That cat has an incredible amount of happy, I think it's contagious
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Cass has been in every game I've played so far too, but that's not saying much since this is my second game.Goatrevolt wrote:Cass, I just realized you've been in every single game I've finished on this site. That's madness.
I got that impression too, and found it funny even if he's implying that I stole his random vote choice.Goatrevolt wrote:I think there's some confusion regarding Matin. I don't think he's saying that it would be scummy of him to put the 2nd vote on someone. I think he's joking around saying it was scummy for someone else to vote for his choice.
I don't mean to prolong the random vote stage because actions during this time do not necessarily give us insight into other player's tactics/intentions/aggressive or defensive nature/etc, and some people don't even like to have a random vote stage so you won't get a read from them.habitang wrote:The thing is though, once we have the ball rolling, it does not make sense to dwell in the initial stages for too long and I think Jahudo is taking advantage of this phase that will not give us much additional clues to who is scum. It is time to move into real evidence of where people's tendencies and positions are to determine if they are pro-town or exhibiting scummy behaviour.
I'm not saying that this is a loaded question and worth investigating, but since he created it I want to know what his train of thought is. The question implies that matin is holding a grudge against me for voting his target, that he was "caught" doing this and now had to defend himself of something. I don't believe this is the case, and furthermore I believe that matin's vote on me was just as random/OMGUS/silly and appropriate for the random vote stage.The Pope's Tiara wrote:Are you trying to avoid acting scummy so as not to draw attention to yourself?
Do you mean that 4 pages of feeling around/lighter discussion would not give us much to work on for later in the day? Proper investigations need to be started by discussion anyway.habitang wrote:I don't think Jahudo's questions would have led us to a lynch, but they certainly had potential to create anotehr 4 pages of discussion that woudl tell us less than anotehr page of proper investigation of a person's answer to relevant topics.
Even if we accept that you started out in the random vote stage being funny it was your own questions that led me and others to view that stage was ending, and that we should take each post more carefully and seriously. Sure you can still have fun with posts but a self-vote isn’t funny. It gives the impression that you are possibly bluffing, which doesn’t help town, or possibly can’t take criticism, which could mean you go defensive and overly cautious.The Pope’s Tiara wrote: I wasn't trying to say that at all. I know that it's hard to detect sarcasm when typed (sometimes) and that my posts weren't written by an idiot, just by someone who tends to quick scribble stuff down without thinking.
I just want a clarification, but your defense against the Pope is that he is your partner?Simenon wrote:TPT is town, by the way.
nureins wrote:It seems this random vote is exploding...I want to know your opinions in the 4 points I wrote before (feel free to say all of them are ridiculous, i almost think they are ) and in the following extra two
1. I think his vote was serious, not random. He based the vote off a question from Pope’s #41 post, which does stick out if you don’t connect the Jack Nicholson joke after it. Pope’s question was loaded even though he did not FoS or vote matin.nureins wrote: 1. Ythill QUICK vote after saying he doesnt like random-joke votes...
2. pope INSISTING on you so much
3. tpt voting back to Ythill in an OMGUS way
4. They playing to vote each other to DISTANCE in a semi-random phase...
3. Well the Pope says he knows and he wouldn’t be joking would he?[/sarcasm] Of course, if he did have information it wouldn’t be pro-town to keep it to himself, but I took this line with a grain of salt.The Pope’s Tiara wrote: I already know what you are. Your secret is safe with me.
4. I don’t see if this was answered but OMGUS is when you vote for someone simply because they voted for you. But nureins, how are they trying to ‘distance’ each other? This seems to bring in more attention.The pope’s Tiara wrote: OMGUS: (What does this mean?)
5. I thought it could be a bluff like ‘you really want to try and lynch someone this early and get a dead townie?’ or maybe he was over anxious in the random voting stage and now that serious votes are cast on him he isn’t handling the pressure well. Regardless of the reason, self-votes are bad news.nureins wrote: 5. Ectomancer thinks all is a joke but he doesnt understand that tpt might also be joking and casts on him a fourth vote, SUSPICIOUS?
6. I ask u this because you are the only not voting now, and u unvoted ectomancer, so i guess your answer to five is NO (mine is also no) but want to know how you perceive all this struggle...random voting is typically unvoted when u put ur vote on someone else , were u planning to do it ?
