to click on the link to check.Quote from: IronyOwl screws up[misquote]Are you done misquoting me yet? No? Fine. That's about the most ridiculous misquote in here. I'm not sure if you edited tht there, if that was part of something else, or that was me trying to post int he ten minutes before my bedtime,If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't get away with not scumhunting, you wouldn't be able to IC."If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't be ICing."[/misquote]
Irony, here's a little lesson I learned when I got lynched last game. You can call someone's argument crap and bull all you want but you need to back it up. Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.I see no links proving I've misquoted you. Why is that?
Thus we get:
So, with my defense we get the truth, which is what I actually said, scum:
1. If you weren't ICing right now you'd be doing nothing
1. If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't have the excuse of being the ohso benevolent IC that just sits around and hands out advice, and you'd be recgonized as active lurking.
2. You're doing nothing anyway
2. Even if you do have the excuse, it doesn't change the fact that you're active lurking.Nope. ICing is useful, as you later admit.
3. You're doing absolutely nothing for the town
3. If you're ICing, YOU NEED TO SCUMHUNT. Not scumhunting means not finding scum. Not finding scum means losing.You've said this, but you've also said this:
It really doesn't matter if we're too noobish, or if we need lots of ICing, if you're only being an IC, you're not doing a single thing for the town.Plus, accusations of active lurking are pretty much this by definition, so basically the entirety of your case is "you're doing nothing," not "scumhunting is important." The two might look similar, but they're not the same thing.
Thus we get my original interpretation: "If you weren't an IC you wouldn't be doing anything right now, thus you're not doing anything right now." In other words, (1 = 0).
That's not what you've been saying all game. Your entire previous section is centered around claiming that I've been active lurking and that my ICing is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide that fact. Which is it?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Three:Your ICing does help. But if you don't scumhunt, we lose. Scumhunting is needed.Three: I feel my ICing is helping quite a bit in some areas. Would you care to point out an example or two where it's been completely worthless?Helping Shakerag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2632331#msg2632331) to avoid crippling assumptions, break out of his complacency, and refine his case. He took some further convincing for the theory part, but admitted (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636748#msg2636748) most other points were not just good, but helpful to improving his game.
Helping ed boy (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993) explain his case on Jim. Note the improved specifics of the response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2648647#msg2648647) relative to the vagueness of the explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2646622#msg2646622) I was objecting to.
I thought we'd established that you needed quotes to do stuff, rather than more vague, pointless garbage?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Four:Bouncing around an occasional question to look active (A bit hypocritical, I'm sorry, but I didn't do that on purpose- I just couldn't find anything suspicious) while not following up on it doesn't count. I;m sorry.Four: I am scumhunting. Saying blatantly, demonstrably false things tends to ruin your case, so unless you'd care to explain why I'm not actually scumhunting ed boy or why we should all live in the past for a moment, I'm pretty sure you should just admit to spouting bullshit and move along to real arguments.
At this point I take it back about you scumhunting ed boy.But it's too little, too late, and only after I launched a savage attack on you.So you admit to being wrong, but shrug and say it's "not enough" without going into any detail. This is both in grievous violation of your now-infamous wisdom, and a very definite sign of tunneling.
I look forward to your detailed and well-thought out explanations for all of this, in addition to why you needed this before you could field any responses of your own. And yes, that last part is a real, genuine question that you will need a fucking awesome explanation for.You also seem to have forgotten something. I pretty much knew you would, but that doesn't really make it better.
Why not?Shakerag, you never said who your next-most-suspicious person wasTrue.Quote, you didn't vote them, and you didn't question them.True and true.
"IDK my BFF Jim"...Does BFF mean scumbuddy? If not, why are you trying to buddy up to him?
...
I'm fairly worried about one or both of the ICs being on the scumteam, because I think we'd be all thoroughly fucked if that happened.
Mormota, what's your current list of suspects?
Why not?Shakerag, you never said who your next-most-suspicious person wasTrue.Quote, you didn't vote them, and you didn't question them.True and true.
Quote"IDK my BFF Jim"...Does BFF mean scumbuddy? If not, why are you trying to buddy up to him?
...
I'm fairly worried about one or both of the ICs being on the scumteam, because I think we'd be all thoroughly fucked if that happened.
Why not?Shakerag, you never said who your next-most-suspicious person wasTrue.Quote, you didn't vote them, and you didn't question them.True and true.
Quote"IDK my BFF Jim"...Does BFF mean scumbuddy? If not, why are you trying to buddy up to him?
...
I'm fairly worried about one or both of the ICs being on the scumteam, because I think we'd be all thoroughly fucked if that happened.
In regards to your first point, that's because I never got around to filling that position, ergo I couldn't vote/question said non-existant person.
In regards to your second point, I haz a parody. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nIUcRJX9-o)
<sarcasm>Maybe I should request a replacement too, since that's what all the cool kids are doing these days.</sarcasm>
@IronyOwl: Well, my vote for scummiest behavior couldn't go to anyone other than Powder Miner, for reasons which should be blatantly obvious. As far as "useful" scummy behavior ... well, whether or not Jim's "meta" is flaming asshole, I still think it comes off as a little suspicious. Urist has been tossing his vote around like beads at Mardi Gras, so that strikes me as a little off ...
Oh, hey, looks like I'm about to be strung up. Well, might as well extend if it'll do any good. If I'm still alive in a little bit, I'll answer your questions, Mormota.
Mormota, IronyOwl, care to explain your votes? You both seem to have been rather quick in voting Shakerag, and I don't really see any justification for Irony's vote, and Mormota only slightly justified his.
Could you please explain why you found my reason not satisfying enough? What is it you did not see as good enough about it?
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.
I'd ask you the same question, Mormota.
Could you please explain why you found my reason not satisfying enough? What is it you did not see as good enough about it?
There was a total of six posts made in this thread on Sunday. Between your questions and your vote, there were three. One of these was ed boy asking for a replace, so two. Why did you consider a lack of a response to be grounds for a vote when there was so little happening?
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.
I'd ask you the same question, Mormota.
I did not ask a question. I stated a fact, that he was not responding to my questions.
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.See? Question. Answer it.
Exactly because so little was happening, perhaps? Are you saying that my argument saying nothing is happening is invalid because nothing is happening? What?
Mormota, IronyOwl, care to explain your votes? You both seem to have been rather quick in voting Shakerag, and I don't really see any justification for Irony's vote, and Mormota only slightly justified his.
Could you please explain why you found my reason not satisfying enough? What is it you did not see as good enough about it?
IronyOwl, you were there, occupied with Powder Miner. Someone you stated as not finding suspicious. Then why didn't you bother with anyone else near the end of the day, other than your quick vote on Shakerag? Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.
Powder Miner, what is your opinion on the replace?
Off-topic, but no PMs: The Arena Battles redux thread: What mod did you use for those metals? You sort of didn't answer at all yet.
