Open Role 5: Switch Mafia. Over. - before 384

[IH]

Argh, are we back at square one for most of our games? Did the data get deleted, or did the mods delete the posts?

Also, if we're back in the random stage, I'm

voting:Cornflux

because I DO remember that Cornflux was distancing himself from the bandwagon.

[IH]

/reconfirm

[IH]

Yes Spectrum, that is strange. Of course you seem a little confused in the other, oh, three or four games I'm in with you, so I'll buy that for now.

Also I don't care if you like to be called Spectrum, but whatev.

I remember what I posted last, and I had agreed with Cardboard Box. When a bandwagon started on Relyte, he was pretty quick to jump off. He wanted nothing to do with it, and did not want to be associated with it.

[IH]

Cornflux, as I have already stated above.

[IH]

Actually, it was more the way I remember it. He seemed pretty anxious to not associate him with anything. I really don't feel like going into random voting, and I remember that.

I haven't ever thought of that tactic though, to join someone on a bandwagon to see how they react to it.

[IH]

Actually, it was more the way I remember it. He seemed pretty anxious to not associate him with anything. I really don't feel like going into random voting, and I remember that.

I haven't ever thought of that tactic though, to join someone on a bandwagon to see how they react to it.

Wow, look at that horrible grammar. That first sentence SHOULD say ,"Actually I remember it more of the way" or something along those lines.

Also ShadowLurker, I believe it was one of my replies about Relyte I believe.

I had posted in response Relyte say "We shouldn't bandwagon" when two votes were on him, and that scum may jump on also.

I think I'd said something stupid that was kind of half and half, and I've decided to

unvote

until everyone posts I think

[IH]

well, I unvoted Yosarian. = D I don't want my vote on anyone I believe, but just in case.

unvote

[IH]

I think people misunderstood me, here is my defense:

1. This nearly happened to a player in another game of mine. I should have been more aware that with 10 people, it won't happen as easily as it will with 7.

2. What, I think everyone thinks is that I was only defending myself, unless I remember incorrectly, someone else also had 2-3 votes or so on them. This was back in the random stage I believe.

Can someone please elaborate on what IH did?

I do remember as soon as I did my, "Don't bandwagon" thing, he tried to attack me to get people off him, it worked... partly.

Also from a metagaming point of view, (other forum) IH doesn't act like he usually does. Then again, it has been about 3-4 months or so since I've played a Mafia game with him. Don't trust this 100%.

The FOS of the day goes to: IH

1.You shouldn't be worrying about your own skin, you should be worried about finding scum. So what should it matter if you have a bandwagon.

2.No, it was just you, and I said something pretty stupid, and that started another wagon.

metagaming-I've changed alot since my MT game, mostly because I get to deal with strategy here, instead of relying on a seer at MT.

I would also like to note that you only added an FOS onto me, and I wasn't even at lynch -2 was I, of course thats not bad in itself.

All in all though...

vote: Relyte

[IH]

I think I agree with ShadowLurker, depending on what that quotes about.

no, significant things have happened.

yes, there's nothing wrong with an early 2nd vote

no, there is something wrong when you treat us all like newbs, and tell us "Hey don't lynch me, thats a speed lynch" when you have two random votes on you. Relyte seemed awfully worried about random suspicion piling up on us.

no, we are NOT back to square one. Unless you want us to forget the suspicious things.

angsts over the lost posts

[IH]

Has this game died?

Also no, but I have got the one that says the CPU quota or something is exceeded.

[IH]

Things that have happened. (In response to Spectrum Void)+

We've had two deaths.

A townie and a Serial Killer.

Before the crash, I believe we were discussing bandwagons. Cornflux seemed afraid to be associated with one.

Relyte had all but insulted our intelligence, and I had said so in a suspicious way.

The old vote count, pre cornflux suspicion I believe.

3 Relyte: (IH, cardboardbox, romanus)
3 IH: (ShadowLurker, SV, klebian)
1 klebian (Relyte)
Not voting: Brutal Assassin, conflux, Cameron

With 10 alive, it is 6 votes to lynch.

Oh, and what's wrong with being distant from the bandwagon since the person we lynched wasn't scum? (I'm assuming you meant distant from the day 1 wagon, I can't remember if we were having another one.)

It's the idea. You don't want to be anywhere around it, and are skittish from blame.

Even though you had games mixed up.

Cornflux Said

Do you think bandwagons are good for the town? Discussion was started already, so don't you get that apology.

What did that last part mean?

Spectrumvoid said

Well, bandwagons generally aren't good for town

How so SV?

We need some more out of Brutal Assassin

Cardboardbox gave us a decent summary of pre crash.

hey Relyte.

The FOS of the day goes to: IH

Do I get that for having three votes on me, or what?