Ok. I can see how that makes a bigger impression on the words you say if you are confident about them during more serious investigations, but if you had reason to doubt you’d explain that too though? At this point we’re more or less even anyway.Simenon wrote:I do it all the time. Since this is a normal game with day roles being highly unlikely, I feel there's little harm in phrasing that way. It has more of an impact.Cass wrote: The way you phrased that sounds like stating a fact rather than an opinion. It is strange to state something like that without explaining yourself.
I misinterpreted Simenon’s writing style, that’s all. How I saw it was that “TPT is town” sounded like “I know TPT is town”. And how could you know for sure this early unless he was in your role pm?habitang wrote:Jahudo wrote:I just want a clarification, but your defense against the Pope is that he is your partner?
Seems to be probing a bit too much in a way that benefits scum there.
I mean that I am taking the Pope’s posts with a grain of salt because now each post has a hint of sarcasm in it. (post 52, 62 86) He even agrees with this accusation in post 72. It doesn’t mean I think he’s scum now, but it will be harder for me at least to analyze him.habitang wrote:@ Jahudo: What does you took this line with a grain of salt mean? Just a clarification question.
I did not say those words. That was Goatrevolt in post 78.habitang wrote:He finds the action significant to comment on but then he does not give his opinion but rather a broad sweepign statement. To me, that is withholding information.Jahudo wrote:The self-vote is poor play as both town and scum, but it seems like something that townies do more often than scum, regardless.
I think this says enough on the subject. At this early stage in the game there’s going to be a lot more gut feelings to go on and it won’t be until later that enough of someone has been revealed to make a lynch look acceptable.Simenon wrote: Because I haven't commented on any of the reasons why people might suspect TPT. I've merely stated my feelings on the matter; I haven't actually responded to any of the accusations.
And give a chance for TPT to say something on his own that’s not under the pressure of the first things he’s said since getting into this game; that way we learn more about him because since the self-vote he’s become quieter. Maybe we’ll see a different side of him and that could change or reinforce our opinions of him. I don’t think that’s wrong to want at all.Ythill wrote: Absouletly not. Choosing to argue something later, after consideration is not the same as choosing to not argue it at all. You seem too bright to have misread that accidentally, but I'll ask rather than assume. Did you?
If someone continues to be that way after a long period of time then I think more good and bad points about their character would be revealed and would probably be higher on most people’s suspicions anyway. Maybe they’re just bad at defending themselves or just too cautious in scum-hunting but together with other things make a more compelling case against them. So I only think TPT has gone one step in the wrong direction and when he stops voting himself maybe he’ll make a move elsewhere.Cass wrote: Well, I think not helping town is generally a scum-tell Wink But yes, if there is no evidence on anyone, I think lynching the least helpful player is not a bad thing. It's the smallest loss for town, and he might just be scum... I much prefer evidence, though.
Still, it’s posts like these that I think people have the most opposition towards.The Pope’s Tiara wrote:And why would I want to cooperate with the town? Oh, right, you're all so sure that I'm a townie now, right? Night hasn't passed. I haven't been investigated, yet. No one really knows for sure. Even then, what if I end up being a Godfather; undetectable to a cop? Or what if I'm a milller, and wrongfully thought of as being scum?
I initially turned my attention towards TPT because he voted for someone (Matin) jokingly or half-serious because Matin voted for me (random/joke) for voting Ectomancer (random/joke). It was his questions that could and can be interpreted as half-serious with or without his jokes in the same posts.habitang wrote:Sorry Jahudo to seem to be directly on your case all the time, but your last post gives me the idea that you are supporting the convo in any direction, sorta like when you were questioning about random voting cept now the issue is more relevant and you aren't taking any stand on it. It's the most suspicious thing you've done so far. My first suspicion was to jolt some discussion, which I accepted your defence.
Inferred and implied are synonyms. Is that your attempt at scumhunting? Did I get my hopes up for nothing?The Pope's Tiara wrote:I think you meant that heEctomancer wrote: Nurein has inferred Ectomancer as a voice of authority once too many times for me to trust his motivations.impliedit.