How do you make a llink look like a word, like make a link to a post turn into the word "aware"?
[url=link goes here]text[/url]
Urist, the second point isn't about the lurking. It's about his lack of scumhunting and how his excuses for that weren't good because of his lurking.
Powder Miner, do you have any other evidence against IronyOwl than active lurking?
Mormota, IronyOwl, care to explain your votes? You both seem to have been rather quick in voting Shakerag, and I don't really see any justification for Irony's vote, and Mormota only slightly justified his.Was meant to be a pressure vote, not a lynchvote.
IronyOwl, you were there, occupied with Powder Miner. Someone you stated as not finding suspicious. Then why didn't you bother with anyone else near the end of the day, other than your quick vote on Shakerag?I was busy, though I admit to focusing far too much on Powder Miner. However, I "bothered" with two people at the end.
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.Too bad, that's the answer. Why doesn't this reasoning apply to everyone else in the game, yourself included? It's not like anyone else requested an extension prior to the deadline looming, and you didn't request one at all, despite being the last vote needed.
Powder Miner, what is your opinion on the replace?What is the purpose of this question?
I'm going to put out a case on IronyOwl now.Utterly, utterly worthless, and an extremely clear sign of being scum, tunneling, and/or not knowing what the fuck you're doing.
Two points:
First point:
[Unformatted Wall of Text That Doesn't Provide The Relevant Data]
As you can see, IronyOwl has half the posts of everyone else currently alive right now. This means Irony has been active lurking or lurking, and this is even including Toaster's posts. Moving on.
Point Two:Two points here.
[More garbage about scumhunting]
Powder Miner:
Stop being a lazy fuck and actually hunt some scum. Pointing at lurkers all game is not scumhunting.
This is what I find unacceptable, IronyOwl, and it's why I think you're scum.I know. You've been saying it ever since you gave up on thrashing against lurkers. It hasn't changed, at all, regardless of what else has happened or been said. Ever.
Urist:Mormota, IronyOwl, care to explain your votes? You both seem to have been rather quick in voting Shakerag, and I don't really see any justification for Irony's vote, and Mormota only slightly justified his.Was meant to be a pressure vote, not a lynchvote.
I see. If it was meant as a pressure vote, why didn't you remove it before day end or vote to extend?I wasn't paying attention to deadlines and such, so the day end caught me unaware.
Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.
I'd ask you the same question, Mormota.
I did not ask a question. I stated a fact, that he was not responding to my questions.
AHEM. YOUR QUESTIONS. Why did you not ask for an extension to get answers to them?
Alternatively:Why did you not ask for an extension to get an answer to your question? I am not going to accept "I was asleep". You could have asked before.See? Question. Answer it.QuoteExactly because so little was happening, perhaps? Are you saying that my argument saying nothing is happening is invalid because nothing is happening? What?
I'm saying your argument that Shakerag wasn't doing anything is insufficient for a vote because nobody (except IronyOwl) was doing anything at the time.
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Also, Mormota, I want answers. I know you were online recently.
If you didn't like my "quick vote" on Shakerag, why did you mimic it?
What is the purpose of this question?
My opinion on the replace? Oh crap, not again. That said, don;t use it as an excuse to vote ed boy- last time this happened, and you should remember this vividly, Mormota, because last game you let ORangebottle get away with a LyLo vote on Flandre, and bang, game over.
Fine. Jesus Christ. I'll find something else scummy. Unvote IronyOwl. Although Urist Imiknorris, that third fallacy doesn;t quite apply- the problem had not that IronyOwl is not finding the scum with his scumhunting- it had been that IronyOwl hadn't been scumhunting- different things.
Third point: That is no excuse for Shakerag. I do not agree with this point.
Second and first point: I did not ask for an extension because Shakerag posted and decided, for no apparent reason, that he won't answer my question unless his life is saved via an extension.Perhaps so he could have enough time to answer your questions too? The "asking questions anytime soon" part would probably have involved him reading through the thread again looking for suspicions (and asking questions based on them), which I know I wouldn't be able to do in 30 minutes. Would you?
I also didn't ask for one because because he left my questions unanswered, as I pointed out. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2657733#msg2657733)And you thought that was grounds to kill him before he answered your questions?
Also. WHAT? How could I use a question as an excuse to vote someone who is NOT IN THE GAME?ed boy hadn't officially been replaced at that point.
One, he's still in the game while's he's getting replaced (although ZRk2's in now), and two, I'm saying that you should nkow this because of last BM's LyLo, WHICH YOU WERE IN. This part is full of stupidity.My opinion on the replace? Oh crap, not again. That said, don;t use it as an excuse to vote ed boy- last time this happened, and you should remember this vividly, Mormota, because last game you let ORangebottle get away with a LyLo vote on Flandre, and bang, game over.
Yes, again! You are going to talk, Powder Miner, or you are going to HANG. Also. WHAT? How could I use a question as an excuse to vote someone who is NOT IN THE GAME? And I have no idea what the second part of your "sentence" is.
[/quote]Fine. Jesus Christ. I'll find something else scummy. Unvote IronyOwl. Although Urist Imiknorris, that third fallacy doesn;t quite apply- the problem had not that IronyOwl is not finding the scum with his scumhunting- it had been that IronyOwl hadn't been scumhunting- different things.
THIRD fallacy? I may be blind, but Urist was talking about a single fallacy. You have not been doing anything all game, and I had enough. I asked you a question to get you out of the fucking MESS you got yourself into. And you refuse to even give an answer! What's worse, you acknowledge the question, and still don't give an answer. Explain yourself, or hang.
Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Not going to touch this one.
I think you have the ICs' priorities wrong. You assume that their primary goal is to play the game and their secondary goal is to teach us newbies. I think it's the other way around, what with Irony's response to my questioning here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414).Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.
I see no misquoting. Please explain how what you said isn't what you meant.Quote from: IronyOwlThis is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again. And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them. I would also call it profanities, but I swear not to do so, since I'm only 13. So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
That was six days ago. The response in question had been given seven days ago:Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Spoiler: Answer to "Who do you suspect?" (click to show/hide)
Twelve hours ago, you finally got off your ass and gave an answer that wasn't uselessly vague. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) It took you a fucking week to answer a question and provide an explanation for your case.
Why?
Point Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.
This is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again. And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them. I would also call it profanities, but I swear not to do so, since I'm only 13. So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.
[misquote]So, with my defense we get the truth, which is what I actually said, scum:Spoiler: Powder Miner fucks up (click to show/hide)
Point Three:Your ICing does help. But if you don't scumhunt, we lose. Scumhunting is needed.Three: I feel my ICing is helping quite a bit in some areas. Would you care to point out an example or two where it's been completely worthless?Helping Shakerag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2632331#msg2632331) to avoid crippling assumptions, break out of his complacency, and refine his case. He took some further convincing for the theory part, but admitted (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636748#msg2636748) most other points were not just good, but helpful to improving his game.