Hey Kelbian

4. I see that you added "of course that's not bad in itself", but seriously. There's a reason for FOSes. Someone in this game is utilizing that.

But thats all Relyte uses. Why? Afraid of being associated with voting someone?

COME ON PEOPLE, this game is dying!

[IH]

yes, but I'm not sure I've seen a vote from you this whole game, even before the crash. It looks as if you don't want to have suspicion thrown on you.

Besides, FoS's don't exactly have the same OOMPH as votes.

FoS's seem like "I'm watching you."
Votes are more "I'm after you."

[IH]

even before the crash

[IH]

Keep in mind this thread is only about 2 pages long or so. (Counting after random votes and the Mods rules, VCs, etc.)

even before the crash

better?

[IH]

no way, we were on page 3 or 4 weren't we? We got sent all the way back to like three posts into page 1!

[IH]

Whose question was that Conflux.

And I coulda sworn your name had an R in it.

[IH]

Ok, Relyte. I'm very glad you bring this up.

IH

yes, but I'm not sure I've seen a vote from you this whole game, even before the crash. It looks as if you don't want to have suspicion thrown on you.

Besides, FoS's don't exactly have the same OOMPH as votes.

FoS's seem like "I'm watching you."
Votes are more "I'm after you."

Relyte-

Keep in mind this thread is only about 2 pages long or so. (Counting after random votes and the Mods rules, VCs, etc.)

(Random vote)

IH-

Quote:
Keep in mind this thread is only about 2 pages long or so. (Counting after random votes and the Mods rules, VCs, etc.)


Quote:
even before the crash


better?

Relyte-

IH wrote:
Quote:
even before the crash



We lost at most 1 page with the crash. I think it was a LOT less though.

IH-

no way, we were on page 3 or 4 weren't we? We got sent all the way back to like three posts into page 1!

Relyte-

Maybe we had 3 or 4. Whatever. Doesn't really matter IMHO. If we can't even remember what we were voting you for.

Alright.

I brought up the point of Relyte's FoS's.

Relyte says "alright then" and votes me, after saying I need to learn the point of Fos's

I say why I think FoS's and Votes are different.

Relyte switches his defense to the threads only 2 pages long.

I reply with I was including before the crash

Relyte continues to claim that the thread wasn't that long before the crash anyway

I bring up I thought it was at least 3 or 4 pages long

Relyte says maybe it coulda been, and tries to play it off as if it doesn't matter, and switches it to being "I don't even remember why we're voting you" hoping to placate me I would assume.

The whole reason of that little banter wasn't because of why I was being voted.
It was why you don't seem to want to vote...

Also a slight Kelbian defense of Relyte has been noted, as he defends that Relyte HAS VOTED.

A random vote anyways.

[IH]

Unfortunately Relyte, if we're talking about how many FOS's you did instead of votes, then the thread length does matter. Alas, we cannot get this information back.

I'll also

unvote Vote:Lowell

until I hear something from him.

[IH]

I think it was because after that bandwagon thing, I said something along the lines of "Maybe you really did mean it" or something, and that we shouldn't jump on so quick for the statement, but I either voted you or FoSed you one or the other.

Also I do not mean that FoS's are suspicious, I just personally think it's strange to use

only FoS's

. I myself only use them if we're in a Lynch or Lose situation, or if I feel strong with my vote and don't want to change it.


Also I think I know where I'm getting this excess of FoS's from you, because you are in a few other games with me, and I was getting all those FoS's mixed together in my head I think...

[IH]

Ok then Shadowlurker. I have a very good case against Relyte I believe.

At first he seems to agree that to many FoS's are something bad, and brings up the length.

Keep in mind this thread is only about 2 pages long or so. (Counting after random votes and the Mods rules, VCs, etc.)

He sticks with this for another post.

We lost at most 1 page with the crash. I think it was a LOT less though.

He then shifts his defense again.

Maybe we had 3 or 4. Whatever. Doesn't really matter IMHO. If we can't even remember what we were voting you for.

And then tries to bring up "Why were we voting you again?"


Then he seems to forget what I said...

How does a FOS make me suspicious? I'm only showing who I think to be suspicious.

However, if you think I'm trying to say, "I'm not scum because I didn't vote so-and-so, I only FOS'd him." You're wrong, I could easily use WIFOM, to say that.

Anyway, all I'm asking is can you please recall what you said that's scummy.

Maybe you're avoiding it, maybe you're not, I'm not trying to use it to incriminate you, I'm just wondering what it is... and you seem to just keep avoiding it.

Still trying to bring up "Why are you avoiding what we voted you for?"

He then changes it again saying it's a matter of his playstyle.

People have different playing styles.

