Open 87 - Baby Too Much Scum - Over before 641

[Rage]

@Mod Could you prod Alvinz? He hasn't posted in 3 days, but has been posting elsewhere on this site in that time.

So have I, but you have to know, when it comes to my games I always play favourites.

Which is the reason for not putting a random vote in your first post after confirmation stage?

Why would my random vote have been necessary. Even you say "random", meaning it SHOULD be unbiased, right?

[armlx]

I agree with everything OGML said. Pushing over reaction as a scum tell is bull. He also has not answered my question.

Vote Oman

[Netran]

Which is the reason for not putting a random vote in your first post after confirmation stage?

Why would my random vote have been necessary. Even you say "random", meaning it SHOULD be unbiased, right?

Not necessary but better than a useless comment on flavor.

[farside22]

All this scum talk makes me wonder if I cleaned my employers house well.

votes:
Oman 2 vote: (Goatrevolt, Armlx)
Goatrevolt 1 vote: (Oman)
Netran 1 vote: (alvinz95)
OhGodMyLife 1 vote: (Rage)
Crazy 2 votes: (OGML, Netran)

Not voting

Crazy



8 people 5 to lynch
Deadline August 17th 2:00pm PST

Prodding Alvinz95

[Rage]

Which is the reason for not putting a random vote in your first post after confirmation stage?

Why would my random vote have been necessary. Even you say "random", meaning it SHOULD be unbiased, right?

Not necessary but better than a useless comment on flavor.

What do you call this?

Vote: OhGodMyLife
I think we need more random votes to provide more discussion. This game has been sitting still for too long.

Just because it didn't happen when you wanted it, the vote was random. And I didn't realize that it has existed for this long, so:

Unvote

[Netran]

I wanted to know why you didn't vote in your first post since in that post you quote you tried to push discussion using a random vote; it seemed from that that you think random vote has is usefulness.

[Rage]

Yes, I do consider a random vote having usefulness occasionally, but I would like to know why you think that since I didn't contribute a random vote when you wanted me to is reason to pressure me, albeit with only your vote and with that as your only reasoning.

[Goatrevolt]

Rage, what do you think about the rest of the game besides Netran's questions?

[Oman]

I should have more within a week or two.

[Rage]

I voted GR because he engaged in what I have annecdotally seen to be a scumtel..

If someone engages in something I have seen as previously scum, then I will do it, regardless of whther or not it makes me look scummy.

The thing I have a problem with about Oman's reasoning to vote for Goatrevolt is that he has no basis for it other than "I think you are scum because I saw a scum do that before". That makes little sense to everyone except Oman. I see no evidence that could lead to why Oman is thinking this way other than his word, which doesn't mean much when Goatrevolt is throwing it back at him.

On the other side of the argument, we have Goatrevolt, who could easily say the same thing to Oman. "I think YOU are scum because I saw scum do what you are doing now before". But he isn't saying that. Instead, GR is saying that Oman is being hypocritical (and more, but his points have already been stated numerous times) and I agree.

Vote: Crazy

Expressed equal suspicion of both Oman and GR, but decided to vote for GR and later took it off when proven incorrect. Then he FoSed GR and took that off too. He did not consider other suspicions when pressuring GR, and didn't see GR's side until he had already taken a vote and FoS off of him. I want to know what Crazy thinks about why Goatrevolt is suspicious of Oman.

[Crazy]

I think GR was mistaken of what Oman was trying to do. Oman wasn't hypocritical IMO; I'm thinking he was just trying to start discussion.

I'm thinking that both of them are town, actually. As for who the scum is, I gotta reread...

[Crazy]

Vote: Netran

for:

Which is the reason for not putting a random vote in your first post after confirmation stage?

First post or second post, really what's the difference?

I agree that the reactions of Oman and Goatrevolt to each other are interesting but it is early in the game and I don't think we could have very much from them.
Lurkerhunting gives us even less: it is not scumtell and at this point I think it is quite useful because it helps discussion giving something to say to people after they get their prod.

You say we can't get anything from Oman & GR's argument? Why? You can get something out of every argument? Why do you want to steer the attention away from them.

And lurker-hunting, in fact, is a scum-tell later in the game, but at that point, I don't think it can be considered anything. But in any situation, it's probably better just to ask for prods.

Goatrevolt is aggressive but I don't see him overreacting too much.

