Haha I can't blame you, but let me return the favorMusher333 wrote:Since i believe in revengevote Lord_hur,2 votes is nothing with this many people.
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_smile.gif)
I was thinking about a poisoner role, who can poison one type of food, maybe with a delay on the death.PyroDwarf wrote:I wonder how our lunch will come into play? Maybe "XXX is dead and there are pancakes everywhere!" I just picked pancakes at random, it isn't mine, who has pancakes for lunch, anyways?
Hmm sorry, I've not played with hidden roles before. So you're saying town doesn't want roles to be known, while scum on the contrary want them revealed?thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:HoS:lord_hurwould be a vote but I believe you are on 3 so far.
What is speculation on roles at this time going to do to help town?
AlsoFos:PyroDwarffor more speculation.
That would be Mr Stoofer. I put him with the "very good and experienced players I could learn a lot from"Musher333 wrote:And @lord_hur who was it you wanted to be in a game with? As that is what you said in the queue thread, im nosey deal with it.:d
At any rate, and if what you said is true, I've not made much damage, as my speculation over a poisoner role is really far-fetched (and a scum role), and about the resurrect thing... well I'd have an argument to defend myself but it would give more info, and apparently this is badthevampireofdusseldorf wrote:HoS:lord_hurwould be a vote but I believe you are on 3 so far.
What is speculation on roles at this time going to do to help town?
AlsoFos:PyroDwarffor more speculation.
I was thinking it would help town, so the lynch is not a shot in the dark... Maybe not thoughhasdgfas wrote:If we discuss the setup, it will give the scum more information than we want them to have. It's best to keep them guessing about these things as much as we can.
Then if it is neutral to town, why would you FoS me (vote me even, if I wasn't at L-3 already) over it ?thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Not that it does much damage either way but at this stage of the game it has no use. I have my own private thoughts about these things especialy the food but it is of no benifit to speculate on these things yet.
I think I know what you're refering to and there's a good explanation, but I guess I can't give it without getting more FoS... this IS public info though.Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
Okay, I think the reason Mr Stoofer thinks I know more than him about the setup if that there is extra info in undo's introductory post in the queue thread, including the reference to 10 plagues. So I was thinking maybe he didn't read it.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:@lord_hur
Speculating on roles even if there is no obvious disadvantage to town or obvious advantage to scum I have to see as slightly scummy.If you are town and have an explanation that wont hurt town or help scum then perhaps you should explain. If not your explanation for not explaining is unsatisfactory.lord_hur wrote:I think I know what you're refering to and there's a good explanation, but I guess I can't give it without getting more FoS... this IS public info though.
@Mr Stoofer
I deemed the suspicion that was already on lord_hur to be sufficent for his action
I also viewed your overburdening of him with more suspicion suspicious
Err, I was reacting to thevampireofdusseldorf's post, not yours, as indicates :Mr Stoofer wrote:Nothing at all. Anyone can question anyone, as far as I am concerned. I'll answer any questions you have.lord_hur wrote:Please tell me what gives you the *exclusive* right to questioning people ?
I don't understand where you got the idea that I claimed the *exclusive* right to question people.
Both roles were basically far-fetched guesses on assumptions I explained when I posted them ; but to clarify even more :Mr Stoofer wrote:I read the opening post. But I saw no warrant for a resurrection role, or a poisoner. Nor for your assumption that we are going to have a different plague every night.lord_hur wrote:Okay, I think the reason Mr Stoofer thinks I know more than him about the setup if that there is extra info in undo's introductory post in the queue thread, including the reference to 10 plagues. So I was thinking maybe he didn't read it.
Yes, I learned a lot by playing with cicero (and, to a lesser extent, Adel, but that was my faultMusher333 wrote:Wow this game moves quite fastly doesnt it? And @Lord_hur about wanting to be with stoofer its a good point, better people help make you better. (supposedly)
He was basically asking where I got the informations, because explaining it was the only way I could defend myself. I see what you're trying to say though. But because *you* analyzed something doesn't mean one can't analyze the same thing, especially if the person brings up new points, which Mr Stoofer did (the fact that I might know more than him).thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:If you look at the third quote I didn't really see it as a question, more 3 quotes of yours (a large body of evidence) and an accusation. To me it was trying to push something a bit far.lord_hur wrote:About what you said to Mr Stoofer though... Please tell me what gives you the *exclusive* right to questioning people ?