Unvote, Vote: Ectomancer
I looked over nhat's posts again and although he's had one more post than andy, he's only responded to only TPT's words and hasn't said a word about any other player or investigation since his random vote.nureins wrote: Andycyca: Lot of lurking posting. Desire someone to start a wagon against him at some moment to see his reactions...
I can accept that approach regardless if you find TPT more town, more scum, or neutral at the moment. Everyone’s suspicious until proven innocent since we start out as a probability.habitang wrote:If TpT is scum, TpT will be revealed as such. But if someone not in the spotlight is scum, then they will not so easily be revealed as such. I choose to shine my own torch into the surrounding area outside of teh spotlight.
Habit, are you partially joking here or all serious? And are you saying this more for Day 1 investigations or are you against long posts in later days, especially lylo?habitang wrote:Otherwise I haven't really been reading your posts, too long, this is to your disadvantage because I will gladly be the hammer vote if you're the suspect, even without reading.
What do you know about this setup? I'm not accusing as much as asking for clarification because you make it sound like 8:2 is our best scenario of any role distribution.Habitang wrote:Night Kill x 1 by scum. NK x 1 by vigilante and we still have a ratio of 8:2 at best or 6:4 at worst.
What heat were you referring to? Besides not having any votes on back then, you do know how many votes it will take today to lynch? With 12 alive it's 7 to lynch unless I'm mistaken.habitang wrote:Yes I feel the heat of beign suspected by a lot of people. I can only ask that I be given benefit of the doubt, like really really give me benefit of the doubt.
Now it's much better to get everything out in the open and try to fix yourself up. Be honest and clearly outline your opinions of me and the rest. Maybe outline like nureins and Ythill did if you think I've been overlooked. I have nothing to hide, do you?habitang wrote:Honestly, can I redo with a clean slate? I wish I never posted anything now.
This post certainly changed my position of you, yes.habitang wrote:Not only am I going on a rave, I think that if I just let everything go, then maybe you will see me better.
-I should have said something like “If you still have suspicions of me then maybe I can answer them in response to a PbPA”. I was unfamiliar with the abbv. and couldn’t think of how to word it without using you as an example. I don’t mean to say you are town or scum for using it yourself.Ythill wrote:I very much dislike the way Jah is attacking a player who is apparently unskilled while complimenting some of us who have argued strongly. There was no linguistuc reason to name examples. It sounds like positioning to me.
I don’t catch how Andy’s suspicions addressed habit’s appeal to inexperience. Andy had three points 1) fake defense against nothing in particular, 2) defense based on feelings, 3) OMGUS attitude.Ythill wrote:This picks up the unreasonable argument Andy already questioned and runs with it: whether a player is new to the game or to the role. The hole in the argument is that a player with experience as town will play better as scum.Jahudo wrote:Also what benefit of the doubt? That you don't think before you type because you've said its stupidity? That you're inexperienced? That you're not experienced with your role?
The quote also contains unecesarry ad hom aimed at a player who was already against the ropes a few votes ago. Intended to draw further emotional outbursts? Maybe.
I did not present my individual points throughout this game towards habit but I was committed to find out more in this case and not ignore a chance to get a better read on habit. When I said my position changed it was the erratic, frustrated behavior that I did not see up until then. I saw it as uncharacteristic. We saw how he defended against very little pressure and could expand our view by adding more pressure and get an explanation.Ythill wrote:This statement is very empty. Its tone says that Jah caught on to some really convincing evidence, but the case he gives amounts to very little and all of it full of holes. Jah has shown himself to be intelligent and perceptive. Why would such minor evidence change his mind so strongly?Jahudo wrote:This post certainly changed my position of you, yes.habitang wrote: Not only am I going on a rave, I think that if I just let everything go, then maybe you will see me better.