Helping ed boy (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993) explain his case on Jim. Note the improved specifics of the response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2648647#msg2648647) relative to the vagueness of the explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2646622#msg2646622) I was objecting to.Only had this as a seperate section due to a quote screwup I'm far too lazy to deal with.
Point Four:Bouncing around an occasional question to look active (A bit hypocritical, I'm sorry, but I didn't do that on purpose- I just couldn't find anything suspicious) while not following up on it doesn't count. I;m sorry.Four: I am scumhunting. Saying blatantly, demonstrably false things tends to ruin your case, so unless you'd care to explain why I'm not actually scumhunting ed boy or why we should all live in the past for a moment, I'm pretty sure you should just admit to spouting bullshit and move along to real arguments.
[/quote]Spoiler: IronyOwl hunts for scum (click to show/hide)
I look forward to your detailed and well-thought out explanations for all of this, in addition to why you needed this before you could field any responses of your own. And yes, that last part is a real, genuine question that you will need a fucking awesome explanation for.
Sorry about that, been busy.
Powder Miner:Spoiler: On Case Strength And Quotes (click to show/hide)I quoted you in the quote you're quoting here.No, you didn't. Explain what you meant by this.Also, I love how you say your gut was the only thing keeping me from being a guaranteed lynch. That both means you'd be willing to stake a lynch on nothing but your gutIf my gut says you're not scum, I'm not going to lynch you for being a shitty player. What about this is scummy or a bad idea to you?AND that you'd be willing to use your IC status to manipulate everyone else.You don't even know where you're going with this, do you?
I mean, what is your argument here, exactly? That I'm scum attempting to manipulate the Town into not mislynching you? Or that it's only manipulation if I say you are scum? Or that with two ICs saying you're scum and four players voting you, I'd need some sort of elaborate gambit to get you lynched?
This has the classic signs of low-level tunneling and terrible, shitty arguments- it made sense in your head and sounds bad when you say it out loud, but doesn't make any goddamned sense when you actually plug it into the fantasy you've created for yourself. It's the throw-everything-without-looking-at-it approach, which is a clear sign that you're making arguments to support your case, not prove it.
Furthermore, this doesn't address my question. Even if you had quoted me in that prior post, I don't see how one quote for a two-sentence response invalidates the simple fact that you've been practicing none of what you preached. And what you've used as an excuse to not explain yourself.
So I'll ask you again, because apparently just once doesn't stick: Why have all of your prior posts been extremely brief, undetailed, and quoteless if "backing it up" is so important?
On Timing And Such:Yes, but that was, what, four (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) days ago (as of this quote)? My explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414) was not long after, but your response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2649155#msg2649155) certainly was.Quote from: IronyOwlSo, here we go:I ANSWERED THAT. I SAID THAT I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION BECAUSE I NEVER FOUND AN ANSWER OF YOURS TO MORMOTA UNSATISFACTORY!
Point One:One: Why did it take you so long to mention this part? As I've said (repeatedly) this question has been out to you for a long, long while, and you've just now gotten around to saying this part. Why? You've given very brief, vague versions before, mainly consisting of "Why can't you do both" or "You should scumhunt too" or similar, but this is the first time you've explained yourself fully, and the first time you could be interpreted as responding in a concrete way to the explanations I gave for it much, much earlier.
I first asked this question way, waaaaay the fuck back here:Spoiler: Eternal question to Powder Miner (click to show/hide)
And mind you, this was after blatantly ignoring the question when you didn't understand it, rather than bothering to ask about (or even acknowledge (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636803#msg2636803)) it.
On Noobs And Scum:If this was the original reason you were suspicious of me, why is this the first time you've ever mentioned it?Quote from: IronyOwlThat was six days ago. The response in question had been given seven days ago:Reading that quote now, I'm going to facepalm. That not finding anyone suspicious even though tey were lurking/active lurking/questionable tactics-using was what made me suspicious in the first place. How would you expect me to get off of your case for what made me suspicious? Yay emphasis stacking.Spoiler: Answer to "Who do you suspect?" (click to show/hide)
Twelve hours ago, you finally got off your ass and gave an answer that wasn't uselessly vague. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641018#msg2641018) It took you a fucking week to answer a question and provide an explanation for your case.
Why?
Also, I've explained this in fairly elaborate detail by now, but here's a particularly concise example:What makes a bandwagon or lack of scumhunting a sign of scum and not proof of not being sure what they're doing?
If you still don't understand the concept, why didn't you call me out on thinking your play was crap yet still thinking you were town? Wouldn't the two be mutually exclusive?
On Logic and Such:Well, which is it, said or meant? If it's said, why isn't this a careful dissection of what words mean instead of vague accusations of misinterpretation? If it's meant, why are you phrasing your inability to communicate what you mean as a scumtell from me?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Two:That's not what I meant. What I meant was all you're doing is handing out advice and pretending that's an acceptable excuse to be not scumhunting. That's hat I said, scum.Two: "If you weren't doing X you'd be doing nothing therefore you're doing nothing" does not work as an argument, because they're not not doing X. It can have merit as a show of tunneling or lack of activity, but "1 = 0" just isn't going to fly.I went through very elaborate efforts to explain, in detail, the logic of your argument and why it was worthless. If that hinged on misquoting your meaning, your response would have been a rather simple dismantling of my interpretation by pointing out what those words and phrases actually mean. Instead you've got a fairly emotional rant about how I've been misquoting you, without really bothering to explain why, and not explaining why at all until later on. Why?Quote from: IronyOwlThis is a logical argument. Yet you've refused to answer it because:I fail to see how misquoting my meaning is a logical argument. Try again.Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.This is known as "unacceptable bullshit," as it's a completely irrelevant excuse to avoid answering. If for some reason you need proof that you actually said that, that's also unacceptable bullshit, but I'll provide it anyway because I'm tired of you wriggling out of doing anything at the slightest excuse.And I did say that. I won't deny that, nor would I ever need to or want to deny that. I wanted posts linked to because you were misquoting what I was trying saying and that was unacceptable. That's harder to do with the words up there and me here to advance them.So you saw me doing something scummy, and instead of calling me out on it and explaining why it was baseless and thus a scum ploy, you kicked the can down the road and insisted I fancy up my posts more. Why?So I'll go with that it's just compltely unacceptable to misquote my meaning. How's that for you as logical arguments go?It's a lot of text for saying absolutely nothing, except that you're emotional and defensive.