Plus, I have vote at least twice in the course of this game. I believe I also voted for you in the stuff that was lost in the crash. I'm not sure, but I believe I said it was suspicious that you were trying to put the blame on someone as soon as they came up.

And no, you didn't put a vote on me until two other people did I believe.

IMO, Relyte seems to be jumping his defense around.

[IH]

I think it was because after that bandwagon thing, I said something along the lines of "Maybe you really did mean it" or something, and that we shouldn't jump on so quick for the statement, but I either voted you or FoSed you one or the other.

Also I do not mean that FoS's are suspicious, I just personally think it's strange to use only FoS's. I myself only use them if we're in a Lynch or Lose situation, or if I feel strong with my vote and don't want to change it.


Also I think I know where I'm getting this excess of FoS's from you, because you are in a few other games with me, and I was getting all those FoS's mixed together in my head I think...

There's your answer, already answered last page.

I'll answer the rest later.

[IH]

If thats the vote count, I'm

unvoting

Not a criticism but... where's Lowells vote? <.<;;;

Anyways yes, after looking the last page over, I saw some strange things from Relyte, some jumping his defense and such...

but nothing truly concretely suspicious, pheh.

probably tonight, I'll go over the thread again.

[IH]

Pheh, I can't drop this, because of SV's continued protection of Relyte. She said she agreed with post 79, when half of it was an outburst that was later withdrawn. I'll elaborate more in this post

post 79:

IH just answer the question and then I'll shut up. I don't like missing pieces and you keep accusing me with it to try and get past the point I just want to know what it is.

What I consider the outburst.

In post 35, he asks if someone can elaborate on what I did, and then brings up a metagaming point from a forum where I got to post around 5 times, before I was lynched for disagreeing with public opinion. (Town lost might I add)

Post 35

:Can someone please elaborate on what IH did?

I do remember as soon as I did my, "Don't bandwagon" thing, he tried to attack me to get people off him, it worked... partly.

Also from a metagaming point of view, (other forum) IH doesn't act like he usually does. Then again, it has been about 3-4 months or so since I've played a Mafia game with him. Don't trust this 100%.

then he doesn't bring it back up, until i put a little bit of pressure on him, and the thread length came up (After he claimed it was only 2 pages, and that bugged me)

Then he pushes it back to his "question"

post 65:

Maybe we had 3 or 4. Whatever. Doesn't really matter IMHO. If we can't even remember what we were voting you for.

then in 68, warps it even farther, when that wasn't even the point, just a way to throw suspicion off of him, and onto me.

post 68:

Okay, IH.

How does the thread length effect the game?

At least I'm willing to admit what I did to get votes on me.

If we had an extra 2 pages, great. It's not like there was super important information on who was scum in those pages.

I believe all we talked about it is how it was bad it was for me to make my scummy statement and yours.

The length does not change who the scum is.

Maybe we did have 3 or 4 pages in length.

I don't really care. It can't be fixed now. You shouldn't use the crash as evidence against someone, because it's not as if the crash held game-winning evidence in it.

...and please don't misinterpret me. All I'm saying is, why are you so eager to bring back the pre-crash thread, when you won't even tell us the scummy thing you did.

Now don't misinterpret you again, I am not trying to incriminate you. I'm just wondering what it is you did, because honestly, if I can remember what I did and tell everyone what it was, you can too.

and after he says that "We shouldn't use crash information (even though he's trying to because, at least he admitted it, but I'm avoiding the issue, even though we shouldn't use crash evidence?) I believe this is the first time he asked me directly. Tries to throw out the notion I'm avoiding it.

70:

Anyway, all I'm asking is can you please recall what you said that's scummy.

Maybe you're avoiding it, maybe you're not, I'm not trying to use it to incriminate you, I'm just wondering what it is... and you seem to just keep avoiding it.

I answered it, and back to his outburst.



79:

IH just answer the question and then I'll shut up. I don't like missing pieces and you keep accusing me with it to try and get past the point I just want to know what it is.

I didn't vote you until two people were on you? First off: Who are you to say that I wasn't able to access my PC before the other two people so I couldn't voice my opinions before them. Second: Are you implying I'm scum by hopping on the bandwagon? In this game that's not even close to majority. Three =/= Seven.

I will and have openly admitted that I do FOS a lot, but seriously I don't see what's wrong with it. Someone isn't voteworthy so I give them a FOS.

Sure. I do it more often than most people, if you want me to vote more than FOS then that's your opinion.

then after ALL that. I posted a quote where I answered and we get this.

82:

Oh crash makes me forget stuff, and I kinda only "skimmed" your last post.

pheh, maybe I'm looking into things, but it seemed to me he was blowing that out of proportion, and contradicted himself a few times.