Woah, woah, what? GR

was

overreacting to Oman's vote. The whole case was erupted enormously out of proportion.

I find this wishy-washy. And extremely suspicious: you seemed to want to vote Goatrevolt for some posts, than voted and just after that you regret your mistake (?) and unvoted trying to cover your error in next posts.

Show me where I wanted to vote GR before I did... that's what he said but I couldn't find anything. I put on an IGMEOY, but then I actually defended him. When I voted for him, that was just blatant bandwagoning. I unFoSed and then unvoted because I realized how stupid it was. Wouldn't it be

more

suspicious if I would have kept my vote on GR?

[Goatrevolt]

I think GR was mistaken of what Oman was trying to do. Oman wasn't hypocritical IMO; I'm thinking he was just trying to start discussion.

Discussion had already started. He was putting a 2nd legitimate vote on someone who already had a legitimate vote and suspicion on them. Believe me, that vote wasn't meant "to spark discussion."

Hypocrite: a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude,

esp. one whose

private life, opinions, or

statements belie his or her public statements.

Oman's public statement: Placing a vote with reasoning is something scum do more often than town.

Oman's vote: Placed with reasoning on me. His actions speak the lie to his public statement, and thus is hypocrisy.

I'm thinking that both of them are town, actually. As for who the scum is, I gotta reread...

Why do you think both of us are town?

And lurker-hunting, in fact, is a scum-tell later in the game, but at that point, I don't think it can be considered anything.

Then I suppose you could be called out for lurker-hunting, which is... well, bad, as it's the mod's job to do that.

Contradiction?

Woah, woah, what? GR was overreacting to Oman's vote. The whole case was erupted enormously out of proportion.

Overreacting implies that my actions were out of line. I feel that my actions were perfectly justified. Oman furthers a bandwagon on me with crap logic. I feel my reaction and vote on him was not an overreaction at all. Aggressive? Sure, but is there anything wrong with being aggressive?

Show me where I wanted to vote GR before I did... that's what he said but I couldn't find anything.

These 3 quotes right here:

We're not yet totally into the full game-part yet. I'd say his vote is justified.

Your reactions are interesting, if anything.

Interesting means that I don't know whether it's scummy or not, but I'd like to look into it, and

keep my eye on you.

I believe Oman's point was that you provided reasoning on a seemingly random vote.

You're trying to make the suspicion smaller than it is.

Bolded for emphasis. Especially that last quote right there. You accuse me of trying to lessen the suspicion on myself (basically, defend myself) and imply it as being a bad thing. To me that suggests that you've already made up your mind and are just waiting at this point for an opportunity to jump on my bandwagon. It certainly wasn't a surprise at all when you voted for me. I had been expecting it.

[Oman]

Does anyone actually have a good vote outside me and goat?

[Crazy]

GR, I said that I thought you were town. Why do you feel the need to defend yourself?

And please don't quote from those 3 posts I made that one night. They were absolutely stupid. If you take out those 3 posts, then everything else I've said will make sense.

Bolded for emphasis. Especially that last quote right there. You accuse me of trying to lessen the suspicion on myself (basically, defend myself) and imply it as being a bad thing.

Actually, that point was phrased poorly. I meant that you were trying to strawman the argument against you. But again, irrelevant because that's one of the Evil 3 posts that should not be mentioned again.

Oman's public statement: Placing a vote with reasoning is something scum do more often than town.

Oman's vote: Placed with reasoning on me. His actions speak the lie to his public statement, and thus is hypocrisy.

Oman's case: Placing a vote with reasoning on a

random

vote is something scum do more often than town. I understand that you say your vote was not random, but take that up with Oman, not with me.

Why do you think both of us are town?

I always get good vibes when someone willingly puts themselves in the spotlight in an attempt to start discussion. It seems like you both did that.

[Goatrevolt]

Crazy, show me where Oman said anything about a random vote. My vote on armlx was not random and Oman never implied that it was. You're fabricating reasons why Oman's actions make sense.

[Goatrevolt]

I always get good vibes when someone willingly puts themselves in the spotlight in an attempt to start discussion. It seems like you both did that.

I don't think Oman expected his vote on me to be challenged. After all he was voting for someone other people had already expressed suspicion on.

[armlx]

I should have more within a week or two.

Real useful response to pressure.

[Crazy]

Crazy, show me where Oman said anything about a random vote. My vote on armlx was not random and Oman never implied that it was. You're fabricating reasons why Oman's actions make sense.