On Scumhunting And Such:So you consider this a laughable, scummy misquote, but admit that you might have posted it and can't be bothered to click on the link to check.Quote from: IronyOwl screws up[misquote]Are you done misquoting me yet? No? Fine. That's about the most ridiculous misquote in here. I'm not sure if you edited tht there, if that was part of something else, or that was me trying to post int he ten minutes before my bedtime,If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't get away with not scumhunting, you wouldn't be able to IC."If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't be ICing."[/misquote]
It's a direct quote. It's trimmed, but there was no context to remove. I'll once again remind you of your claim that:Irony, here's a little lesson I learned when I got lynched last game. You can call someone's argument crap and bull all you want but you need to back it up. Link me to posts and I'll be happy to oblige.I see no links proving I've misquoted you. Why is that?Spoiler: On Logic And Points (click to show/hide)Quote from: WordTwistingOwlThus we get:So, with my defense we get the truth, which is what I actually said, scum:Quote from: WordTwistingOwl1. If you weren't ICing right now you'd be doing nothing1. If you weren't an IC, you wouldn't have the excuse of being the ohso benevolent IC that just sits around and hands out advice, and you'd be recgonized as active lurking.Quote from: WordTwistingOwl2. You're doing nothing anyway2. Even if you do have the excuse, it doesn't change the fact that you're active lurking.Nope. ICing is useful, as you later admit.Quote from: WordTwistingOwl3. You're doing absolutely nothing for the town3. If you're ICing, YOU NEED TO SCUMHUNT. Not scumhunting means not finding scum. Not finding scum means losing.You've said this, but you've also said this:It really doesn't matter if we're too noobish, or if we need lots of ICing, if you're only being an IC, you're not doing a single thing for the town.Plus, accusations of active lurking are pretty much this by definition, so basically the entirety of your case is "you're doing nothing," not "scumhunting is important." The two might look similar, but they're not the same thing.
With regards to your "intended" point, ICing is largely concerned with getting other people to scumhunt and scumhunt well, and the BM format's entire point is helping others improve. Even if it were more efficient for me to attempt to win the game single-handedly, it'd completely defeat the purpose.
Thus, I stand by my statement:Quote from: WordTwistingOwlThus we get my original interpretation: "If you weren't an IC you wouldn't be doing anything right now, thus you're not doing anything right now." In other words, (1 = 0).
On ICing:That's not what you've been saying all game. Your entire previous section is centered around claiming that I've been active lurking and that my ICing is nothing more than a smokescreen to hide that fact. Which is it?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Three:Your ICing does help. But if you don't scumhunt, we lose. Scumhunting is needed.Three: I feel my ICing is helping quite a bit in some areas. Would you care to point out an example or two where it's been completely worthless?Helping Shakerag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2632331#msg2632331) to avoid crippling assumptions, break out of his complacency, and refine his case. He took some further convincing for the theory part, but admitted (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2636748#msg2636748) most other points were not just good, but helpful to improving his game.
Helping ed boy (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993) explain his case on Jim. Note the improved specifics of the response (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2648647#msg2648647) relative to the vagueness of the explanation (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2646622#msg2646622) I was objecting to.I thought we'd established that you needed quotes to do stuff, rather than more vague, pointless garbage?Quote from: IronyOwlPoint Four:Bouncing around an occasional question to look active (A bit hypocritical, I'm sorry, but I didn't do that on purpose- I just couldn't find anything suspicious) while not following up on it doesn't count. I;m sorry.Four: I am scumhunting. Saying blatantly, demonstrably false things tends to ruin your case, so unless you'd care to explain why I'm not actually scumhunting ed boy or why we should all live in the past for a moment, I'm pretty sure you should just admit to spouting bullshit and move along to real arguments.Spoiler: IronyOwl hunts for scum (click to show/hide)At this point I take it back about you scumhunting ed boy.But it's too little, too late, and only after I launched a savage attack on you.So you admit to being wrong, but shrug and say it's "not enough" without going into any detail. This is both in grievous violation of your now-infamous wisdom, and a very definite sign of tunneling.Quote from: WordTwistingOwlI look forward to your detailed and well-thought out explanations for all of this, in addition to why you needed this before you could field any responses of your own. And yes, that last part is a real, genuine question that you will need a fucking awesome explanation for.You also seem to have forgotten something. I pretty much knew you would, but that doesn't really make it better.
Well. This has become an atrocity.
Unvote ed boy. Quite unfortunate, as I had a few more things to ask him. Mostly about who he suspected now.
Shakerag, what's the scummiest thing you've seen in this game so far? I mean that both in the "why would you ever do that as either alignment" sense, and the far more useful "this made me suspicious of that person" sense.
Mormota, what's your current list of suspects?
I have no idea what your response to PMs 3rd quotation is about, please elucidate.
As to 'not ... touching this one' why the Hell not? If it's retarded spell it out, fucking hammer that point
home! Going soft, scum?
Where is this 'Part Two'?
Overall, after reviewing the entire thread, I feel that Powder Miner is scum.
[spoiler][quote][/spoiler][/quote]
Mormota: What do you hope to get out of this game? If you could pick one of the four possible power roles (Cop, Doctor, Godfather, or Roleblocker), which would you pick? Why?
Probably Godfather. The ability to stay hidden from town is invaluable, and I don't think I'm experienced enough to take any other role.
Quote from: Powder MinerMormota, What's up with ignoring several of my posts in addition to voting shakerag for saying the word "whoops"?
Well. Not reading the thread, just randomly posting is outright ignoring everything everyone has said. Urist was very active by that time. Please point out which of your posts I ignored. About voting someone for saying whoops, well. It is a perfect opportunity for scum to, they might think, "prove" they're town by acting as if they felt sorry for being suspicious of someone who was NKed and was town.
ed boy hadn't officially been replaced at that point.
Not an excuse for the person you voted, but good enough for everyone else? (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Relativist_Fallacy) (not a perfect fit, but it's still there) Bullshit (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Red_Herring). You wanted an easy lynch, and who better than the person who was already about to be axed (unless Irony or I unvoted)? You only voted him so that if someone changed their mind, he'd still be gone, didn't you?
And you thought that was grounds to kill him before he answered your questions?
Mormota: What do you hope to get out of this game? If you could pick one of the four possible power roles (Cop, Doctor, Godfather, or Roleblocker), which would you pick? Why?
Probably Godfather. The ability to stay hidden from town is invaluable, and I don't think I'm experienced enough to take any other role.
"Is", not "would be?"
Q: "Why are you ignoring me?"
A: "You're doing more ignoring than I am, and I'm not going to answer you until you tell me what I ignored."
Care to explain?
Also, vote to extend.
What question? The only question Urist asked was towards IRonyOwl.
Not an excuse for the person you voted, but good enough for everyone else? (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Relativist_Fallacy) (not a perfect fit, but it's still there) Bullshit (http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Red_Herring). You wanted an easy lynch, and who better than the person who was already about to be axed (unless Irony or I unvoted)? You only voted him so that if someone changed their mind, he'd still be gone, didn't you?
It was not an excuse for anyone, but I wasn't voting everyone. I was voting Shakerag. Stop crafting conspiracy theories, that's not going to help you.