"We shouldn't use crash information to throw guilt on someone"
"IH just answer the question and then I'll shut up. I don't like missing pieces and you keep accusing me with it to try and get past the point I just want to know what it is. "

......

vote:Relyte

AGAIN

[IH]

for the third time Relyte.

I think it was because after that bandwagon thing, I said something along the lines of "Maybe you really did mean it" or something, and that we shouldn't jump on so quick for the statement, but I either voted you or FoSed you one or the other.

Also, my case wasn't to much I think, but watching you jump around your defense (about three times, as my last post stated) and contradicting yourself in the same post, I believe I do.

[IH]

I can't understand hardly any of the accusations that have been made in this game. I've read over it like 5 times and it all just seems so trivial and meaningless. WAYYY too much looking into individual lines of text and writing paragraphs in response.

The fact that most of the posting has been done by 4 people in a 10 player game would indicate that I'm not the only one in this camp.

I think it's because this game was so slow, and there were only roughly half the people posting (Maybe it still is = /) but we're trying to start something up.

It's like something that I brought something up that I personally thought was only mildly scummy, and found something I thought was seriously scummy from Relyte.

[IH]

I'd like to see a few more thoughts from SL. I see what SL thinks about something (Goodposting, badposting, etc) but I never see suspicions.

[IH]

I find it interesting that you single out me though when there are lurkers at the moment.

Well, perhaps I'm just asking you first. Technically everyone except for around 3 or 4 of us are lurking, aren't they?

Also, I don't see your opinions in detail. I mostly see if you agree or disagree(IE, if you agree it's good posting, if you disagree it's bad posting ETC ETC). I haven't see you trying to make any connections or the like. Maybe it's just a playstyle, but if you are only commenting on people's posts on if they're good or not, we don't see your logic or thought process.

Could we therefore deduce you're only following others?

[IH]

Bad posts=Mistakes (for both sides)

Mistakes=Everyone.

[IH]

Well fine SL, since I'm a lazy bastid and you protested my initial request for some more thoughts.

What are your thoughts on people, andwho do you think is scummy and why?

Is that not a reasonable request for so early in the game?

[IH]

What I thought.

unvote, vote:ShadowLurker

[IH]

I'm an idiot for thinking you would put a small amount of work to give us your general suspicions and why? I personally think it's more suspicious that you didn't give an answer, because you are so reluctant to part with such information.

[IH]

Well if you have been paying attention to the game you would have a general sense of who you believed is scummy and who is not. If you have not, then you wouldn't have this off the top of your head, and you could just pop in, post whether you thought the most recent post was "Goodposting or badposting" mostly we'd be happy with your performance, and you could cruise on through without us really seeing anything.

Also, if you post your opinions and your "List of Scumtells" as you call it, then the would most obviously generate reactions from players you consider scummy, and more general content to pick the game up.

I continue to become happier with my vote after each post you make.

[IH]

And how does "not paying attention to the game" make someone scum?

You would be lurking my friend.

The cons of that far outweigh "picking the game up

And what would the cons be?

[IH]

While you continue to try and justify this let me clear one thing up.

I did not ask you to tell me everything you considered a scum tell.

I asked you to tell me which players you believed most scummy, and why you thought they were most scummy. Did they cover that broad a spectrum?

Not to mention, I voted you, because you've flat out refused to answer that question (actively lurking) instead of (inactively lurking).

Perhaps you're just watching the thread, and posting at opportune times to shift the conversation.

I await how you will turn this into idiocy.

[IH]

Let me clarify one thing. I didn't specifically say anywhere that I voted you for lurking. In fact, it was (and still is) the refusal to answer my question in 111. You have given your reasons why you haven't, and I am not satisfied with them.

I disagree with your points that if scum saw reasons you found somone scummy, and they avoided those things, they'd coast to be looking protown. If everyone followed your logic, would the game invariably end up going no where? I personally think that it's a bad reason that you continue to stick with to avoid answering.

[IH]

Also, I believe it's very intriguing that this was started when I asked for some more thoughts from you.

You say that badposting means scummy and good posting means town (which I thought was obvious) and finish it up by saying you find it interesting that I asked you instead of lurkers.

Which I think I've asked them repeatedly.

[IH]

Ok SL, I will break down last night, quote by quote.

I'd like to see a few more thoughts from SL. I see what SL thinks about something (Goodposting, badposting, etc) but I never see suspicions.

initial question. Expressing I'd like to see some more thoughts from ShadowLurker.

Stop being an idiot.

Obviously, if you see what you think is good posting, you won't think they are suspicious.
Obviously, if you see what you think is bad posting, you will think they are suspicious.
Obviously, you're going to vote who you think is suspicious.

I find it interesting that you single out me though when there are lurkers at the moment.

