If you thought Matti's was big, well, be prepared...
In post 525, Matti wrote:Warning wall of text folks
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:Okay, so my 2 cents on Matti-
1) You talk. And you talk. And talk some more.
There is oh yeah, yeah, and some little stuff here and there,
but most of your posts(before your interactions with me),
actually all of you posts are mostly fluff.
Is it most of my posts have a little bit of stuff in them or all of my posts are mostly fluff?
By which you are effectively saying the same thing twice. Point being you are overemphasising your views.
The posts "before your interactions with me" are mostly fluff. No need for cherry picking this stuff now.
Contrast this with post 419 where you are actually getting a "metric crapton" of info out of me. So something CAN be gained from them? Just not something positive?
I can see you have a view I'm scum, fine, but you seem to let it colour your entire view.
"Nothing at all can be gained from them" It's just not true is it. Do you really believe that there is nothing of any use in any of my posts?
Did you not read the part about "before your interactions with me"? And if I have a view you're scum, I'm gonna look at you like you're scum, unless I REALLY want you to be town for some reason. Again. "before your interactions with me" is a key phrase in this.
post 519 - "some little stuff here and there"
Actually look - you do think there is "some little stuff" in them. But maybe I'm taking that out of context - "all of you posts are mostly fluff" if they are MOSTLY fluff then the remainder must be non-fluff which I'd say is of more use than "Nothing at all can be gained from them" which i'd assume to be ALL fluff.
Yes, you ARE taking this stuff out of context. There is so little substance that nothing can be gained from it, and when I say gained, I mean you, Matti, can't actually be getting something from it.
Ok so it's a little childish to reply like this, sorry, but I'm pointing out that you have tainted or biased the language in your posts to suit your end which is to lynch me. I'm comfortable being the lynch based on reason and others understanding your position but this emotive language doesn't seem like town play. It smells like scum pushing for a lynch.
I don't want to make an in depth thesis about how it's just opinions that make those words "strong language" or "tainted" so I won't.
I would counter with your recent posts about me have a significant amount of bias in them and seem scummier because of it.
I don't feel there is any bull shit in my interactions with you that I won't have addressed in this post - point them out to me and I'll deal with them if I can - if not and I'm just lying to get you lynched - you got me - do the work and earn the lynch.
I think I explained fairly decently what the bull shit was. The only thing is you didn't quote it.
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
There isn't scum hunting or town hunting, there is just ebing around and looking productive.
"I'm not clear what your definition of scum-hunting or town-hunting is. Please explain [1] and I will either accept that
a) I wasn't doing those activities or
b) show you how I was.
This is where my post gets a bit confusing. This goes back up to the area of the posts before our interaction. It's fluff. Scum/town hunting is pulling reactions out of people and getting answers to questions, getting reads. You've just been picking them up as you've been going along.
It feels like you've simply made another provocative statement you can't back up but I'm more than willing to get into a discussion on this as it'll help me pick up more info on scum-hunting.
"You are right - there wasn't and I made a linguistic error in referring to it as such. There was only one vote cast on him at the time, and no other votes.
You DID vote HITD straight away with limited explanation which I found frustrating as a new player. You also joined the only existing vote - I'm led to understand that scum is found in the middle of voting patterns but I'm not 100% sure of how sound that is."
Now this is back at the part about the bs in his interactions with me. This is part is understandable.
[qupte]
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
b) He asks me to take out all the bad stuff about HITD then tell him what I think about HITD.
That is flat out wrong.
That is not how you play this game.
If someone had a huge scum slip, you wouldn't just ignore it.
Looking at that element -
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
"b) He asks me to take out all the bad stuff about HITD then tell him what I think about HITD.
Actually I asked you to take out the bad explanations and consider rest of of his play - I named scumhunting and interaction with other players particularly.
I'm using a filter to cut out one element of a player's play and considering the others seperately to see if they feel as scummy. "[/quote]
Again, you cannot separate a players bad play when considering his/her other posts. At least, I can't.
Well now you are just making statements telling me how to play mafia. I guess I shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth though - if my method which I'd arrived at a whole two days earlier meets with such disapproval from you, what is "right"?
Okay, that was a rather harsh on my part. You can't create a read on someone if you exclude some of there posts. No matter if you take out the good or the bad. It will probably give you a wrong impression of that person. You have to take into calculation all their posts, as they all are part of their play.
That is not very helpful. Ok, I'm learning here bear with me - it's a newbie game - so I made some unforeseen mistake that has clearly annoyed you - care to give me any tips on how to play the game?
Again, rather harsh on my part. Tip is above.
Correct - If I felt I'd spotted a scumslip or something very obviously scummy I'd post about it. In fact I did. I thought your slot looked scummy. I may be wrong, but I think I'm right so I posted.
Exactly, so if someones play is making them look scummy, you can't ignore it.