So being one of half (rounded down) of the people in the game not posting during that time was scummy?And you thought that was grounds to kill him before he answered your questions?Yes I did, and I would do it again. What he did was scummy. Period.
I am not sure I understand what you said there.Let's go back to the quote in question, specifically the bolded part:
Quote from: Powder MinerMormota, What's up with ignoring several of my posts in addition to voting shakerag for saying the word "whoops"?Well. Not reading the thread, just randomly posting is outright ignoring everything everyone has said. Urist was very active by that time. Please point out which of your posts I ignored. About voting someone for saying whoops, well. It is a perfect opportunity for scum to, they might think, "prove" they're town by acting as if they felt sorry for being suspicious of someone who was NKed and was town.
Do you actually have any claims on me which I haven't shown false yet? If not, why are you voting me, and not doing some scumhunting? Get off your arse and get to work.Aww, did I hit a nerve? I am scumhunting. Your answers aren't convincing me that you're town, and until I am convinced, I'm not going to back off.
As you can see, IronyOwl has half the posts of everyone else currently alive right now. This means Irony has been active lurking or lurking, and this is even including Toaster's posts. Moving on.
Point Two:
This one has been argued to no end, but I am aware that it's IC first player second as far as responsibilities go for you Irony, but you shouldn't be ICing in lieu of scumhunting, you should have been doing both. You were lurking because you weren't scumhunting- you didn't have no room for scumhunting, and this is what I find absolutely unacceptable.
I'm aware (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2635939#msg2635939) that you have your excuses, (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414) namely that we're all too nooby to be hunted, and that we need IC direction more.
We do need IC direction. But we're not too nooby to be scumhunted- we're scumhunting each other, are we not? I would find this maybe more acceptable if you had the same amount of posts compared to everyone else, but you have half of even mine. THis means you were ICing and thne when that was done had to lurk instead of scumhunt. You should be ICing AND scumhunting, and the fact that you ICed and lurked instead and then tried to pass it off as acceptable is what makes me suspicious of you to no end. You've hunted scum... in D1 RVS ad only a couple posts afterwards. In D2 your only scumhunting activity, when we were at risk of LyLo, was to ask ed boy a few questions later in the day (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993), Question me a little after I started going after you, (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2635939#msg2635939)
and then the defense that's easily viewable in the very few last pages. For the first half-of the-day, you did nothing but ICing until ed boy pestered you a little about it and then I wnet for your throat. Then you asked ed boy a question or two without really going into an in-depth attack. You mostly defended against me in the second half. This is a lack of scumhunting. It's active lurking.
This is what I find unacceptable, IronyOwl, and it's why I think you're scum.
Part One:As you can see, IronyOwl has half the posts of everyone else currently alive right now. This means Irony has been active lurking or lurking, and this is even including Toaster's posts. Moving on.
Point Two:
This one has been argued to no end, but I am aware that it's IC first player second as far as responsibilities go for you Irony, but you shouldn't be ICing in lieu of scumhunting, you should have been doing both. You were lurking because you weren't scumhunting- you didn't have no room for scumhunting, and this is what I find absolutely unacceptable.
I'm aware (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2635939#msg2635939) that you have your excuses, (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2641414#msg2641414) namely that we're all too nooby to be hunted, and that we need IC direction more.
We do need IC direction. But we're not too nooby to be scumhunted- we're scumhunting each other, are we not? I would find this maybe more acceptable if you had the same amount of posts compared to everyone else, but you have half of even mine. THis means you were ICing and thne when that was done had to lurk instead of scumhunt. You should be ICing AND scumhunting, and the fact that you ICed and lurked instead and then tried to pass it off as acceptable is what makes me suspicious of you to no end. You've hunted scum... in D1 RVS ad only a couple posts afterwards. In D2 your only scumhunting activity, when we were at risk of LyLo, was to ask ed boy a few questions later in the day (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2647993#msg2647993), Question me a little after I started going after you, (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2635939#msg2635939)
and then the defense that's easily viewable in the very few last pages. For the first half-of the-day, you did nothing but ICing until ed boy pestered you a little about it and then I wnet for your throat. Then you asked ed boy a question or two without really going into an in-depth attack. You mostly defended against me in the second half. This is a lack of scumhunting. It's active lurking.
This is what I find unacceptable, IronyOwl, and it's why I think you're scum.
This is one of my reasons for voting Powder Miner.
A. You want to vote for him because he isn't posting too much. While lynching lurkers is a good idea in the early game is a good idea as even if they are town, they aren't useful town. However LYLO is not a good time for a policy lynch, and pushing for one is a very scummy idea because it comes up with a good reason on the surface, but doesn't require any actual scumhunting. It's the perfect out. So, if you had some other reasons this would be tolerable.
This brings me to
B. you seem to think that Irony is not scumhunting, just ICing. This is bull.Spoiler: Example (click to show/hide)
So, yourmainonly argument for for lynching Irony is bullshit. And you other is not even an argument. As long as there is content, which there is (see spoiler), simple number of posts is no reason to lynch.
Then someone else called you on your shitpost and you promptly back off:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
If you are town and you think someone is scum, lay on and don't back down. If you think he is scum overcome the opposition by proving that he is scum. Backing off like this to avoid questioning is a major scumtell in my eyes because yo are trying to avoid being questioned. This is LYLO, everyone will be questioned. Deal with it.
Now, explain why number of posts is a scumtell. Explain why you thought Irony was not scumhunting when he was. Explain why you backed down at the first sign of trouble. Explain why we shouldn't kill you. Now.
To everyone: I apologize for fucking up the format on that post so seriously. If you endeavoured to quote any section of it, I say double-sorry. Looks like that hour of my life was pretty much for not.
-snip-Part One:
All you did there was say that my argumentwas crap and cite a non-seuitur (hint, I started my argument in Day 1, a single post cited in Day 3 responding to that argument doesn't automatically make you right and me wrong, and if that's all of that argument, then in fact it renders that little piece of your argument in serious need of work.
Part Two:
Because I'd already repeated that argument a billion times, and they were going to simply ignore me if I continued to pursue it. This is not a goal, to get ignored.
Your points contradict each other anyway. First you say that my argument is bas and should not be used and then you say I'm scummy for trying to find a new argument to find scum.
Mormota: Thre's no question in thre. The only thing that could be interpreted as a quesiton is you asking me how askign for a replace could be used aas an excuse to vote the replacee when they're not in the game. I answered that. And the answer is: They're stll in the game until the replacer shows up.
So did you have any other reason for justifying your vote on Shakerag? Because you've admitted that he wasn't the only one not posting, and (according to you) that's why you voted him. If that was your only reason for voting Shakerag (which you've strongly implied), then you've got some explaining to do re: why Shakerag not posting was so much more suspicious than Jim not posting or Powder Miner not posting.