Was that good interesting or bad interesting? Also, I believe that we know what Good and Bad posting are, and that you are subtly discrediting my competence.

Well, perhaps I'm just asking you first. Technically everyone except for around 3 or 4 of us are lurking, aren't they?

Also, I don't see your opinions in detail. I mostly see if you agree or disagree(IE, if you agree it's good posting, if you disagree it's bad posting ETC ETC). I haven't see you trying to make any connections or the like. Maybe it's just a playstyle, but if you are only commenting on people's posts on if they're good or not, we don't see your logic or thought process.

Could we therefore deduce you're only following others?

A comment that I don't see you detailing your post, so we aren't seeing your full thought process (about all we have on a day 1 to find scum) also, making connections as an example, such as linking posts together (Like you have done to discredit me, have you not?)

This is a blatant misrepresentation. I have not "agreed" things are bad or good posts have I? I generally only point them out when they have NOT been noted. Why would you want me to make connections? Connections are a horrible way of playing as you're going to miss most of the time.

And what logic is there?

Bad posts => Scum
Good posts => Town

If you say it's a goodpost, you say they're town and you agree. If you say it's a badpost, you say they're scum and you disagree, no?

Bad posts=Mistakes (for both sides)

Mistakes=Everyone.

You are basically saying a scumtell is a mistake for both sides. I ask you then, how the hell do you expect to find scum?

A bad post is possible to made by town, but is always more likely to be made by scum, that is why it is regarded as a bad post.

Which is why I say that just saying as such doesn't allow us to get a read on you, but you to get a read on others.

Well fine SL, since I'm a lazy bastid and you protested my initial request for some more thoughts.

What are your thoughts on people, andwho do you think is scummy and why?

Is that not a reasonable request for so early in the game?

I then got frustrated, and then rephrased my request.

Too vague of a question. I'm not going to post my entire list of scumtells and towntells so far so you can analyze them, kthx.

This lead me to believe what I stated above, and could be called lurking. That is why Lurking could be a scummy thing. It's not the action of lurking, it's that you get information to use from others, while we get none from you.

What I thought.

unvote, vote:ShadowLurker

If you honestly expected me to answer "What are your thoughts on people" then you are an idiot, especially when we have only five pages of things to go on.

I'm an idiot for thinking you would put a small amount of work to give us your general suspicions and why? I personally think it's more suspicious that you didn't give an answer, because you are so reluctant to part with such information.

Please explain why scum would be "reluctant to part with such information"
Also please explain how posting everyone of my scumtells I have picked up this game and my list of scumtells is a little bit of work as well as beneficial to the town. Thanks.

Here I believe I began to lose my cool, and just started posting things without thinking. I apologize for that.

Well if you have been paying attention to the game you would have a general sense of who you believed is scummy and who is not. If you have not, then you wouldn't have this off the top of your head, and you could just pop in, post whether you thought the most recent post was "Goodposting or badposting" mostly we'd be happy with your performance, and you could cruise on through without us really seeing anything.

Also, if you post your opinions and your "List of Scumtells" as you call it, then the would most obviously generate reactions from players you consider scummy, and more general content to pick the game up.

I continue to become happier with my vote after each post you make.

As you could tell with that obviously not thought out logic. Though as I look back on my initial vote, I am happy with it.

Well if you have been paying attention to the game you would have a general sense of who you believed is scummy and who is not. If you have not, then you wouldn't have this off the top of your head, and you could just pop in, post whether you thought the most recent post was "Goodposting or badposting" mostly we'd be happy with your performance, and you could cruise on through without us really seeing anything.

Also, if you post your opinions and your "List of Scumtells" as you call it, then the would most obviously generate reactions from players you consider scummy, and more general content to pick the game up.

I continue to become happier with my vote after each post you make.

And how does "not paying attention to the game" make someone scum?

Also, if you post your opinions and your "List of Scumtells" as you call it, then the would most obviously generate reactions from players you consider scummy, and more general content to pick the game up.

The cons of that far outweigh "picking the game up"

I still haven't understood the logic of the "Cons".

You would be lurking my friend.

And what would the cons be?

More not thought out logic from me. other than asking of the cons.

here you begin making 'connections' though you say it's a horrible way to play.

And how does "not paying attention to the game" make someone scum?

You would be lurking my friend.

I find it interesting that you single out me though when there are lurkers at the moment.



Well, perhaps I'm just asking you first. Technically everyone except for around 3 or 4 of us are lurking, aren't they?

Wait so you're voting me for possibly potentially lurking which I am not doing so at the moment and there are people who you claim are?

Ignoring the idiocy of that, how does lurking make someone scum?

Ignoring the idiocy of that, if someone posted whether the most recent posts pinged his scumdar or not, that would most certaintly not be lurking.