If you knew they were a town cop then I definately agree with you. What if you weren't sure if they were town? Would you 100% believe someone calling a guilt read then? I'm looking at HiddenInTheDark saying this bit looks scummy - do the other bits also look scummy? I'm not throwing out scummy parts. I'm covering one eye to see if I can read things differently - I still use both eyes when making a final decision.
Say it's early game, D2, and they claim a guilty, and this is a game with 10+ plus people, so we would still have days left, unless it is some ridiculous gambit that scum put together, scum wouldn't risk getting their partner or themselves lynched that early. If you use both eyes when making the final decision, then is there a point to limiting your view in the first place?
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
"And then Matti proceeds to agree with me that you can't separate a player from his posts. WHAT THE FUCK."
At no point do I ask you to separate the player from the posts.
Uh, yeah you did...
Posts are all we have to consider a view on a player. I was asking you to take each element of his play that I outlined and consider them individually and independant of what you seem to think is a scum-tell way of playing in 389 - a tool I thought possibly useful to prevent a newb town making one mistake and being mislynched.
That's the thing, if they slip up to much, and you think they're scum, you're(a general you) going to lynch them eventually.
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
3) As far as I can tell, in his 409, he thinks I'm tunneling HITD. I asked him one question. I'm tunneling on Matti more than HITD, and I'm not even tunneling!
I did not mean to imply you were tunnelling - it was directed to VictorDeAngelo - it was a poorly worded post. The comments were to everyone so I feel it's clear that the (you) in question wasn't HighShroomish.
Thanks for clearing that up.
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
4) This should sum up another part of his 409 decently as well-
You memory better be perfect as hell or you are definitely scum.
I'm sorry this doesn't make sense to me - please expand on it. In particular explain how my memory has anything to do with me being scum. If I remember or forget something how does that make me scum?
Again you are using very emotive language to push your point home - town players with a solid point will surely win out and won't need to resort to this kind of play?
That was a summary of what you said. You said that unless I could link to the exact game where I found this and highlight the exact player then you were "calling cobblers on the whole thing."
Yes I did not post for 3 days. Not sure if that is defined as disappearing - you didn't seem bothered until now - But there wasn't a poof.
Having had my ideas heavily critiqued for the first time in this forum I found I had a bit of a glass jaw.
Um, that's almost the dictionary definition of disappearing. You couldn't be found on the thread for three whole days.
There was a poof to me. It seemed we were in the middle of a wall war, and then you were gone. Just like that. And that jaw is going to need to get a bit stronger if you want to get into wall wars
In post 519, HighShroomish wrote:
"Then he comes back with the same thing he was doing when he first came in. He just talks. He's not actually doing anything. "
I'm genuinely struggling to see what more I can do, I'm posting, you say it yourself "he talks" but you don't think I'm doing anything. What in the name of all that is yellow and rubbery can I do to do more?
Work. Ask questions. [sarcasm]I don't like people who use my playstyle.[/sarcasm] Unless you really want to do what I'm doing.
Not true - I wasn't posting for 3 days. That isn't giving up is it? I'm still here and playing, and posting, and my vote was and still is on you. After I reviewed you still seemed the scummiest player.
But you stopped trying to get other people to lynch me. It is giving up to me.
I'm not trying to paint you as scum and I feel this is key to the way we both look at this game.
I feel you are scum for the reasons stated - often not stated very well - by me.
My aim is to put my reasoning out there and see if others agree - if so we can move towards a lynch and more info.
If not then if I am persuaded by other player's reasons for their scumspects then I'll change my vote and aim to proceed that way.
Okay.
Where I feel you are aiming is by force of character and language to make people think you are so certain you can't be wrong. You've been super-certain in this way 3 times - HiddenInTheDark, goodmorning, and me - we can't all be scum - fact. Strong language, no matter how many swear words you put in it, doesn't make your case any stronger. My point being that by using such strong language I think your case actually looks weaker. Good cases don't need strong language.
I'm struggling not to write a huge thesis to this already big post. Please don't tempt me. It would probably get me mod killed or force replaced.
I know you can't all three be scum. Doesn't mean I can't read you as scum.
So exactly how am I going with the flow? By being the only player voting for you? By making you be the only player voting for me? This sentence makes no sense to me - could you please explain [2] it further?
You are spot on about me not posting for 3 days but some of your points seem contradictory I'm going with the flow, except....Doesn't work for me - but I'm biased.
By having the same reads as most of the other players except for the fact that you are scum reading me.
I totally disagree. I think you can change reads anytime based on posts and interactions.
Simply swapping votes with little to no reason would DEFINATELY draw suspicion. I'm not swapping MY vote.
If you suddenly stopped voting me along with giving up on trying to get people to vote me, then that would most definitely draw some sort of suspicion.
HighShroomish - Interaction, this is great. And what I've wanted with you from the start. This is more interaction than I felt you've given all game. For me the more the interaction the more town - but what do I know.