The last sentence is where the "I'm not going to answer you until you tell me what I ignored" part came in. If you were accusing Powder Miner of not reading the thread, then why would you not go back and read the thread to find out which posts you ignored?
Aww, did I hit a nerve? I am scumhunting. Your answers aren't convincing me that you're town, and until I am convinced, I'm not going to back off.
Mormota: Thre's no question in thre. The only thing that could be interpreted as a quesiton is you asking me how askign for a replace could be used aas an excuse to vote the replacee when they're not in the game. I answered that. And the answer is: They're stll in the game until the replacer shows up.
Am far too busy to read this at the moment. Preemptive extend is a good idea.
Because I asked Shakerag a question, not them. Since they were not asked questions, they weren't required to reply to anything. Shakerag was, and he didn't.You weren't the only one asking questions, you know, and Shakerag wasn't the only one being asked. IronyOwl asked, among other things, quite a few questions to Powder Miner, and as far as I can tell none of those were answered.
I have shown that the logic behind your arguments was wrong. If you are still voting me, that is not out of logic, but on a gut feeling. Do you believe that is good?No. You seem to misunderstand why my vote rests on you. I am trying to read you as well as possible. To that end, I'm picking apart your argument and questioning you on anything that looks suspicious. For instance:
IronyOwl, if you are too busy, ask for a replace. You are not going to lurk through this day with that lousy an excuse, scum.Your entire argument here seems to be "If he's busy now, he'll always be busy, and should ask for a replace." Do you have any other evidence that he's scum?
So did you have any other reason for justifying your vote on Shakerag? Because you've admitted that he wasn't the only one not posting, and (according to you) that's why you voted him. If that was your only reason for voting Shakerag (which you've strongly implied), then you've got some explaining to do re: why Shakerag not posting was so much more suspicious than Jim not posting or Powder Miner not posting.
Because I asked Shakerag a question, not them. Since they were not asked questions, they weren't required to reply to anything. Shakerag was, and he didn't. A.Am far too busy to read this at the moment. Preemptive extend is a good idea.
IronyOwl, if you are too busy, ask for a replace. You are not going to lurk through this day with that lousy an excuse, scum. B.
1, I didn't. Mimicking it would require me not to provide a reason for it. I did.Or it'd require you to provide an excuse to cover for your mimicking.
2, You could try using your brain. Let me help: To get Powder Miner talking about SOMETHING [Both bold and capital, because... FFFFFFFF!] other than you, and allow us to get reads on him.So you had nothing else you could/wanted to ask him about? Did you think this might encourage him to post relevant things somehow, or did you feel his response might be useful in itself?
I believe the idea is this:Mormota: What do you hope to get out of this game? If you could pick one of the four possible power roles (Cop, Doctor, Godfather, or Roleblocker), which would you pick? Why?
Probably Godfather. The ability to stay hidden from town is invaluable, and I don't think I'm experienced enough to take any other role.
"Is", not "would be?"
I laughed. But other than that.. What? I was talking in this peculiar language called English, and that is how that's grammatically correct. I think.
I have shown that the logic behind your arguments was wrong. If you are still voting me, that is not out of logic, but on a gut feeling. Do you believe that is good?Interesting. So you believe Urist to be town following his gut, and not scum pushing for a mislynch? Why's that, Mormota?
Overall, after reviewing the entire thread, I feel that Powder Miner is scum.This seems kind of lackluster.
If you are town and you think someone is scum, lay on and don't back down. If you think he is scum overcome the opposition by proving that he is scum. Backing off like this to avoid questioning is a major scumtell in my eyes because yo are trying to avoid being questioned. This is LYLO, everyone will be questioned. Deal with it.This is better, but it still feels like you're going after easy targets.
Now, explain why number of posts is a scumtell. Explain why you thought Irony was not scumhunting when he was. Explain why you backed down at the first sign of trouble. Explain why we shouldn't kill you. Now.
To everyone: I apologize for fucking up the format on that post so seriously. If you endeavoured to quote any section of it, I say double-sorry. Looks like that hour of my life was pretty much for not.It was better than nothing, but I don't see the in-depth analysis part. You want to try re-giving your opinions on everyone you've analyzed?
Anyone who hasn't voted; who are your scumpicks? Why? Examples?Mormota and you. Powder I still think is thrashing town (mainly due to gut and doesn't-have-an-IC-syndrome), Urist has seemed townlike for the most part. I was suspicious of ed boy and you've been continuing that a bit, what with going for the easiest target and delivering somewhat lackluster results. Mormota's had kind of a history of subtly following others' suspicions/votes, and hasn't had any serious suspicions all game.
Urist, scumpicks. Also, you see flaws in Mormota's arguments, but do you have any other scumtells?
...What? You quoted a complete nonsequitur and then said that it also proves a non-sequitur (What did I ever say about "good" or "bad" posts, and then you try to change the subject here from the ICing as much as scumhunting argument to my mistaken post number analysis. (You know, how you kind of tried to refute the IC-scumhunt argument wtith a non-sequitur and I just called you out on it)?And why are you intent on defending IronyOwl anyway? I mean seriously, what kind of vote excuse is that, Zrk2?-snip-Part One:
All you did there was say that my argumentwas crap and cite a non-seuitur (hint, I started my argument in Day 1, a single post cited in Day 3 responding to that argument doesn't automatically make you right and me wrong, and if that's all of that argument, then in fact it renders that little piece of your argument in serious need of work.
Part Two:
Because I'd already repeated that argument a billion times, and they were going to simply ignore me if I continued to pursue it. This is not a goal, to get ignored.
Your points contradict each other anyway. First you say that my argument is bas and should not be used and then you say I'm scummy for trying to find a new argument to find scum.
Mormota: Thre's no question in thre. The only thing that could be interpreted as a quesiton is you asking me how askign for a replace could be used aas an excuse to vote the replacee when they're not in the game. I answered that. And the answer is: They're stll in the game until the replacer shows up.
A. A single post demonstrates that one good post =/= one bad post, so your case on nothing but post number is still shit, always was shit, and always will be shit.
B. Being ignored is not an excuse to stop arguing. You see something that doesn't make sense point it out, point that bitch way the fuck out. People ignore it, ask them why they're ignoring it. Maybe they're covering for their scumbuddy. Fucking investigate that shit!Zrk2, the problem was that I had been repeating the same argument too many times. I needed to find the new one, since I'd been tunneling again... And I'm afraid you're the one I find scummy now, I mean seriously what's up with your first point?
C. It is bad, but if you believe it then stick with it. At the very least don't back off like that, since bowing to pressure looks completely like a scum trying to avoid attention drawn by his bad scumhunt. If someone trys to tell you you are wrong, analyze their logic and see if you can find flaws. If you can point them out, if you don't incorporate their thoughts into your case. Don't back down like a wuss.Because machoness is always the key to town winning. In any case, they want me to find scum in other ways, and that I can do. In fact, I'm doing it right now.