The cons of that far outweigh "picking the game up

and What would the cons be?

Let's see, exactly what not to do to appease me?

Explaining it again, just in case you don't get it. True you are not lurking, but you are acheiving the same thing that lurking would do. Us unable to get a good read on you, and therefore stay off our radars.
Of course, we only see the most recent posts, and some things go completely "ignored" by you.

While you continue to try and justify this let me clear one thing up.

I did not ask you to tell me everything you considered a scum tell.

I asked you to tell me which players you believed most scummy, and why you thought they were most scummy. Did they cover that broad a spectrum?

Not to mention, I voted you, because you've flat out refused to answer that question (actively lurking) instead of (inactively lurking).

Perhaps you're just watching the thread, and posting at opportune times to shift the conversation.

I await how you will turn this into idiocy.

This was in response to the "cons".

Way to avoid my questions, stop actively lurking.

Yes it did, each post gives you a thought whether it is lack of content, content to muse about, or seeing if you would make that post from a scum perspective or town perspective. Of course I couldn't analyze each post which is why most people note it, but do not particularly comment on it. If they did note everything that popped into their minds, scum would know exactly how to act.

Pretty sure by flat out refusing to answer that question on terms of idiocy is not actively lurking, thank you very much.

"Perhaps you're just watching the thread, and posting at opportune times to shift the conversation."

Obviously, this is not true. \

You have evaded my point about you are voting me for potentially lurking when I am not and there are people who are. You have evaded lurking makes you scum and by your definition, you yourself are actively lurking and by your own standards, you yourself are good for a vote.

Each post from you tells us if the above post is town or scum I believe.
By that logic, you shouldn't accuse anyone, because scum could avoid that in the future.
Like I said, the game would never move.
You never pointed out terms of idiocy on the question, but from why I would be voting you I believe.

Let me clarify one thing. I didn't specifically say anywhere that I voted you for lurking. In fact, it was (and still is) the refusal to answer my question in 111. You have given your reasons why you haven't, and I am not satisfied with them.

I disagree with your points that if scum saw reasons you found somone scummy, and they avoided those things, they'd coast to be looking protown. If everyone followed your logic, would the game invariably end up going no where? I personally think that it's a bad reason that you continue to stick with to avoid answering.

This was crap from me, as for some reason I was mashing everything together.
As well as this.

Also, I believe it's very intriguing that this was started when I asked for some more thoughts from you.

You say that badposting means scummy and good posting means town (which I thought was obvious) and finish it up by saying you find it interesting that I asked you instead of lurkers.

Which I think I've asked them repeatedly.

I THOUGHT I had asked them repeatedly, though usually I will hit out at lurkers pretty hard.
Also, I believe that post 126 was a combination of bullshit from me and you.
From you the OMGUS "Guys, IH is being very vague and only saying things like whether it's intriguing or not intriguing. I would like to see who he thinks is scummy and not just goodveryintriguing or badnotintriguing from him. "
From me, the bottom part most obviously.

[IH]

yes I am here. Also I have taken to previewing my quotes now. Nothing new to comment on.

[IH]

I'm still in.

[IH]

Lowell.... did you reread when you came in? = D I can't remember your responses.

[IH]

That would be nice = D

[IH]

unvote

Yos, my vote is on two different people. = D Now it shouldn't be on anyone.

[IH]

By being useless, of course.

........So are you being useless right now?

[IH]

I think your quotes are missing context. The first one happened in a squabble between IH and Relytye regarding how pages was the thread. IH was accusing Relyte of not posting much (I think.) The bizarre complaint was in response to IH accusing Relyte of wagoning. I think what is more noteworthy is the 3 =/= 7 bit.

That was about how many FoS's Relyte's done. He defended it by saying the game was only 2 pages long I believe. That's how it degenerated into the argument that came about I believe.

...How many votes to a lynch, and does Relyte have any current votes on him than Kelly's. XD Sorry YoS, but your corrected vote counts and such confused the hell outta me.

[IH]

I believe post 87, and then I reread the thread and continued in post 96.

[IH]

.... I am not happy with SpectrumVoid at all.

In my opinion, nothing significant has happened. There's nothing wrong with putting 2 votes on someone early day, and there's nothing wrong with telling people not to quick-lynch. So back to square one.

....(SV says-Let's forget this thing ever happened and start over. K?)

The line you quoted was in response to Conflux's question, so I'll clear them up together. Basically wagons are good in early day 1 to get discussion going. Bandwagons = bad in a small game because it's easy for mafia to hop on. (provided they're smart scum and give some kind of reason.) I know people who disagree with me have said that wagons give us info, but in a small game it may be too late for the info to be of use if we lynch the wrong people one time too many. But anyway, this is a discussion for the tactics thread, not here.