What do any of us know? [This is about to look like some AtE, but it's not.] Nobody REALLY knows what goes through a scums head at the time they are posting except for them, and maybe someone like cabd(who I'm sure you will hear about if you haven't already).
I feel that you joined the game and then immediately joined the only existing vote on a player with limited explanation.
You responded to initial questions from me with a joke response and a refusal to offer information on your own slot. This got me OMGUSing you - gotta be fair and state that.
I was actually very serious in saying I was the most town as fuck GUY around here. And did I mention I said nothing about girl?(yes, I just did that) And that wasn't OMGUS. What I did with voting you was more OMGUS than what you did.
You cite HiddenInTheDarks playstyle as a newb scum tell from another game. I ask you to provide backup which you don't.
I'm asking for some evidence which could bring me on board with your scum read that is within your power to present and you are choosing not to.
I would not enjoy going through mafia games that would probably take a few months to get through, even for me. I would not be able to be active in this game or any other games if I did what you asked, which would not be fair to the overwhelming majority.
So I guess you are just lazy or feel you don't need to convince me of your case and get my vote - ok.
"And I reccommend you don't doubt my memory. I don't take notes for a reason." you say in 419
What - you're telling me to just believe you when you say you remember another game where, for instance, someone played like me so I must be scum - don't you dare doubt my memory! I think this game you are supposed to doubt things - it's you that brought your memory into this.
Yes, you are supposed to doubt me. And yes, I did bring my memory into this. But I can't remember everything.
What does you taking notes, or not, have to do with HiddenInTheDark being scum? - Nothing.
I wasn't saying it had anything to do with it. Just ask the majority of players here if they take notes. They probably do. It adds to the effect of me having a good memory.
What does this have to do with you having a convincing scum read without presenting the damning evidence you talked about? - Everything
You followed VictorDeAngelo in voting on HiddenInTheDark at the start - I think this is HighShroomish looking for an easy vote.
I've already said it was an attempt at getting scum to trip up. I've said it twice, actually, and jon said it once.
[quote
You put nothing out about any player unless responding to questions - this doesn't seem pro town to me but could be playstyle I guess.[/quote] Very much playstyle.
You seem convinced HiddenInTheDark is scum following VictorDeAngelo's vote - then echo jon_h61's thinking on goodmorning and move your vote there from HiddenInTheDark. I'd assume therefore that they are scum partners because nobody has refuted the case (unproven despite evidence available and asked for) about HiddenInTheDark. Or is goodmorning the easier lynch now?
goodmorning would have been L-1 and I was seeing if I could get newbscum to quickhammer, providing us with a good lynch, or for scum to self hammer, providing us with a good lynch.
442 - You have one scum read on jon_h61 or goodmorning from the townclears on you. The two players who have been interacting the most and there was a high likelihood of today's lynch coming from that pair. Setting yourself up for the easy vote again in my view.
I don't see how someone can have such a strong town read on me. Especially when I work to put myself as low to the scum line as possible without crossing it. I haven't even gotten to the halfway point, apparently. And no, you having a scum read on me isn't affected by this playstyle because I hadn't even started it until after our interaction.
Then we have 3 posts in 40 minutes - after jon_h61 highlights that we are near to deadline and you haven't produced anything from this crap-ton of info you've been getting yet we get:-
The theatrical setup of 517 and 518 lead through to your thoughts on me in 519 that I addressed above - the other players can read them and decide.
The summary is -
Post 519 contained emotional language, some misunderstandings from you, some scratching around from you, some points I completely agree with, and some points I'd like further explained.
Yes, I had an epiphany. Again with the emotional language...
You've found a player in me who's clearly not town read you before - and who has not posted for 3 days - and convinced yourself I'm scum. I think if you believed you had a solid case you wouldn't need all the theatre and pointed language to be clear about how I've slipped if I was scum.
There really wasn't much theater, and I didn't even think I had much of a case on you until my little epiphany.
I'm going to allow myself a little licence here and be glad that you've done independant work and actually found a player nobody else thought was scum and pushed a move on them - oh but wait no, you just followed on the coat tails of VictorDeAngelo (513), again, and took the hint from jon_h61 in 498.
I'm on the "coat tails of VictorDeAngelo" because he posted before I was able to. I "took the hint from jon_h61" because I was busy up until then.
I credit you with seeing how the wind blows very well but I think you are playing the game of going with the wind rather than thinking for yourself.
Wouldn't anybody be "going with the wind" if they were on a wagon by your definition? I like to let people do most of my dirty work, yes, but I use my own though processes and methods.
Now if you can remove my OMGUS of HighShroomish which I freely admit is an element here - then I still feel he has scum elements - I'd like to know what you all think.
Yours wasn't OMGUS. Just sayin.
My vote stays - convince me it should be elsewhere I don't think HiddenInTheDark is scum.
Okey dokey.