Questioning people for good reasons is an eminently pro-town attitude and should not be denied to anyone.
On the other hand, if you think someone's accusation is undue, it is perfectly fair game to question it. But it is not what you said.
I agree that this whole thing went out of proportion, but I had to defend myself.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote: I think most were happy to leave this speculating business alone
I'm tired. But okay, one last round on this :thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:I dont really see that as bringing up a new point (not points) that you might know more than him, as he explains below that he had read the applicable meterial, so thus "you might know more than me" is throwing suspicion on you as being scum.lord_hur wrote:He was basically asking where I got the informations, because explaining it was the only way I could defend myself. I see what you're trying to say though. But because *you* analyzed something doesn't mean one can't analyze the same thing, especially if the person brings up new points, which Mr Stoofer did (the fact that I might know more than him).
I also don't understand your conclusion of how he was asking you where you got your information from.
Mr Stoofer implies here that I got information from means not available to everyone, i.e. that I leaked info from my role pm from undo. To refute it, It was necessary for me to prove him that all the info I used was public.Mr Stoofer wrote:The following quotes make me think that lord_hur knows more about this setup than the rest of us (or at least: more than me).
Hmm I didn't understand it this way. It's best he comments on this himself.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:If it is given as MR Stoofer has said he read the information then the "at least: more than me" part is I imagine to be taken as "I dont know things I am unimformed majority aka town"
Sorry about this, I was unnecessarily aggressivelord_hur wrote:And I'm not sure I like how you call "statements" what was obviously wild guesses, especially after I took all that time to clarify it.HackerHuck wrote:I'm not sure I like how quickly Lord_Hur backtracked on his initial statements.
Look really scummy ? What the hell makes you say that ? I was just saying I don't understand what he means... Where did you see even one hint of accusation or allusion to scummyness?HackerHuck wrote:If I'm reading it right (and this is my position by the way) he is saying that we shouldn't bother speculating on tidbits in the opening posts until we actually have some information about those tidbits.lord_hur wrote:We need more info ? On what then, if we must keep roles secret ?PyroDwarf wrote:That discussion seems to be winding down with the agreement that we need more info first.
I really don't like this post. When I read it, it made PyroDwarf look really scummy, but when I looked at his actual post I got absolutely no scum-vibes.
No, re-read it. He's accusing me of making PyroDwarf look scummy, but that PyroDwarf's actual post wasn't scummy.Musher333 wrote:He isn't accusing you he is accusing PyroDwarf so i would be careful, your remark could be counted as scummish.
Any comments on what happened since you last posted ?Shin Hatsubai wrote:Sorry folks, I had to go out of town unexpectedly. I have caught up on the thread and everything. I also feel that random voting has ended, and my vote on lord_hur should have been removed long ago
unvote lord_hur
The problem with your reasoning is, if it were true no one would ever be able to get out of a defensive position, as the mere fact of doing anything else looks scummy according to you. Do you think I should just keep defending myself till someone lynches me for no pro-town activity ? No thanks.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Ok I am happy with a vote on now
Vote:lord_hur
After watching his reactions to things I am happy to do this, asking for Prods and others thoughts seems to me like wanting to get out of the spotlight.
My own opinion on this :Guardian wrote:hasdgfas is scum. At the bottom of the thread, where it says 'display posts by previous', click hasdgfas, and view his posts in isolation:
Post 0 -- he random votes for HH because he doesn't want to get hacked. He is showing care for his own well being, even in his joke.
Post 1 -- he addresses a question posed to someone else (tvod, conveniently), and talks about how "we" shouldn't do "x" because that would help "them" -- the scum. This post is trying to be helpful but isn't, and interjects so tvod can't answer the question untainted.
Post 2 -- Similarly appears to be helpful but isn't really. 'Why not play mafia?'. ...
Post 3 -- hasdgfas is definitely directing tvod here; my most probable read is scum directing scum (partner, why do you act suspiciously? act better!) but I think that scum directing new town to look nice a pro-town is an almost as probable scenario.
Post 4 -- Casts minor suspicion and comments on how 'he doesn't like' something.
SlySly is also probably scum.
tvod may or may not be scum; there is evidence of a hasdgfas connection, for sure. I am unsure how much faith I have in the direct case on tvod.
unvote: slysly ; vote: hasdgfas
fos: slysly, mfos: tvod
Sarnath'ed.hasdgfas wrote:This post seems to me to be a lot of theory and speculation. I don't see anything here that actually moves the game forward.
