Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[flabort]

What could/will make it affect your reads?

Probably once/if almost everyone has a suggestion/request, the remaining 2-3 players will be seen as hold-outs, which could negatively or possitively affect my read on them by simply increasing the magnitude of the read a small amount.

And what is that wincon?

It's basically an Anti-Ally.
I don't know which player has to lose for me to win, but I know which role/wincon has to lose for me to win.

[flabort]

EBWOP

Because this is the random bullshit you were earlier complaining might take you out of the game prematurely?

That's probably true, but eliminating dangerous players (i.e. skilled, good, experienced, etc.) for no other reason than they are dangerous is a dumb and inelegant strategy.

Speaking of leaping to conclusions, thank you Jack.
I didn't say why you would want to eliminate dangerous players; I suggested why you would care about them.
Care can be caution, which can be opposed to, which can lead to elimination, but it's the same thing that Jack just ragged me about.

[Cheeetar]

Cheeetar:  Fair enough re teams.

If you're hunting scum, who do you suspect and why?

At the moment, I'm looking at TDS pretty heavily- his response to my vague suspicion was much too sharp and noticeable to just be routine self defence.

Mastahcheese is noteworthy. I think him giving you a daykill was pretty silly, and not just because you've threatened to kill me with it- I was unsure whether it was just silliness on his part, or scumminess, but the more he claims it's all part of some huge plan the more I lean towards silliness. I've seen too many townies grandstand about that sort of thing to believe it's scum trying to explain away suspicious moves (for more silly-townie grandstanding, see: BYOR 13.)

Cheetar,TDS,Jim: Why have you guys been more focused on mastahcheese as opposed to Toaster? He's the one that is dangerous, and in my opinion, seems the better person to try to get a vibe off of. Not even for scum or not scum, but role wise, and , for me at least, playstyle wise.

SBC: Why are you trying to get people to not question mastahcheese so transparently? Why do you say 'as opposed to'- do you want mastahcheese to stop being under suspicion in favour of Toaster, or just for people to look at Toaster?

[TolyK]

Mods: Votecount, please.

...
Fine.


The gnomes are sleeping,
The orcs are weeping,
Oh, world, what has come of thee?


The appointed hammerer is TOASTER.
Day will end: Wednesday, 11 AM UTC or so

Votecount:

Shakerag (0)-
Cheetar (1)- Toaster
Jack A T (1)- Flabort
GayArchaea (0)-
TheDarkStar (1)- Cheeetar
Flabort  (1)- Varee
Vector (0)-
Varee (1)- SuperBlackCat
Tiruin (0)-
Jim Groovester (0)-
Toaster (0) -
Persus13 (0) -
4maskwolf (0) - 
Mastahcheese (5) - Jack A T, Vector, Shakerag, TheDarkStar, Jimbot
SuperBlackCat (0) -

To Hammer: Majority at Day End
Please note that voting shenanigans are not displayed if they occur.


Not voting:
(4maskwolf, GayArchaea, 4maskwolf, Mastahcheese, Tiruin, Persus13, 4maskwolf) (5)
PFP (!)

[TheDarkStar]

1. After Jim explained his reasoning, I understood why he found cheese scummy. Beforehand, I found him mildly suspicious because he seemed to make an accusation without much of a reason. Now that I understand his logic, though, I see what he's thinking and that he does have a real case. However, you avoided the question I asked - you said that you found cheese suspicious, but you still haven't provided an actual reason.
2. I asked for clarification on Jim's argument - how does that make me suspicious?
3. Ok, you're scumhunting me. Why aren't you simultaneously scumhunting cheese, who you've said is also suspicious?
4. Yeah, it ends up being WIFOM either way, so this point can't really be argued much more.

Additional question:

5. Oops, I thought I answered that earlier. As for my answer: I never asserted that one was more likely than the other. Now that I've seen Jim's case I would agree with him that it's fairly scummy. Before that, I had no real opinion on it.

Sure. You were only marginally suspicious initially (hence only an FoS and a question.) Moving on my initial FoS and onto the reasons I voted for you:

a) Why did you twig so hard at being FoS'd? You got super defensive super fast for what was one statement and a question.
b) Why did you question Jim's case when you say you had 'no real opinion' on it- why did you then FoS Jim for something you had no read on? Were you simply making yourself seen to be posting?
c) Why were you so quick to tell me I should be focusing on mastahcheese instead, and why do you continue to assert that I have no business scumhunting by focusing on you?

a) It took some detail to answer your first question thoroughly.
b) I questioned it because he seemed to be voting without a real reason. After he explained it, I could then form an opinion on it, but there was no way I could have done so before. You're thinking that I thought it was odd because I disagreed with the logic, but that's not actually what happened. I thought that it was slightly suspicious because it didn't make sense to me.
c) "Instead"? I used the word "simultaneously".