Vote: habitang
It wasn’t late because I was not jumping on his vote using the reasons others used to initially vote for him. (that is, his interaction with Matin and the joke response to a joke response to a joke vote, etc). My case against him was different because I saw him as continually avoiding serious thought on the group and consideration to scum-hunting. Whenever he voted or expressed opinion, he cancelled it out with a joke. I felt that scum could have done this to stay active and look active but not pursuing a serious disagreement with town.habitang wrote: I still need more in terms of why you voted TPT so late,
I used "partner" because I thought he was suggesting they shared role pm’s: the only way to be 100% at this point. Even when I wrote it the statement seemed funny because no one would claim scum and the only other partnered role in this setup might be mason I guess? In hindsight it was an overreaction to writing I had not seen in this game before and didn’t know what to make of. The newbie game taught me to be clear and truthful, so I regarded this as keeping from us a substance-based opinion.Goatrevolt wrote:If you were unfamiliar with masons, then why did you specifically use the term "partner." My thought was that you were implying that they were scum buddies together. That's how I initially read that as, and how it looked to me based in context with the rest of your post, especially the part where you FoS Simenon. Your FoS on Simenon implies that you find him scummy. Your statement that you believe them to be partners implies that they are of the same alignment, thus I think it's a fairly safe assumption that you were accusing them of both being scum buddies. Is this correct?
I don’t think so. It might be more appropriate to say he’s more inexperienced than some others here and is still learning aspects of the game, but so am I.nureins wrote:@jahudo: do you consider habitang a weak player ?
His post 306 came very suddenly and had the look of a defeated player but his posts before that did not build up to this act.nureins wrote:do you consider him a person that, in a position of a townie, could say stupid things and defend poorly ? If so, do you consider your fourth vote a bit dangerous (in other words, HOW SURE are you about him) ?
(I asked him if he was serious because this seems very anti-town AND important.)habitang wrote:Otherwise I haven't really been reading your posts, too long, this is to your disadvantage because I will gladly be the hammer vote if you're the suspect, even without reading.
30 – Wants to no-lynch day 1habitang wrote: SO if I make an inflammatory statement without thinking again, well I don't see why I shouldn't get lynched if it looks like a scum slip-up
I’ve said that my suspicions of habitang might be misinterpreted as a frustrated, impatient townie. There was also the immediate reaction to my vote that gave me doubt if others were not seeing odd things on habitang throughout the day but mostly and I had tunnelvision, so I did unvote yes.Goatrevolt wrote:Question: Jahudo, what is your stance on habitang right now? You're vote is still on him, correct?
My original post, 311, asked him to explain “the benefit of the doubt” that sounded like appeal to emotion. I asked those questions of him to get a response that might include more logical fallacy or something that would see him again as town.Ythill wrote: The question here is what you think. Habit is not a weak player? Habit is inexperienced? Habit is scummy? Habit is just a n00b?
I would rather share my opinions and information than withhold it, which is what lazyness will do. If my case is weak I’ll see if it’s my mistake.Ythill wrote: Which makes your vote less scummy how? I'd rather someone post "habit is obvscum" then try to make a weak case sound plausible. The former is lazy. The latter is scummy.
Since I said that post 311 was not to lynch but to question, I saw it as a starting place from where the case would be given to habit after he answered my question on using a logical fallacy.Ythill wrote:Question for Jah: If it is true that you refrained from posting your pre-306 case in #311 because you feared habit wouldn't read it, then why do you explicitly say (in #311) that #306 changed your view of him? I seriously smell a rat here.
My mind before post #306 was stated in #288 shown here.Ythill wrote:The problem is that you said #306 changed your mind. Then, later, you said that you had a large case at that time, much of which was based on posts before #306. So which was it? Did #306 change your mind or not? It can't be both.
He showed dedication in going after me, but I also felt he was scum hunting with the mindset that he would try to make the best choice on Day 1 no matter how long it took. This seemed like a pro-town action to me.Jahudo wrote:I prefer to argue that both of us have questioned multiple people throughout this day and the reason we have prioritized a certain person is somewhat based on instinct or that gut feeling. Would you agree?
Also if I were to rate a suspect list of my own and omit our two replacements as null tells you would still be in the middle with slightly town inclinations.
I started to re-look once he said it and I saw him change around 359-360. I have questioned myself and a possible tunnelvision on some aspects of habit since then and since I acknowledged my change of mind, but then again there’s a lot to mull over in these 20 pages.Jahudo wrote:306 changed the way I looked at habit from 288 and I needed to re-examine his posts like he was a different person...Ythill wrote:When did you perform that reread?