...What? You quoted a complete nonsequitur and then said that it also proves a non-sequitur (What did I ever say about "good" or "bad" posts, and then you try to change the subject here from the ICing as much as scumhunting argument to my mistaken post number analysis. (You know, how you kind of tried to refute the IC-scumhunt argument wtith a non-sequitur and I just called you out on it)?And why are you intent on defending IronyOwl anyway? I mean seriously, what kind of vote excuse is that, Zrk2?-snip-Part One:
All you did there was say that my argumentwas crap and cite a non-seuitur (hint, I started my argument in Day 1, a single post cited in Day 3 responding to that argument doesn't automatically make you right and me wrong, and if that's all of that argument, then in fact it renders that little piece of your argument in serious need of work.
Part Two:
Because I'd already repeated that argument a billion times, and they were going to simply ignore me if I continued to pursue it. This is not a goal, to get ignored.
Your points contradict each other anyway. First you say that my argument is bas and should not be used and then you say I'm scummy for trying to find a new argument to find scum.
Mormota: Thre's no question in thre. The only thing that could be interpreted as a quesiton is you asking me how askign for a replace could be used aas an excuse to vote the replacee when they're not in the game. I answered that. And the answer is: They're stll in the game until the replacer shows up.
A. A single post demonstrates that one good post =/= one bad post, so your case on nothing but post number is still shit, always was shit, and always will be shit.
Quote from: Zrk2B. Being ignored is not an excuse to stop arguing. You see something that doesn't make sense point it out, point that bitch way the fuck out. People ignore it, ask them why they're ignoring it. Maybe they're covering for their scumbuddy. Fucking investigate that shit!Zrk2, the problem was that I had been repeating the same argument too many times. I needed to find the new one, since I'd been tunneling again... And I'm afraid you're the one I find scummy now, I mean seriously what's up with your first point?Quote from: Zrk2C. It is bad, but if you believe it then stick with it. At the very least don't back off like that, since bowing to pressure looks completely like a scum trying to avoid attention drawn by his bad scumhunt. If someone trys to tell you you are wrong, analyze their logic and see if you can find flaws. If you can point them out, if you don't incorporate their thoughts into your case. Don't back down like a wuss.Because machoness is always the key to town winning. In any case, they want me to find scum in other ways, and that I can do. In fact, I'm doing it right now.
Oh Mormota, you seem to be doing exactly the thing that you voted Shakerag for doing.
Examples, please.Sure:
Questions for Shakerag
As per this, my main suspect right now is Shakerag, for the questions I asked him here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2655149#msg2655149) are still unanswered.
Extend.
I guess I'm basically just waiting for Mormota to get back.
Or it'd require you to provide an excuse to cover for your mimicking.
For instance, you specifically mentioned that your questions to Shakerag were "still unanswered" and implied he'd need an excuse for that. Yet, the difference between your asking the questions and voting him over them was just a pinch over the time between asking those questions and your previous post. What about that time difference seemed lurky or suspicious for Shakerag, but not yourself?
I believe the idea is this:
"Is" means that it is currently so. "Would be" implies that it would be true given a certain set of circumstances. So answering this question like that implies that you were thinking "Well I'm scum, so hiding from town is invaluable, so I'll say hiding from town is invaluable," rather than "Well I'm town, but if I was scum hiding from town would be invaluable, so I'll say hiding from town would be invaluable." In other words, it implies you weren't thinking of the town/scum situation hypothetically.I have shown that the logic behind your arguments was wrong. If you are still voting me, that is not out of logic, but on a gut feeling. Do you believe that is good?Interesting. So you believe Urist to be town following his gut, and not scum pushing for a mislynch? Why's that, Mormota?
Also, on D1 you said mipe9 was more arrogant than scum, but FoS'd him later on. What made you change your mind?
Mormota's had kind of a history of subtly following others' suspicions/votes, and hasn't had any serious suspicions all game.
Oh Mormota, you seem to be doing exactly the thing that you voted Shakerag for doing.
Zrk2: Here (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2666608#msg2666608) you ask Urist if he has anything other than pointing out the flaws in my argument against me. Are you not doing the same? Do you not find it hypocritical, Zrk2?
Yes you were. See those questions that IronyOwl asked you while you were gone? Those questions were (surprise!) questions that you were being asked and not answering. Also there was this:Oh Mormota, you seem to be doing exactly the thing that you voted Shakerag for doing.
There is a rather sizeablequestiondifference. He was being asked questions. I was not.
His explanation for not voting for an extension also seems scummy - why would a town player not want to hear their target's defense?
(By the way, I'd like an answer to that, Mormota)
Second point, I am not entirely sure what you meant, so I'm just going to explain it a bit clearer. I voted him because I generally found him suspicious and because he did not answer. I did not take the vote off him because he did not get any better and if he wanted to, he could have just explained himself. To me, it seemed as scum trying to get more time, not town trying to get more time.I'm not talking about when you kept your vote on him, I'm talking about when you first voted him. The difference in time (as I recall) was something like 12 hours between asking him a question and voting him over not answering it, complete with the insinuation that you found that suspicious or that he was deliberately avoiding answering you. Yet, the difference between asking him said question and voting him on it was also around 12 hours (or whatever the actual time was). What was it about that time difference that was scummy and lurky for him but normal for you?
I'm not assuming that if someone attacks you they have to be scum. I'm assuming that it's odd to automatically assume that someone's going after you for genuine but bad reasons rather than because they're scum. What makes you think Urist is town? Do you have reasons, or do you just assume everyone is town until they do something horribly, horribly scummy?Second point: You are assuming that if someone attacks me he has to be scum? Why? If I don't find someone suspicious, why should I call them scum? To give more reasons?I have shown that the logic behind your arguments was wrong. If you are still voting me, that is not out of logic, but on a gut feeling. Do you believe that is good?Interesting. So you believe Urist to be town following his gut, and not scum pushing for a mislynch? Why's that, Mormota?
Please point out where and how I was doing that. Throwing unbacked shit out there is not making a clear case.Too busy to deal with this properly, but the short version is:
Quickly checking back, it seems your very first vote was the fourth on Jafferey. You later claimed to be the first because the others were RVS, but that's not really a good explanation, especially since you unvoted his replacement with no fuss.
Quickly checking back, it seems your very first vote was the fourth on Jafferey. You later claimed to be the first because the others were RVS, but that's not really a good explanation, especially since you unvoted his replacement with no fuss.
Just throwing this out here: Why would I not unvote the replacement? He just replaced, he can't be scummy.
SO you do, Zrk2. So you do. I can provide you with that.
The first reason why I think you're scum is because the first thing you did when you came in was post an unnavigable thing that really proved nothing and then just jumped straight to a caseless vote against me. (Here.) (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2663265#msg2663265)
As far as I can decipher from that, yor reaon would appear to have been parroting IronyOwl (this is bad), by saying that he had an impressive post against me and then voting me. This is parroting.