Oman is an experienced player, here, so he's not going to do something so obvious not-making-sense like that. Of course we're supposed to provide reasons for our votes, unless if this is AITP or something. I mean, that's the whole point of mafia. So I can assume that that's not what Oman meant. But since nobody can explain what he meant like he can, I think he should respond to this.

[armlx]

he's not going to do something so obvious not-making-sense like that.

WIFOM.

[Crazy]

he's not going to do something so obvious not-making-sense like that.

WIFOM.

Umm, no it isn't. What purpose would Oman have for accusing someone based on completely idiotic grounds, like "putting reason with a vote." He must have had some reason, or phrased that poorly, or whatever.

I don't think Oman expected his vote on me to be challenged. After all he was voting for someone other people had already expressed suspicion on.

You know, this is actually a good point. I didn't realize that OGML was the one that pointed it out.

[armlx]

Umm, no it isn't. What purpose would Oman have for accusing someone based on completely idiotic grounds, like "putting reason with a vote." He must have had some reason, or phrased that poorly, or whatever.

What if he just made up some reason that sounded good and had to argue his way out of a hole?

[Goatrevolt]

Oman is an experienced player, here, so he's not going to do something so obvious not-making-sense like that. Of course we're supposed to provide reasons for our votes, unless if this is AITP or something. I mean, that's the whole point of mafia. So I can assume that that's not what Oman meant. But since nobody can explain what he meant like he can, I think he should respond to this.

This could be one of the most ridiculous things I've read, to put it bluntly.

Crazy, Oman has already explained many times why he voted for me. What you're doing right now is saying that Oman's explanation for why he voted for me can't possibly be true because that would put him in a scummy light. You're starting from the assumption that Oman is an experienced player, which means he can't be scummy. From that assumption you've already drawn the conclusion that he's town, and now what you're doing is trying to go back and fit his actions to make sense as though he were town. You're even ignoring

his own explanations

for his actions because they don't fit your preconceived notions.

In other words, rather than see Oman make a scummy action and then draw the conclusion that it's probably because he's scum, you're instead seeing Oman make a scummy action and fabricating reasoning for why he probably did that so that you can assume that he isn't scum. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, because that is truly absurd.

Here's my honest take on the situation. Oman voted for me under the guise of an "anecdotal scum tell" to hop on my already formed bandwagon. Oman did not expect to get seriously challenged on his vote, because it sounded good and sounded like a reasoned vote. Upon getting challenged though, it quickly became quite obvious that Oman had absolutely no real reason for thinking that I was scum and then took to trying to justify his vote ex post facto based on my aggressive response.

I don't see any pro-town motivation in Oman adding an additional vote to my bandwagon based on crap logic and then desperately clinging to that vote based on more crap logic after his original voting reasons were shown to be bad. The logical conclusion here is that he's scum. Your conclusion is that an experienced player would never do something like this, and thus he's town.

With that being said, I'm very highly considering moving my vote to Alvinz. Alvinz has been posting elsewhere on the site and is displaying the exact same posting style he had in Open 70, where he was scum. I would not be surprised in the least if he's lurking in this game specifically because he's scum and worried about getting caught. Call it lurker hunting if you wish, but in this case I think lurker = scum.

[Crazy]

I am not saying that experienced players can never be scum, or look scummy. I am saying that experienced players will never be completely idiotic. Voting for someone because they provided reason for a vote is by any definition completely idiotic. Thus, I think the only explanation is that it was phrased poorly and Oman needs to re-explain what he meant.

There. Happy?

With that being said, I'm very highly considering moving my vote to Alvinz. Alvinz has been posting elsewhere on the site and is displaying the exact same posting style he had in Open 70, where he was scum. I would not be surprised in the least if he's lurking in this game specifically because he's scum and worried about getting caught. Call it lurker hunting if you wish, but in this case I think lurker = scum.

Please, if you're worried about lurkers, tell the mod to prod him. Never switch your well-placed vote just to bring out a lurker.

[Oman]

Umm, no it isn't. What purpose would Oman have for accusing someone based on completely idiotic grounds, like "putting reason with a vote." He must have had some reason, or phrased that poorly, or whatever.

What if he just made up some reason that sounded good and had to argue his way out of a hole?

Sounds like a really stupid thing to do as scum this early in a game. and NO, WIFOM does not fit here because its not a 50% swing.