Sirdan is like the anti-Tritch. I don’t see how 437 or 444 contained points that he made but didn’t argue for decisively. He looked pretty sure of what he was saying. No vote though.Ythill wrote: In the case of sirdan, stating that he seems "a little slippery" refers to his general argument style. A few examples include: the way he discussed the simplification issue with nuriens, the shifting appeal to Goat's experience
Sirdan: Are you primarily talking about his recent suspicions on people like me and his pbpa of Andy? Could this “advantageous” be applied to someone like Andy as habit to reason?sirdanilot wrote: but now it really just seems that he only participates when it would be advantageous to him, whereas a towny player would continuously contribute in order to help the town as a whole and to find scum.
Could you comment on my post 480 about you, and in English. All I know is “Where is the bathroom?”Citizen Karne wrote: However, if you wish, I am willing to withdraw my offer.
Habitang's post 306 (page 13) is very defensive and he arguably wasn't under that much pressure. It brought attention to the ways he has played the game and argued for other things. I'm curious, what do you think habitang was trying to say in post 306? What do you think of thepacman281292 wrote: Sorry, but I need help catching up (too many stuff). Why am I/habitang was being voted?
Jahudo wrote:I see instances in which nureins and Cass agree on points and place suspicions around the same time but I don’t think it’s easy to guess what a scum pair will do. Now if they are using poor reasons just like anyone else uses a poor reason then that’s something but like-behavior is the sign of towns too. But I also see where their views differ and they look like normal scum hunters.
You use the weak case on Simenon as an example, but I was also on his case then. In fact, I can find several cases in which nureins, Cass, and I agreed upon: early TPT case, nureins defense, my defense. So I guess my question is, why am I not a possible pair with them?
Ythill has used this badgering tactic in the past, so I don’t see it as a change of character. I also think he's given the defense his reasons beforehand each time and enough slack to react to his badgering in a productive way and not being up against a confirmation bias reasoning.sirdanilot wrote:I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. I don't recall you badgering anyone like you are doing to me, or I would've surely noted it.
Referring to nureins.Ythill wrote:Goebels isn't playing this game. Let's stick to reality, scum.
Nureins again.Ythill wrote:
Scum.
Referring to me.Ythill wrote:Why so slippery?
I'm not sure if badgering isn’t both a good and a bad thing, if the defense reacts frustrated and indirect to the original argument, for instance, or if the attack has no basis for an argument when the defense is ready to answer it, could be unhelpful reads for town, especially if they read it without fully understanding the argument.sirdanilot wrote: Holy shit Ythill. I just pointed out that not giving me a chance to defend myself is very scummy. And now you are refusing to continue the debate, thereby not giving me any chance to defend?
That’s interesting because the only times I recall you responding to nureins is side-tracking discussion into the Spanish language and not getting a real point across. Do you think that “Respond to contrary opinion by repeating the bad argument” is a fair summary of the nureins case on Simenon that you called out for having poor reasons? Do you think this is a scum tell?Citizen Karne wrote:I almost feel as though I no longer need to respond to nuriens, as Simenon as posted exactly what I feel.
nuriens, I find your posts very difficult to read for some reason.
That kinda highlights what I was wondering about since post 480, but still feel free to answer 480.Citizen Karne wrote: nuriens, look at the way you and Cass teamed up against Simenon for very poor reasons.A lot of what I see in those posts seems evident of a scumpair pushing a wagon.The way Cass jumped off looked like she realized it was a lost cause and tried to get you to get off too.
Don’t know anything about their playstyles but I can imagine what makes up an “adversarial player” as you say. I’m sure it’s also effective for scum trying to look like effective scumhunters, but if you’re town and this kind of badgering pressure can get good reveals then it should be helpful in later days.Ythill wrote:Consider the playstyles of TheStatusQuo, Oman, and vollkan: players I try to emulate on purpose, because they are effective scumhunters.
Still waiting for some kind of response. You are still voting nureins. Did Simenon fully summarize nureins attacks on sirdanilot? What do you think of what sirdan offered nuriens?Citizen Karne wrote: I'm curious as to your reasoning here.