Shin, a couple questions for you:
1) Why do you think we need another night to get a better feel for this game? Don't you think we can use 1 day to find scum? It seems to me like what's more important to you at this point is understanding the game as opposed to finding scum.
2) You don't need to make a "snap decision" as to who is scum. In fact, that's one of the worst things you could possibly do. It should be a more well thought-out decision as opposed to just deciding hastily.
Yes, this is what I meant. Thank you.Mr Stoofer wrote:I am not sure that I understand your second/third questions. Generally, giving away extra information is a Scum tell, rather than a Power-Role tell (did you look at the wiki link?). That's because Scum are super keen to appear helpful, while Power-Roles tend to want to stay hidden. That is why I normally ascribe extra knowledge of the setup to scum, when it comes out day 1. But you make a fair point -- pro-Town Power-Roles may also be able to work out the setup more easily.
After all this time, I for one expect a nice big meaty post...SlySly wrote:Someone's hunch is without merit. Pretty much been on unexpected V\LA, will contribute more soon after a read through.
We didn't get the info for kabenon007, there's no reason to think we'll get it for the next one.Mr Stoofer wrote:Of course, phrases such as "tvod turns up as scum" kinda assumes we will find out his alignment if/when we lynch him
This is a good thing I asked your opinion *in general* because otherwise I would be stuck with this type of reply. I wanted to ask you a question like the others, but the only noticeable thing about you is that you were away (which I personally believe is the truth). So I asked this.SlySly wrote:Lurking is sometimes not lurking. This is very much the case for a player who has never posted in the game. You have absolutely no way of knowing if that player is lurking or just not around to contribute therefore is a null tell. I would find a player that popped in every now and then just to throw down a quick vote or FoS then fall back into lurk mode much more suspicious than I would a player that has never posted.
"I really don't like this post" IS an attack. I accept your answer though, as I have myself done the same thing before (as town).HackerHuck wrote:Do I really come off that mean?lord_hur wrote:@HackerHuck, whose only 2 meaningful posts before his attack on Guardian had been attacks on me for reasons I qualified as quite defective. You just wrote off your first attack, but do you still think the second was justified ?![]()
I didn't really think I was attacking you the second time, so I'm not sure what to say. When I read your quote of PyroDwarf, it made him sound scummy. Rereading your post I'm not feeling it as much as I did the first time, but that doesn't discount my initial impression. I think you're overreacting to a rather minor point I made.
You are wrong. Everyone, including SlySly who is currently attacking Mr Stoofer, thinks that he actually added to the discussion (but not necessarily in a town way, according to SlySly).thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:I have already explained that Mr Stoofers comment re lord_hur was not adding anything new to the discussion and my interpretation (aided by Mr Stoofer) shows this was a mere "I think you are scum and I am town".
The difference is not enough to be used as an argument (in my opinion).thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:If somebody adds to a bandwagon in a way you find suspicious is it then reasonable to find them suspicious also?
This is why I FoSed Mr Stoofer.
I guess my explanation for the comment "if it is merited" I have not explained too well. So I will try to give it plainly.
If you are town and add to a bandwagon then you obviously believe your suspicion is merited because you do not know if that person is scum or town.
If you are scum then you have to add suspicion when itseemsmerited.
Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.
A link with Singing Librarian ? What link ?thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:Now I dont hold what I think to be evidence enough to say Mr Stoofer is scum but I am suspicious of him and if he is scum I see a link between him and Singing Librarian.
Well, it seems the mod has decided to show us that he will give more info about the dead in the future. Look at post 0 now.lord_hur wrote:We didn't get the info for kabenon007, there's no reason to think we'll get it for the next one.Mr Stoofer wrote:Of course, phrases such as "tvod turns up as scum" kinda assumes we will find out his alignment if/when we lynch him
This is evil.
Ah damn, it's my fault, I wanted to quote only the second part of VOD's post, about you being "overly interested...", which wasn't unlike SlySly's accusation of being overly defensive in that same post 32.Mr Stoofer wrote:My point about lord_hur was not pointless.lord_hur wrote:Hmm, SlySly raised this point too; I'd like to see Mr Stoofer's answer about it.thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:So from what I have gathered Mr Stoofer added a rather pointless comment to the anti lord_hur movement and then was overly interested in if his suspicions seemed merited in my eyes.It was a point that nobody else had mentioned before. That is why tvod's FOS of me was so stupid. I agree that merely repeating points someone else has made is sometimes a scum tell, but my point wasbrand new. That is why I got so annoyed with tvod.