Also another discussion that isn't really in-game: Relyte's and IH's. I myself use quite a number of FOS when I think it's necessary. I like using FOSes because it makes it clear to everyone exactly where I stand. Therefore, I disagree with IH's attack on Relyte.

mmm.... good answer at the top... but I don't like the defense on Relyte. She just says she doesn't agree with my attack on Relyte.... maybe it's just the way it's worded, but it pings as more of a defense IMO.

I still maintain the opinion that IH is pushing an extremely weak case on Relyte. I agree with Post 79. I also don't think Romanus was right in saying Relyte is being over defensive. I read it as natural defensiveness to a weak attack.

....

I buy the case for klebian.

vote: klebian

I honestly have no impression on Romanus at the moment. But lowell's case for him seems to be meta-gaming, and meta-gaming isn't always accurate. I'll go take a look.

Jumping on a wagon.

OMG. I meant to put a FOS: klebian

Just to make it clear for the mod, unvote whoever, vote IH

Jumped to the wrong wagon I see.

My position on the battle is Romanus's position. That whole discussion should have gone into the strategy/tactics thread. The mistake with the thinking all mistakes are scummy bit is something that I've done myself before when I was cop, so I'm not taking that as a scum-tell.

.....not if the discussion is about tactics that scum would use more.

Hm... I'm back. I see we have gone nowhere. I'll will attempt to get it somewhere.

vote: Thok

.....Apparently not forceful enough until down here, which confuses me a bit.

Sorry, was suffering from a post-exam hangover I think...

I like that 'IH was running around everywhere running like a mad man bit.' My vote stays.

Yet her vote stays on Thok? Did she forget, did Yos not count it since she didn't unvote, or what? I also haven't really seen any reason for these votes. It's just like she hoppped onto my wagon... accidental like. Then it's like she didn't even remember why she had her vote on me.

"I like that 'IH was running around everywhere running like a mad man' bit"

BA has been active elsewhere... weird. Hi Jules and Kelly!

I have a pretty high voting threshold, and other people like MBL have commented on it in many of my other games. I see FOSes as a nice tool to clearly show where I stand, ie, that I think a player has shown scumtells, and I generally vote only when I really want a lynch. I don't think I have enough scumtells and there hasn't been enough discussion to start pushing for a lynch.

I think your quotes are missing context. The first one happened in a squabble between IH and Relytye regarding how pages was the thread. IH was accusing Relyte of not posting much (I think.) The bizarre complaint was in response to IH accusing Relyte of wagoning. I think what is more noteworthy is the 3 =/= 7 bit.

Edit after preview: IH's case on Relyte now seems to hinge on the Relyte pushing IH for an answer bit. It's dinged on my scumdar, but I've seen townies do exactly the same thing.

WROWNG!

Yes I meant to spell it wrong. That actually DIDN'T hinge on Relyte pushing me for an answer.
1.the answer was there
2.it started out with Relyte not voting, remember(except for his random vote)? I was thinking that perhaps only using FoS's were scummy, as you threw suspicion on someone, but didn't actually take any part of the action.
3.Relyte changed the argument to "I told you what I did, why are you hiding what you did?"

As I said, I am NOT HAPPY AT ALL.

Unvote, vote:Spectrumvoid

[IH]

71, 92

In post 71, that was why I had a wagon on me at the time. My first case on Relyte was because I believed he was using only FoS's to avoid having a voting record on someone, not sticking his neck out, only using a mild FoS.

Post 92 was not mine..... what post did you mean, or did you want me to explain Shadowlurker's statement?

Relyte? Well, I do say that he has DEFINITELY done some fishy things, including changing his defense a few times, but I'd say that at this point, I honestly believe she's scummier than him. Of course, some of my reasons against her depend on Relyte being a scum buddy, as she has defended him quite often.

[IH]

I REALLY don't want to start another argument but... I'm not making the connection on how that question is quoted for truth, and then causing you to vote for SV, or are they not related at all?

[IH]

SV was away at camp. Not sure if she's back yet or not.

[IH]

OK Klebian. Please, take another look at that. What is the difference between a random vote, and a serious vote?

A random vote doesn't take a stance on anything. A serious vote shows where you're going, and leaves a better "record" of your attack on someone, does it not?

When I asked about it, I believe he responded with post 56.

I continued by telling him that there was more in the crash, where I didn't believe he'd voted then either.

He then gave into that, and said something along the lines of "Well I don't think that the crash content can be used" and "The game length isn't the point, the point is that I've said what I've done scummy and what I was voted for, why haven't YOU!!?!?!?"

I responded with what I believed I had done.

It was skimmed/ignored/skipped over.