Citizen Karne looks pretty scummy to me right now, but that is partially his avoidance to my questions for the past two weeks. It looks too easy for him to agree at face value with Simenon’s summary of nureins “Respond to contrary opinion by repeating bad argument…” and not saying anything himself, especially since he is voting for him.sirdanilot wrote:I was wondering why you aren't suspicious of anyone at all yet after such a long time? Who do you find the most suspicious and why?
Ew? Um, you asked me who I found suspicious and that was my reply. I figured you didn't know I was trying to investigate Citizen Karne for the past two weeks and then I thought Citizen Karne must not know about it either. I probably wouldn't need an unsubstantiated FoS if X number of days hadn't of passed by.sirdanilot wrote: Ew. Why did you not FoS or vote him (or anyone else) before I asked? Why did you need my question to do so? I am not fond of this reply...
.
I think some of this information would be to look at habitang around post 300 or so (page 13) and how everyone reacted. Also habitang was questioned by more people than several other players have experienced in this game.pacman281292 wrote: I meant that Ythill said that a wagon on me would be "informative". He must explain it.
Why add this later on after you were under pressure? The only one who suspected Goat for inactivity was Cass back on post 236. To me, this sounds like your case is bolstered by something we supposedly thought, but didn’t.sirdanilot post 463 wrote:People were starting to suspect Goat for not participating, so he might have wanted to suddenly participate more, and you know that scum are paranoid.
Actually the vote count says Goat is voting for me, not the other way around. I unvoted, but will vote now.Ythill wrote: *In Jah’s case, I gave his 4 points to his top suspect. I only included his vote target (Goat) as honorable mention because he explicitly said that he would be uncomfortable lynching him right now. Which begs the question, why is Jah still voting for Goat?
I won't comment on that game, but in here Karne's avoidance to questions looks like a general apathy of active gaming. He was trying to group scum by only taking one angle to make it work and ignoring others, so I'd say it was pretty bad behavior on his part. He didn't really post much substantial material while he was dodging our questions, so maybe his avoidance was more a product of inactivity and apathy to 20+ pages of reading.Goatrevolt wrote: Citizen Karne has been really absent of late, but is also absent from another game I'm in with him, so I don't see it as meaningful either way. If he gets his prod I'd like to see his response to Cass's case.
Darox wrote:The other people I found scummy were nureins and Cass. Cass mostly for the way she pursued Simenon, and nureins because I think he is scummy.
For the record I'm still ok with a sirdan-scum lynch if we're doing the concensus thing, but Darox looks like the continuation of anti-town Karne to me from these posts.Citizen Karne wrote:nuriens, look at the way you and Cass teamed up against Simenon for very poor reasons. A lot of what I see in those posts seems evident of a scumpair pushing a wagon. The way Cass jumped off looked like she realized it was a lost cause and tried to get you to get off too.
I said Karne was anti-town. He made that statement about nureins/Cass buddying and after we asked him things about it he ignored it, but he continued to post on other stuff until he was replaced.Darox wrote: Please explain how suspecting Cass is an anti town action, thanks.
Ok so the second sentence does not explain why nureins, but since he also pursued Simenon I can only wonder if his "way" there was indicative of scum behavior. Is this accurate, or was he towny in that situation?Darox wrote:The other people I found scummy were nureins and Cass. Cass mostly for the way she pursued Simenon, and nureins because I think he is scummy.
Back when Darox was at L-1, Ythill was volunteering to hammer and I was hoping to debate pacman up until the deadline.nureins wrote: @Jahudo: Why is the case that Darox was your top scum before and you stayed out of the voting group ?
I think it's interesting that his opinion goes from yesterday saying pacman needs to die, then to pacman's wagon is scum-driven, to today Darox I and pacman both looked scummy. That might be an inconsistency, unless the pacman wagon only looked scummy because it was stalled. In that case it looks like an external scum-tell, not dealing directly with pacman.Darox II wrote:Comments on my post?
You initially agreed I was being consistent with my reaction posts to habitang, who you called an erratic player. Sometimes you have to make a FoS on something minor like a misquote when you are still early in the day and watching for reactions. Also, if you go through the day it was habit who provoked and I reacted. I was actually trying to look at more people but spent most of my time answering him.nureins wrote:2. Basically, they help the other one to build an image of newbie. And they go on in an increasing level of cross-posting, but irrelevant.