[TheDarkStar]

Also, why did you FoS me before even hearing my response? And what do you make of me calling your suspicion perfunctory? To clarify, I'm suggesting that your FoS was only going through the motions. You only did it to make sure you looked like you were scumhunting.

It wasn't a very strong case; it was there so that I could find out if you really were using silly logic (which would cause a vote) or did have good reasons for voting.

Cheetar,TDS,Jim: Why have you guys been more focused on mastahcheese as opposed to Toaster? He's the one that is dangerous, and in my opinion, seems the better person to try to get a vibe off of. Not even for scum or not scum, but role wise, and , for me at least, playstyle wise.

Why should we ignore a scum/not scum reads? Why is it more important to understand Toaster than to focus on the scummy person?

[mastahcheese]

Can't quote because screw this iPod.

Toaster: I'm not trying to bait you, I wasn't even talking to you.
And you're dangerous because reasons.

SBC: No, I don't trust him. I actually forgot he was hammerer.
The reason is far darker, I just love chaos.

Jim: I wasn't even threatening you, but thanks for being self aware.
If you know you're not getting shit out of me, how come you're not questioning other people, rather than just defending yourself?

Jack: No, it's not because of the gambit.
It's because there is no gambit. You're just assuming there is one.


Let's add another layer to the WIFOM cake, in the name of hilarity and conspiricy.

Everyone voting me will die.
I could be lying.
The gun I gave Toaster does nothing.
I could be lying.
I probably have every nightkill in the game aimed at me, and it makes me smile.
I'm not lying about that, but you don't know why I'm smiling.
I could still be lying.
I just love being the center of attention.
I could be lying.

Jim: Choose 1 or 2, if you answer right, I'll give you a shiny button, if you answer wrong, I kill you.
I could be lying.

[TolyK]

Wut.

[TheDarkStar]

Wut.

This.

Also, it doesn't make me want to change my vote. "If you vote me, X terrible things will happen and everyone will die" is a common thing that scum say when lots of people vote for them in a game like this.

[TheDarkStar]

Wut.

This.

Also, it doesn't make me want to change my vote. "If you vote me, X terrible things will happen and everyone will die" is a common thing that scum say when lots of people vote for them in a game like this.

EBWOP: cheese, why aren't you revealing your information? Why are you so vague? Why are you trying to make us so uncertain?

[4maskwolf]

To Hammer: Majority at Day End

Do you mean majority or plurality, because there is an important difference there.

[4maskwolf]

EBWOP: I'll answer everyone's questions after school.

[mastahcheese]

Wut.

This.

Also, it doesn't make me want to change my vote. "If you vote me, X terrible things will happen and everyone will die" is a common thing that scum say when lots of people vote for them in a game like this.

EBWOP: cheese, why aren't you revealing your information? Why are you so vague? Why are you trying to make us so uncertain?

Like I said, I could be lying.
I can't be concise on my role, because than you would know to much, and knowledge is power, and with great power comes great responsibility, and I don't consider the majority of people to be responisible.

So instead I hand out illegal weapons and spin crap that makes even the mod question my sanity.

[TheDarkStar]

Wut.

This.

Also, it doesn't make me want to change my vote. "If you vote me, X terrible things will happen and everyone will die" is a common thing that scum say when lots of people vote for them in a game like this.

EBWOP: cheese, why aren't you revealing your information? Why are you so vague? Why are you trying to make us so uncertain?

Like I said, I could be lying.
I can't be concise on my role, because than you would know to much, and knowledge is power, and with great power comes great responsibility, and I don't consider the majority of people to be responisible.

So instead I hand out illegal weapons and spin crap that makes even the mod question my sanity.

Why would it be bad if I knew too much? You make it seem like you're the informed minority/scum. Can you be more specific?

If you can't justify your actions by the end of the day, there's no way I'm changing my vote.

[TolyK]

To Hammer: Majority at Day End

Do you mean majority or plurality, because there is an important difference there.

The person with the most votes.
If two have the same amount, there might be tiebreaks.

So instead I hand out illegal weapons and spin crap that makes even the mod question my sanity.

You must be new here...
I'm the one who hands out illegal weapons.
Spinning crap is not recommended since centripetal acceleration.