All in all though, the biggest thing IMO, was that it wasn't even that scummy of a point that he did all that to try and not have it pinned on him. In fact it was just something better than a random vote at first. It was then blown out of proportion and carried on for.... well a page or two.

Right now, I'm satisfied with my vote on SV.

[IH]

nn. I believe I'll go through and do a PBP of Romanus.

(Urges everyone to go back to the last page and look at the case against SV)
(Also Urges everyone to frickin post.)

[IH]

Back from camp, break-camp got delayed due to floods and rain.

1st quote: I did think nothing happened,

It sounded like you were trying to downplay anything that happened before the crash

2nd quote: Why I defended relyte: because I disagreed with the attack on R. The attack was that R used too many FOSes instead of votes. My response was


SV wrote:
I myself use quite a number of FOS when I think it's necessary. I like using FOSes because it makes it clear to everyone exactly where I stand.


ie, that I thought that there was nothing scummy about using many FOSes, so IH's attack falls.

We'll have to agree to disagree, but I just get wary when someone defends someone else a bunch.

3rd quote: Yes, jumping onto the wagon, but I voted because I agreed with the reasons other people voted for him. The mistake post and my correction was < 2 min apart.

Mmhm. I know this, but saying you agreed with about the case of Klebian, and then voting me?

4th quote: Discussion that any strat that scum would use more is probably WIFOM anyway + I didn't want this thread becoming a discussion on tactics, we should concentrate on finding scum in-game.

It looks like you just wanted it to go away, and shot it down as nongame related. Of course, if it's about what someones doing, it doesn't deserve to go into the tactics thread, it deserves to go... in the game thread!

5th quote: I think there's some misunderstanding here. I was drunk/kidding when I voted for thok, who isn't in this game. The mod ignored it, leaving my original vote for IH in the VC. Then I added that my reason for voting was IH accusing everyone.

Yes. I also see that this is the first explanation you've given for voting me I believe.

6th quote:
I read this, and... huh? Here's my view on everything: I think IH's attack on relyte was weak, I think squabbling about pages and votes VS FOSes doesn't really make sense. The only issue I have is Relyte skimming through and missing IH's post. That could possibly be an attempt to frame IH, but I don't think that's the case, simply because it'd been too easy for IH to point that out, which he did. So I think Relyte was telling the truth.

You also seem to miss the bit about Relyte switching his defense about.... 3 to 4 times

Answered in bold.

You also clearly ignored the real third quote.

I still maintain the opinion that IH is pushing an extremely weak case on Relyte. I agree with Post 79. I also don't think Romanus was right in saying Relyte is being over defensive. I read it as natural defensiveness to a weak attack.

just one big Relyte defense.

[IH]

Alright Stoofer I'll try to rexplain this. I'll give you the overview. If you'd like a super long quote version, I'll give that, but most people won't read it.

1.I brought up a minor point that... well wasn't even really a scumtell.
2.He brought up a point that had nothing to do with it, while being extremely defensive.
3.His defense was changed a few times throughout it, and "ignored" my explanation (or just plain missed it)

......My vote isn't on Relyte? Did I unvote somewhere? Hmmmm.... I'll probably be back on that thar wagon before the night's end.

[IH]

Gone til Sunday..

[IH]

....Oh yeah = / I keep forgetting details in this game.

[IH]

Is ShadowLurker in this game?

[IH]

So you just don't find anyone scummy SL, or are you working on the rest of the list?

[IH]

OK, just double checking.

[IH]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to shoot down my own townie tell.

Le sigh.

Open 4, cop c9.

I did not one, but around 5 or 6.

[IH]

So then, are you scum in this game, IH?

Most definitely not.

metagaming doesn't work, especially for people like IH. I've seen him change his attitude in a couple of games. I've played with him a LOT and I still don't have a good grasp of his style.

And SV would be the one to know. She's been in all but like two of my games ^_^ (Counting open 6)

Besides the point though, since we're so close to a deadline do we want to try and reach a consensus for a lynch, or all of us be stubborn and stay with our votes?

[IH]

SL brought up that I only do PBPs as town. I told him it was false, and to look at open 4, where I did around 5 or 6 PBPs.

[IH]

I feel that if Relyte were scum, his scumbuddies would be out protecting him so close to a deadline.

mm. Noted.

[IH]

Guys I am a townie. Relyte, SV, and possibly Lowell are scum.

Goodbye all. Bad luck to the switches!

[IH]

= ( I knew Lowell was scum when he switched his vote to me last post before deadline. I was pretty sure of Spectrumvoid also, but Kelly would have had me fooled until Relyte came up town.

[IH]

= 0 Nevahmind. <.<; I dunno about stoof, he had me fooled but good.