I don't think being the most active is an automatic town tell, nor is involving yourself in every debate. I was paying attention to it without cluttering it or answering questions that were not posed to me. IIRC Ythill was covering all the bases with questions about that beautiful dance argument. That was the Ythill v. nureins you were talking about?nureins wrote:None of them took a serious position in the Ythill vs Nureins affair. This applies to the whole of the game, in my sense. (I pointed out to ythill something like that related to habit, if I remember well). This is important, as Ythill and myself are the two most active players IMO.
It didn't make much sense. In hindsight I see it now as a distraction that wasn't well received anyway.nureins wrote:But never and none took a position in our goebels affair.
Yes because I said I would try to find habit/pacman's partner by looking at how habit interacted with people. I will go back and weigh your posts more carefully now too. For starters, I could go back to when I posted 'if habitang was town' material and you were defending me against Ythill.nureins wrote:HE SELECTS A VERY MINOR AMOUNT OF DEBATABLE ACTIONS (though he claims it is based on the whole day)
HE ONLY USES HABIT ACTIONS TO JUSTIFY A VOTE ON ME
Ythill and Goat made me consider my tunnel-visioned attacks on habit were not seeing all possibilities. So I went back and considered that habit was inexperienced and impatience with the long, drawn out day. I think in hindsight that is still true, but I got the alignment wrong on my re-read. Post 419 gave my top scumtells on habit, but my mind read impatience is what a habit-town would do.nureins wrote:POST 419. After a pbpa analysis of half a page, Jahudo easily moves his mind.
It wasn't because of his posting frequency. I told him he's not being productive by talking about talking in Spanish for this game, and only revealing that his feelings towards nureins were reflected in what Simenon kinda-joked-about but karne doesn't go into depth. Then I say nureins has had bad arguments and prod karne into explaining himself. Was I being too "sweet" to you there?nureins wrote:Post 589. jahudo comes back to karne, as karne has not been posting frequently.
But then karne disappears and I go back through the Ythill-sirdan debate that includes nureins and Goat in supporting roles and I found sirdan scummy. This is about a day after you say I didn't decide.nureins wrote:Post 627. He has no candidates. Doesnt want to decide among Ythill-Sirdan, prefers to wait for karne participating.
I seem to remember a nureins leading the charge on getting our top 2 or 3 scum choices. In post 649 I said 1) Karne 2) sirdan but given more time I'd look at Ecto because I could "provide crazy theories and quotes", and Andy, nhat were others I wouldn't dismiss as town.nureins wrote:Emptiness. No cases. No real suspicions of anyone else.
A quick meta on TPT's other games, 5, all ended in which he posted rarely and was replaced in all, show him mostly joking around even after the random vote phase. In each game his last post was on the same day. One might think that as a pro-town power role he would act more serious but that depends if he plays this game to win or just to goof around. So I don't think TPT's attitude makes him any less likely to be town doc or scum.Goatrevolt wrote: -Here's the big one, and the only solid reason I have for doubting his claim:How does TPT's play make sense if he's the doc?
habitang post 231 wrote: First time I did some proper reading on Nureins I think, previously was based on assuming that NUreins was just a crazy Town who liked to post eveyrthing.
habitang post 232 wrote: My first impression was that NUreins seemed to be buddying up to eveyrone! I agree with you on this, I agree with you on that! BUt then in the context of him posting on absoultey eveyrthing, this makes sense.
Post 233 is an important post because it is either coming from scum who is open to jumping on the nureins wagon, or scum distancing himself from scum who is himself accused of buddying.habitang post 233 wrote: If TPT is paired with NUreins, then we should vote NUreins since Nureins initiated the coaching.
If TPT is not paired with NUreins, Nureins may have initiated the coaching just to get his scum buddy free. But Nureins was not under sufficient heat to start thinking about distancing from his buddy so I do not think that this can be the case.
habitang post 259 wrote: I sound liek full pro-scum the way you put my stance on scum-hunting. NO fair, you took eveyrthign otu of context. In particular, teh context of Nureins who loves posting on absolutely EVERYTHING.
habitang post 260 wrote: Well I definitely see it as N00b play by Nureins when he posts on everything. That is if he is Townie. If he is scum, I think he is more N00b scum, since if he was experienced he wouldn't have any arguments against him at teh same time, the massive muddying of waters is a good cover-up.