Then sure, you had new reasons to go for me, but at least one of them is hypocritical AND parroting- you call me out on (mistakenly) calling IronyOwl on post number for one of my post reasons, just like IronyOwl already did. (Hey paaarrrotiing, guess what!)(HEre.) (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2666981#msg2666981). However, you had already noted IronyOwl's post number at the top of the post. (Merely commenting, but yes, indeed noting it, hypocritically, on a point you parroted from IronyOwl.) (Here, very top of the post.) (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=93126.msg2663265#msg2663265)
Also, you didn't address my other concern: You were suspicious of Shakerag for not scumhunting, but the only scumhunting you were doing was calling him out on it and asking him what he meant. Doesn't that strike you as problematic?
I'm not assuming that if someone attacks you they have to be scum. I'm assuming that it's odd to automatically assume that someone's going after you for genuine but bad reasons rather than because they're scum. What makes you think Urist is town? Do you have reasons, or do you just assume everyone is town until they do something horribly, horribly scummy?
All I can find at the moment, so I'll have to go back and properly address this later. I find your general drifting with votes suspicious in general, though; unvoting and then just sitting there while the lynch went through D1 strikes me as suspicious, for instance, since while it's not a bandwagon, it shows a definite disinterest in who's lynched.
So, Mormota and Powder Miner, you need to get on the board. Solidify your scumpicks and come out swinging. I want a vote, a reason, and examples to back them up. Let's go, there's only one day left.
...Because he still replaced someone that appeared scummy? A replacement cannot change roles in the process of being replaced so all those previous scumtells were still valid reasons to vote. This just doesn't make sense.
So? I found examples and reasons and I articulated them. I reasoned, I exampled, I prooved. You on the other hand BSed and backed off the second you were questioned on your reasoning. You then lurked the day away hoping no one would notice you when I pointed out these flaws, in fact you lurked so hard you got prodded. Not just called on it, but fucking prodded. Now you come out against me, and you have what? One reason for voting me? There is nothing wrong with repeating a point if you have other reasons to back it up. I did, I do I always have.
His explanation for not voting for an extension also seems scummy - why would a town player not want to hear their target's defense?Which you didn't answer.
(By the way, I'd like an answer to that, Mormota)
I have two reasons, three if you count the fact that I called you out on parroting.
And I was prodded because I was too busy for a Mafia post sunday. Thing for my church, and then on monday, I had a quick combo of homework and Boy Scouts.
So, Mormota and Powder Miner, you need to get on the board. Solidify your scumpicks and come out swinging. I want a vote, a reason, and examples to back them up. Let's go, there's only one day left.
Yet you are not doing it either.
...Because he still replaced someone that appeared scummy? A replacement cannot change roles in the process of being replaced so all those previous scumtells were still valid reasons to vote. This just doesn't make sense.
This is completely asinine. I can not vote someone and call them scum if I haven't seen them in action.
I didn't feel offended. I was concerend that his attack was so poor, so I called it. There is a difference.So? I found examples and reasons and I articulated them. I reasoned, I exampled, I prooved. You on the other hand BSed and backed off the second you were questioned on your reasoning. You then lurked the day away hoping no one would notice you when I pointed out these flaws, in fact you lurked so hard you got prodded. Not just called on it, but fucking prodded. Now you come out against me, and you have what? One reason for voting me? There is nothing wrong with repeating a point if you have other reasons to back it up. I did, I do I always have.
Why do you feel so offended by being attacked? Then you claim that having a few points is not a problem, but call Powder out for only having one. Uh... right? Well. No. Not at all.
His explanation for not voting for an extension also seems scummy - why would a town player not want to hear their target's defense?Which you didn't answer.
(By the way, I'd like an answer to that, Mormota)
If I am confident that someone is scum, then why would I want to hear more from them?
...Because he still replaced someone that appeared scummy? A replacement cannot change roles in the process of being replaced so all those previous scumtells were still valid reasons to vote. This just doesn't make sense.
This is completely asinine. I can not vote someone and call them scum if I haven't seen them in action.
But you still have all the scumtells from the previous person. All those still stand. Replacing doesn't change any of that. That's what I just said.
His explanation for not voting for an extension also seems scummy - why would a town player not want to hear their target's defense?Which you didn't answer.
(By the way, I'd like an answer to that, Mormota)
If I am confident that someone is scum, then why would I want to hear more from them?
Extend.Quote from: Zrk2...Because he still replaced someone that appeared scummy? A replacement cannot change roles in the process of being replaced so all those previous scumtells were still valid reasons to vote. This just doesn't make sense.
This is completely asinine. I can not vote someone and call them scum if I haven't seen them in action.
But you still have all the scumtells from the previous person. All those still stand. Replacing doesn't change any of that. That's what I just said.
I think what he meant was that you have no way of knowing what were legitimate scumtells and what was simply the replaced being themselves, so the best course of action would not be to dump the other guy's crimes on the replacee.
Because if you're town, you're always looking for scum to incriminate themselves. This requires them to post. If you're scum, you're looking for someone to die, but don't really care who. This is easier when you don't let them defend themselves.
Answers.
Unfortunately, I won;t be able to post for the rest of the day- upcoming field trip, which goes from friday-sunday. BAAAAANDDDDDDDD TRIPPPP
...I suppose an extend is therefore in order.
I guess I'm confirmed. BM will wrap up right shortly.
Zrk2, what the fuck do you mean by this:I guess I'm confirmed. BM will wrap up right shortly.
You guys gotta lynch somebody sometime. You can't endlessly delay, even if you do have endless extensions.
So the day ends... when now?
When will the day end?We have in total -1 request for extension, so today. That is, in two and a half hours.
Well, I indeed picked the roles manually, but not because of the irony (I wasn't even aware of your feud in XXVI), but because I wanted to make a balanced game - none of the ICs or OB, but neither any first-timers. And additionally I didn't think you'd get a scum IC before D2. But oh well, it would have been a good game if not for that vote change one minute before the deadline... :-/
Mormota has earned twelve Bastard Bucks from me for that. Good job.
Zrk2.
Mormota, if you do that again I will punch you through the internet.
XDThat probably would have worked. :<
Anyway, woo! I thought Mormota was gonna die and I was gonna have to try to get Zrk2 lynched day 2 lylo.
Any advice from the ICs for me?
Any advice from the ICs for me?
Mm, you probably woulda got lynched and I woulda won anyway, Zrk2, as admitted by the other two players.
Mm, you probably woulda got lynched and I woulda won anyway, Zrk2, as admitted by the other two players.
That last minute vote switch strikes me as a dick move, has anyone thought about maybe putting in a rule against it or something? I'm not sure how it would work, but winning by an exploit is really bloody cheap.