The three "???" after kabenon007 in the dead section have always been there ?Mr Stoofer wrote:I've looked and I didn't see what you are referring to...lord_hur wrote:Well, it seems the mod has decided to show us that he will give more info about the dead in the future. Look at post 0 now.
He's talking about this. It is obvious to me that you two know something the others (or me at least) don't know, and are debating whether you should reveal it or not.Guardian wrote:Stoofer, I don't insist.
unvote; vote: Mr Stoofer
Yes, I could understand it if no one was talking (in another game, I am basically engaged in a near-monologue so I stopped giving input), but the activity has been great so far in here.Mr Stoofer wrote:I've just done a read through on everyone and one thing leaped out at me that I hadn't spotted before, namely the fact that hasdgfas is posting regularly elsewhere on the site but hasn't posted here for 3 days. In my book that is more than enough to warrantunvote; vote:hasdgfas.
I still think thevampireofdussledorf has to die, though (if he is not scum he doesn't deserve to live).
I completely agree with this. Players behaving anti-town, even if they are not scum, are greatly hurting town, as they reduce the amount of information available and/or reduce town's reasoning ability (lurkers, one-line post specialists, confusing people, etc).Mr Stoofer wrote:Well, I just wanted to make sure you knew, and that you weren't voting for me under a misapprehension. (Although to be honest I'd rather you weren't voting for me at all.)
@SlySly: you have understood my post about tvod correctly. But it is not anti-Town to want to kill a player who is hurting the town regardless of their alignment. Click here for a thread where lots of people express the view that killing players who are hurting the Town is a good idea regardless of their alignment. See posts 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 12, 15, 20, 21 -- all of which agree with me that sometime you have to have a lynch of the player that is not helping the Town. See especially 20 and 21, made by me before I got my role PM in this game.
Of course. Lynching anti-town should *only* take place when town has no real lead on who scum might be. I actually wrote this in my last post, but erased it right before posting, as it sounded so obvious.SlySly wrote:I don't care who agrees with you, this is scum logic. Though mislynches happen, I would prefer to never lynch a townie, regardless of their play style.Mr Stoofer wrote: But it is not anti-Town to want to kill a player who is hurting the town regardless of their alignment.
While I agre with the reasoning, I don't think VOD should die because of it. I think it should only be used in serious cases, and he is just not one of them.SlySly wrote:Beside, tVoD is not hurting the town in any way that I can see.
Re-read post 200 :thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:lord_hur why are you supporting Mr Stoofer?
If he wishes to just lynch someone for being anti town without actually hunting for scum then that is plain ole scummy behaviour to me.
1. Where the hell did you get that I'm trying to defend him in the first place ? (same question than Guardian I know, but you didn't answer him)thevampireofdusseldorf wrote:My stance on Mr Stoofer is he seems to be the most likely scum. Those supporting his arguments or his position I will find slightly scummy.
lord_hurs post is a bit wierd in that he says I support his theory but not his application. This is a strange way of defending someone. Also it gives lord_hur an excuse not to be on the back of Mr Stoofer.
Post 203 has only made me more suspicious of lord_hurs behaviour towards Mr Stoofer.
I voted VOD because I didn't like the way he thrwe FoS's around without any good reason, and maintained it later mainly because I have no real lead and VOD never was in danger of being lynched (or the hammering would have looked VERY scummy...).Guardian wrote:I still don't understand why people want to kill TVOD, could someone summarize??
Guardian wrote:My nose is pretty sweet.OOOOOOO SNAAAAAAAAAAP!lord_hur wrote:Oh yes, Guardian, could you develop this please ?Guardian wrote:O SNAP!
![]()
![]()
?
It is very interesting.Guardian wrote:lord-hur, what do you think of the expansion I did for you right there?
Yes, this had me wondering too. But I didn't know back then if I should push the matter, because there is that consensus that more info is bad for town.PyroDwarf wrote:Also, he says that players with more info are likely to be scum, then goes on and says he has information that he will reveal if guardian insists???
This still isn't an answer. What made you surprised/shocked/angry/whatever ?Guardian wrote:I think it was the most concise post I could have made to accurately express my reaction to your post, so yes.SlySly wrote:Mr. Stoofer for one and you for two. Do you really think "Oh Snap!" was a contributing answer post in response to my question to you?