Most of August 7, habitang was trying to get across the notion that nureins talked a lot about everything and buddy to people, but those were not scum tells in his mind. The sheer number of similar sounding posts by habitang on this theory caught my attention. Because they are back to back, and not in one post, it’s possible that habitang was worried his first post didn’t carry enough weight to get the group’s attention. I think he really wanted to divert attention from nureins. In the end, he chose the no lynch over bussing nureins.habitang post 261 wrote: So what I propose is a no-lynch, or no-vote. Whatever it is. Let me see, 12 people. Night Kill x 1 by scum. NK x 1 by vigilante and we still have a ratio of 8:2 at best or 6:4 at worst.
But in all likelihood,the way this first day is going, I feel like Nureins has sorta stuffed it up for a proper investigation. Any scum coudl easily make a stance by saying Nureins is scum or town and then accuse eitehr nureins or say eveyrone is null-tell.
Do you mean manipulative of your own words, or something else specifically? Also do you mean poor as in incorrect or lacking substance/evidence/...?nureins wrote:About my tone with Ythill, it is probably something like respect. The first time we debated, I found his arguments quite poor and manipulative. With time, I perceived that it was not the second. About the first, I have serious doubts, as I have reviewed my talk with him and yet find my points mostly correct.
Sounds alot like this:nureins wrote:I find Ythill as reason-based townie.
Therefore, I talk with him at a serious level.
And this:nureins wrote:Good, I expected that of you (Ectomancer, noc noc, you are failing us
Sounds like this:nureins wrote:Ecto, allow me this at the same time I swallow my pride by accepting your superiority
In that nureins is making a joke but still looking for an ally. In the past I think his "town reads" were based on flimsy views he's held that can sway when a town is no longer an ally. So here's a few points that I think are still valid:nureins wrote:...we, the retarded open you the doors of our house.
Ythill wrote:Names 7 of 12 players as possibly implicated in #38-39. Gives ambivalent “town-soft” reads on two of them, with little new evidence, in #53. (scum)
Ythill wrote:Posts the “which is a joke?” quiz (#58) to his declared townies, myself, and the lead suspect. The examples all shed suspicion on two opposed players. The post leaves a very obvious exit from any attempt to discredit it (scum).
I understand the case as you presented it with regards to Ythill's tactics, but my own interpretation is that you tried to make up and embellish scum tells on his style of play that can be legitimate as town, and of course you now think Ythill's town.nureins wrote:Do you want me to discuss Goebels again?
I can't really argue with your beliefs so I'll drop my argument there. As for nonsensical people, I think they know what they're doing and why it can be effective in riling up scum. A real nonsense person was TPT.nureins wrote:In any case, I said FOUND. I do not find them anymore like that. Neither manipulative nor quite poor...This does not mean Ythill is a nonsense person, as Kuribo or Darox, or a mafia guy jumping onto me, as you...
It was your own words. If you felt any combination of sarcasm/condescension/remorse for Ecto and Kuribo at those times, I can't read it. In any case, they hurt the nureins who is "sharing opinions and information with people" and who is "open to look for people to help in the task of developing scum debate".nureins wrote:Brilliant trick. MANIPULATIVE.
Yes, the examples I brought up have already been analyzed and discussed. I don't have a problem with how you defended them, but I think that your actions could have been performed by scum.nureins wrote:can you give examples in which I havent re-read profusely the thread and construct a serious case against ?
But there's the burden of proof from where we're all standing, because you are not confirmed town. You also ignore parts of the late day 1 interactions by saying that an argument based on them is childish.nureins wrote: Your argument on him guessing correctly is ridiculous. 2 observations, 1 correct guess (Pacman), 1 incorrect guess (me). Hardly the study is statistically serious. This seems to me an argument you can use against a child, do not treat me as if I am dumb.
Saying it in this game does not make your actions any more town. It's irrelevant.nureins wrote:I already said that I have played only one complete (serious) mafia game in my life.
By the way, that game was 4 days long. I voted essentially 3 persons. Two of them were scum.